So, how do WE win the league?

[Alan B'stard]

Interestingly, I don't know if anyone heard or picked up on it today, but on SSN one of city's directors said that they would not be making wholesale changes to the squad this summer. They may add 1 or 2 players but they want to retain the core nucleus of players.

Maybe they won't be splashing out in the way every thinks in future?

They don't need to. They have established critical mass now and only need the odd marquee
Signing going forward. Plus let's not forget city always had a decent academy (unlike Chelsea)

[Coney]

Sack the manager and get someone who wants to win. Someone who is not a mere mouthpiece of the board.

The fact that the board would choose the next manager is not relevant then?

[Olivier's xmas twist]

The fact that the board would choose the next manager is not relevant then?

Excatly but most on here are too Stupid or too desperate to blame everything on AW to Grasp that.

[AKBapologist]

he was sacked for a bung scandal then went on to manage Spurs. Let us not forget it.

[Özim]

Excatly but most on here are too Stupid or too desperate to blame everything on AW to Grasp that.

Oh the irony.

[Özim]

he was sacked for a bung scandal then went on to manage Spurs. Let us not forget it.

Doesn't really change anything, he still was very successful and did a lot for the club, if not for him Wenger would probably not have won those titles after all Adams and co were the foundation of his winning side.

As for the bung, well yes he made a mistake, sometimes people do, I'm sure he wasn't on 7 million a year though.

[Kano]

Doesn't really change anything, he still was very successful and did a lot for the club, if not for him Wenger would probably not have won those titles after all Adams and co were the foundation of his winning side.

As for the bung, well yes he made a mistake, sometimes people do, I'm sure he wasn't on 7 million a year though.

sounds like you are being a lot more lenient for that illegal charade than you are about a non dividend collecting chairman who has said a couple of silly things in the paper. i don't think there is really a case at to defend graham for that bung saga.

great player, great mangaer but he fucked up his legacy doing that - he's still a legend at the club but he tarnished himself.

[Özim]

sounds like you are being a lot more lenient for that illegal charade than you are about a non dividend collecting chairman who has said a couple of silly things in the paper. i don't think there is really a case at to defend graham for that bung saga.

great player, great mangaer but he fucked up his legacy doing that - he's still a legend at the club but he tarnished himself.

I acknowledged he made a mistake by taking that money and probably had to lose his job because of it, doesn't change the fact he brought success to the club.

The board on the other hand aren't too interested in that, they seem to be primarily interested in the finances, if success was on their agenda the money issue wouldn't be a problem, it's more the fact they expect to charge sky high prices, are happy to deluver no success (that's not a criteria for them) and then seem put out when anyone dares question their methods.

[Kano]

it was the 'old school' board over graham back then too don't forget. too many have seen a cash cow now but they have not always been a dodgy old bunch supposedly only looking out for themselves.

[Özim]

Yes it was, and they were stingy then as well I remember it, we signed Wright for 2.5 million but generally we barely spent a penny. The difference is that Graham's sides to that point always had something about them, they could always upset the odds, this kept the heat off the board.

When you don't win and don't spend it's a different scenario.