Can we win the Premier League again under Wenger ?

[Power n Glory]

I don't like the way we rip off our fans, part of the reason I don't go any more is the cost although there are other factors. But I don't see how else we could hope to compete with the billionaire-fueled sides, and we're only able to charge those ticket prices because of our huge fanbase which has come about through previous success.
I don't like a lot of things about the way modern football is and I agree that there's no other way in the modern game to join the top table but spare me the bollox about their 'achievements' and 'ambition'. Pumping money in till you succeed isn't an achievement, Chelsea showed it could be done, City have showed you can do it with any club if you pump enough money in for long enough.

You still haven't addressed the £50m Danny Fiszman invested so we could give key players a new contract and buy guys like Bergkamp, Platt and Wenger's early signings.

[Letters]

I don't know much about that, your first about it was the first I'd heard of it.
But I don't think we've bought success quite so blatantly as Chelsea and City have, neither team had any recent history of success before the billionaires took over.

[Power n Glory]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...s-2319483.html

According to Tony Adams.

But I don't think we've bought success quite so blatantly as Chelsea and City have, neither team had any recent history of success before the billionaires took over.

But still bought. That £50m got us to the next level according to Adams. As the years went on and the market inflated by the established elite clubs like Man Utd, Real, AC and Inter, the entry fee for Europe's elite went from £50m to £250m.

[LDG]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...s-2319483.html

According to Tony Adams.



But still bought. That £50m got us to the next level according to Adams. As the years went on and the market inflated by clubs like the established elite clubs like Man Utd, Real and the Serie A clubs, it went from £50m to £250m to build a team that could contend for the title and in Europe.

It's a very loose argument you have there.

City and Chelsea can afford to spend anything they want, and practically buy anyone they want if they chuck enough money at it. There is no barrier, save squad size and FFP (guffaw).

That 50m was to bridge a relatively small gap....not to finance limitless spending.

Of course its a leg up, but the comparison to City and Chelsea is very far fetched. That's a different league of doping.

[Power n Glory]

It's a very loose argument you have there.

City and Chelsea can afford to spend anything they want, and practically buy anyone they want if they chuck enough money at it. There is no barrier, save squad size and FFP (guffaw).

That 50m was to bridge a relatively small gap....not to finance limitless spending.

Of course its a leg up, but the comparison to City and Chelsea is very far fetched. That's a different league of doping.

It’s not at the Chelsea and City level but it’s still outside investment from money we didn’t earn through football. It also shows that there is another way to finance our transfer needs without ripping off the fans. I think it’s a piss take to have Board members that won’t dip into their own funds in fact.

[Marc Overmars]

Every type of business requires some form of investment to succeed, whether that be through self generated revenue or personal wealth. The difference is Chelsea and City have been able to operate to the point where it doesn't matter if a big money signing succeeds or not, because they can easily take a hit and move on to whoever they desire next until they get it right, thanks to wallet of one man.

[Power n Glory]

That’s a different argument to what Letter’s is saying. He regards outside investment as cheating if not earned from football and past success. Also, if we’re talking in terms of business, don’t other companies do what City and Chelsea do? For example, Microsoft can drop a ton of money into their Xbox department and invest heavily until it’s a success even if their console department make a loss or isn’t number 1 in the market. It’s murky territory. It just so happens Chelsea and City are owned ridiculously rich owners. This is why they need to tear up the rule book when it comes to football ownership and finances. The elite clubs that have had a monopoly on success are now only concerned because their status is under threat. The correlation between money and success has been evident for a long time and clubs like Real, Man Utd and Inter were already pushing the boundaries with ridiculous world record transfer fees. And funny enough, Real Madrid are still the holders of the most ridiculous fee ever paid by a club and they’re one of the established elites.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I still agree with the principle (not the execution) of FPP that a club cannot be allowed to spend excessively more than it generates on football transfers, how the club makes its money is up to the club as long as it's legal.

[Letters]

There is, or should be, a difference between business and sport.
I know that's idealistic these days, but it would be nice to think that the playing field should be as level as possible and may the best man/team win.

That advert with Henry saying the PL is the best in the world is laughable.
Right now I can tell you who the top 4 will be with a fair amount of certainty. It would be amazing if anyone other than Chelsea, City, ManYoo and Arsenal ended up in the top 4. I don't know the order, but it shouldn't be like that.
Everything about football these days is designed to keep the playing field so uneven that the only way any team can break into the top 4 is to 'do a Chelsea' or, now a City.

It's all very depressing, it's one of the reasons I'm less interested in it all these days. Who cares which billionaire buys the title next?

[Power n Glory]

I still agree with the principle (not the execution) of FPP that a club cannot be allowed to spend excessively more than it generates on football transfers, how the club makes its money is up to the club as long as it's legal.

I’m not even sure I agree with FFP because it stops the smaller clubs from growing and maintains the status quo. They need a need better ruling.