Welcome to the EPL Señor Guardiola...

[txj]

What on earth are you talking about?

Both teams have a lot of resources. LFC cannot plead poverty by any means. But they most definitely do not have similar resources...

The value of both squads is different. The investment outlay over the last 8 seasons is different. Plus City are building on championship winning squads since 2011-2012...

Yes, coaching is the difference between teams of similar resources. But LFC and MCFC do NOT have similar resources. There is no objective analysis of the squad investments of both clubs that can lead to such a conclusion...

I didn't punctuate my sentence well - just seeing it now. What I meant was Klopp has been at Liverpool 4 years - he has been there longer than Pep has been at City. He has had longer to build his team and money was no object. The argument that the City team was being built for Pep b/4 he arrived is hollow.

Its not whether money was an object or not. Its what was spent. Klopp arrived mid-season, so there was no prep for his arrival as was the case with Pep.

Its not an argument that City's team was being built as prep for him. Its a statement based on interviews of Soriano as well as Pellegrini...

Liverpool bid 75m for Van Dijk and City pulled out. Liverpool paid 65m for Naby Keita. Fabinho was megabucks too. This is a team that had already blown a fortune on Salah, Mane, etc. Liverpool would have won the title b/4 Klopp but for Gerrard's slip.

The fact that the sheikhs started spending money on City 10 years ago is laughably irrelevant. Liverpool were also blowing money on Andy Carroll, Torres, Suarez, etc. Money is not the difference b/w Liverpool and City.

It's not irrelevant. They were spending more than LFC; much more, with championship winning squads that predate Klopp and carried over to the Pep era. Over the period from their first championship under Mancini, they have spent more, and of course better...

The net effect of this was to create a higher base level on which Pep then built from as compared to the base level Klopp had to start with. So it's clearly not irrelevant. That is what Jose referenced in his "football heritage" comments...

But they have also blown money; in fact more than LFC! They have not only spent more in transfer terms, but also have a higher wage bill over the same period and thus a higher value squad.

I rate Klopp as a coach, but I think Pep is a better coach. I think Pep would win the league with the squads at Manure, Spurs, Liverpool and Chelsea. I don't think he would win it with the Arse. And Liverpool and Manure would have won the league this season and last without Pep.

That's your opinion. Some would agree, some would disagree...

[cic old boy]

Its not whether money was an object or not. Its what was spent. Klopp arrived mid-season, so there was no prep for his arrival as was the case with Pep.

Its not an argument that City's team was being built as prep for him. Its a statement based on interviews of Soriano as well as Pellegrini...

It's not irrelevant. They were spending more than LFC; much more, with championship winning squads that predate Klopp and carried over to the Pep era. Over the period from their first championship under Mancini, they have spent more, and of course better...

The net effect of this was to create a higher base level on which Pep then built from as compared to the base level Klopp had to start with. So it's clearly not irrelevant. That is what Jose referenced in his "football heritage" comments...

But they have also blown money; in fact more than LFC! They have not only spent more in transfer terms, but also have a higher wage bill over the same period and thus a higher value squad.

That's your opinion. Some would agree, some would disagree...

When did the alleged building of the team for Pep start? During Pellegrini’s time or during Mancini’s? You seem to be attributing City’s success to building that started over 10 years ago.

Liverpool had a championship squad b/4 Klopp – a squad that came 2nd. It’s not like Klopp took over at Everton. The base at Liverpool was high. Some of that base are still there playing for Klopp 4 years after he arrived.

Borinho’s “heritage” comments were just a futile exercise in excuse-making to deflect attention from his failures. Same as you are doing here for Liverpool’s failure to match City despite spending crazy money.

Liverpool has the 2nd highest wage bill in the league behind Manure. City are 3rd! https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... nited-city
So you need to give the wage bill story a rest.

Money is no object for elite clubs. Money can explain their dominance over non-elite clubs. But money is not the reason why they beat their fellow elite clubs. This should be abundantly clear to any non-biased observer.

[txj]

Its not whether money was an object or not. Its what was spent. Klopp arrived mid-season, so there was no prep for his arrival as was the case with Pep.

Its not an argument that City's team was being built as prep for him. Its a statement based on interviews of Soriano as well as Pellegrini...

It's not irrelevant. They were spending more than LFC; much more, with championship winning squads that predate Klopp and carried over to the Pep era. Over the period from their first championship under Mancini, they have spent more, and of course better...

The net effect of this was to create a higher base level on which Pep then built from as compared to the base level Klopp had to start with. So it's clearly not irrelevant. That is what Jose referenced in his "football heritage" comments...

But they have also blown money; in fact more than LFC! They have not only spent more in transfer terms, but also have a higher wage bill over the same period and thus a higher value squad.

That's your opinion. Some would agree, some would disagree...

When did the alleged building of the team for Pep start? During Pellegrini’s time or during Mancini’s? You seem to be attributing City’s success to building that started over 10 years ago.

Liverpool had a championship squad b/4 Klopp – a squad that came 2nd. It’s not like Klopp took over at Everton. The base at Liverpool was high. Some of that base are still there playing for Klopp 4 years after he arrived.

Borinho’s “heritage” comments were just a futile exercise in excuse-making to deflect attention from his failures. Same as you are doing here for Liverpool’s failure to match City despite spending crazy money.

Liverpool has the 2nd highest wage bill in the league behind Manure. City are 3rd! https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... nited-city
So you need to give the wage bill story a rest.

Money is no object for elite clubs. Money can explain their dominance over non-elite clubs. But money is not the reason why they beat their fellow elite clubs. This should be abundantly clear to any non-biased observer.

1. Money is not the SOLE reason City pipped LFC to the title. It is a part of it and a significant part too, b/c it is the basis of the squad they have built.

2. City's success under Pep is a function of his superior mgt acumen. However, in-built in that is the fact of a superior squad, whose construction began as Pele's reign wound down as confirmed in interviews with Soriano...

3. While Jose's comments maybe self serving in some respects, the underlying point is about state of the squad at the beginning of each project. It is a fact that Pep started with a championship squad from two years prior. That means he started from a higher base. Its not an excuse for LFC losing the title. Its just a simple fact...

4. On the wage bill, you should try and read what you posted....First the timeline of the wage bill report. 2nd, the composition of the wage bill. Player salaries and current value, are the basis of determining the value of the squad.

5. Money is always a factor in football, but it does not explain everything. Man. City have won on the basis of superior mgt by Pep. But underlying this is the investment outlay by Sheik Mansour, funding not just the playing squad, but an array of support staff, including over 20 personal staff for Guardiola.

TBH I find these debates not productive, b/c they have a tendency to take away from what is an exceptional feat in management by one of the best managers of all time.

But you CANNOT divorce money from his achievements at City...

[heavyd]

funny that most of the people commenting in the first 5 pages of this thread are no where to be seen in the last six

[cic old boy]

1. Money is not the SOLE reason City pipped LFC to the title. It is a part of it and a significant part too, b/c it is the basis of the squad they have built.

2. City's success under Pep is a function of his superior mgt acumen. However, in-built in that is the fact of a superior squad, whose construction began as Pele's reign wound down as confirmed in interviews with Soriano...

3. While Jose's comments maybe self serving in some respects, the underlying point is about state of the squad at the beginning of each project. It is a fact that Pep started with a championship squad from two years prior. That means he started from a higher base. Its not an excuse for LFC losing the title. Its just a simple fact...

4. On the wage bill, you should try and read what you posted....First the timeline of the wage bill report. 2nd, the composition of the wage bill. Player salaries and current value, are the basis of determining the value of the squad.

5. Money is always a factor in football, but it does not explain everything. Man. City have won on the basis of superior mgt by Pep. But underlying this is the investment outlay by Sheik Mansour, funding not just the playing squad, but an array of support staff, including over 20 personal staff for Guardiola.

TBH I find these debates not productive, b/c they have a tendency to take away from what is an exceptional feat in management by one of the best managers of all time.

But you CANNOT divorce money from his achievements at City...

Money means City can compete with other elite clubs for elite players. The difference in spending among elite clubs is marginal. So while money is why City are no longer the yo-yo club they were b/4 Arab millions, it is not a factor when competing with other teams with money as they neutralise each other.

So City's squad construction started with Pelle and not 10 years ago as you first claimed. And Liverpool's squad construction only started with Klopp's arrival even though he still has Henderson and Milner that precede his arrival in his squad. He also inherited Coutinho. OK.

Borinho's heritage BS was about Sevilla having a stronger European pedigree than Manure. Not sure of its relevance here.

So Liverpool had a higher wage bill than City last year and finished 25pts behind! So what was your point about wages again? There are no figures available for this season on wage bills.

Nobody is denying money being a factor. My point is that among elite clubs it is not a factor since they all spend megabucks.

[Cristao II]

Meanwhile, Conte's team is winning 5-0 against one of the so-called "seven title contenders." Is Conte not from a league that EPL pundits consider "dead"? How come his team is humiliating one of the solid teams in the "toughest" league?

so you now using Conte to bail out Pep?
You're not listening. We keep saying, you need to bring your A game everytime, all the time. You snooze, you lose. Kai. The team in the bottom half can worry the top team. Nature of the beast

What does Pep do? He buys a second squad...

[txj]

1. Money is not the SOLE reason City pipped LFC to the title. It is a part of it and a significant part too, b/c it is the basis of the squad they have built.

2. City's success under Pep is a function of his superior mgt acumen. However, in-built in that is the fact of a superior squad, whose construction began as Pele's reign wound down as confirmed in interviews with Soriano...

3. While Jose's comments maybe self serving in some respects, the underlying point is about state of the squad at the beginning of each project. It is a fact that Pep started with a championship squad from two years prior. That means he started from a higher base. Its not an excuse for LFC losing the title. Its just a simple fact...

4. On the wage bill, you should try and read what you posted....First the timeline of the wage bill report. 2nd, the composition of the wage bill. Player salaries and current value, are the basis of determining the value of the squad.

5. Money is always a factor in football, but it does not explain everything. Man. City have won on the basis of superior mgt by Pep. But underlying this is the investment outlay by Sheik Mansour, funding not just the playing squad, but an array of support staff, including over 20 personal staff for Guardiola.

TBH I find these debates not productive, b/c they have a tendency to take away from what is an exceptional feat in management by one of the best managers of all time.

But you CANNOT divorce money from his achievements at City...

Money means City can compete with other elite clubs for elite players. The difference in spending among elite clubs is marginal. So while money is why City are no longer the yo-yo club they were b/4 Arab millions, it is not a factor when competing with other teams with money as they neutralise each other.

The difference is that City have no constraints but themselves and the Sheikh. Others have budget constraints and of course the FFP framework. That is why City are being investigated. So they don't neutralize each other financially.

So City's squad construction started with Pelle and not 10 years ago as you first claimed. And Liverpool's squad construction only started with Klopp's arrival even though he still has Henderson and Milner that precede his arrival in his squad. He also inherited Coutinho. OK.

I said specifically that City's prep for Guardiola started under Pele's rein- the end of his rein, once the agreement in principle with Pep was secured...

Borinho's heritage BS was about Sevilla having a stronger European pedigree than Manure. Not sure of its relevance here.

Its about quality of squad left behind as a new manager transition's into a club.

So Liverpool had a higher wage bill than City last year and finished 25pts behind! So what was your point about wages again? There are no figures available for this season on wage bills.

No they did not! Take out the CL bonus and they do not...That is not a measure of squad value...

Nobody is denying money being a factor. My point is that among elite clubs it is not a factor since they all spend megabucks.
As long as one team does not have a budget constraint, and is able to find a mechanism to circumvent FFP, its a factor, even among elite teams.

[Mr. Piffington]

Meanwhile, Conte's team is winning 5-0 against one of the so-called "seven title contenders." Is Conte not from a league that EPL pundits consider "dead"? How come his team is humiliating one of the solid teams in the "toughest" league?

so you now using Conte to bail out Pep?
You're not listening. We keep saying, you need to bring your A game everytime, all the time. You snooze, you lose. Kai. The team in the bottom half can worry the top team. Nature of the beast

What does Pep do? He buys a second squad...

Who did he buy?

[cic old boy]

The difference is that City have no constraints but themselves and the Sheikh. Others have budget constraints and of course the FFP framework. That is why City are being investigated. So they don't neutralize each other financially.

I said specifically that City's prep for Guardiola started under Pele's rein- the end of his rein, once the agreement in principle with Pep was secured...

Its about quality of squad left behind as a new manager transition's into a club.

No they did not! Take out the CL bonus and they do not...That is not a measure of squad value...

As long as one team does not have a budget constraint, and is able to find a mechanism to circumvent FFP, its a factor, even among elite teams.

Financial constraints or not, the differences in the transfer budget are marginal. And in some years, other clubs like Liverpool outspent City. When confronted with those facts, you shift to spending 10 years ago! Besides, financial constraints are in relation to commercial revenue. Clubs like Manure and Liverpool have advantages of commercial success from a "heritage" of winning and worldwide following. City is only trying to bridge that gap with state aid.

You said:

The investment outlay over the last 8 seasons is different. Plus City are building on championship winning squads since 2011-2012...

So you were not talking just specifically about the spending under Pellegrini.

Borinho's "heritage" was in reference to Sevilla's record in Europe being better than Manure's. What is Sevilla's transfer budget?

Do you have Liverpool's wage bill without the CL bonus? Do you know the amount of the CL bonus? In the absence of such figures, we will stick to the fact that Liverpool's wage bill is £4m higher than City's, whose bill presumably includes the bonus for winning the EPL! We should take out bonuses for Liverpool but not for City!

Even without financial constraints, City are spending the sort of money Liverpool and Manure are spending. Liverpool and Manure can match City's spending b/c they have higher levels of commercial revenue.

[txj]

The difference is that City have no constraints but themselves and the Sheikh. Others have budget constraints and of course the FFP framework. That is why City are being investigated. So they don't neutralize each other financially.

I said specifically that City's prep for Guardiola started under Pele's rein- the end of his rein, once the agreement in principle with Pep was secured...

Its about quality of squad left behind as a new manager transition's into a club.

No they did not! Take out the CL bonus and they do not...That is not a measure of squad value...

As long as one team does not have a budget constraint, and is able to find a mechanism to circumvent FFP, its a factor, even among elite teams.

Financial constraints or not, the differences in the transfer budget are marginal. And in some years, other clubs like Liverpool outspent City. When confronted with those facts, you shift to spending 10 years ago! Besides, financial constraints are in relation to commercial revenue. Clubs like Manure and Liverpool have advantages of commercial success from a "heritage" of winning and worldwide following. City is only trying to bridge that gap with state aid.

I am speaking about spending over a sustained period. You cannot measure this accurately with a snapshot in time. City are trying to bridge the gap by cooking the books and inflating the sponsorship, allegedly. That is why they are being investigated. That is not a constraint.

You said:

The investment outlay over the last 8 seasons is different. Plus City are building on championship winning squads since 2011-2012...

So you were not talking just specifically about the spending under Pellegrini.

I talked specifically about Pelle wrt the preparatory spending in expectation of Pep's arrival, in the final year of his rein.

Borinho's "heritage" was in reference to Sevilla's record in Europe being better than Manure's. What is Sevilla's transfer budget?

Jose's presser may have been largely self serving, but his point about football heritage is applicable beyond Manure/Sevilla. Its about the quality of squad and the heritage of that which a new manager inherits.

Do you have Liverpool's wage bill without the CL bonus? Do you know the amount of the CL bonus? In the absence of such figures, we will stick to the fact that Liverpool's wage bill is £4m higher than City's, whose bill presumably includes the bonus for winning the EPL! We should take out bonuses for Liverpool but not for City!

LFC's wage bill without the CL bonus can be deducted from the very report you posted. Both sides earned bonuses from the PL, which embodies several factors including global viewership.

Even without financial constraints, City are spending the sort of money Liverpool and Manure are spending. Liverpool and Manure can match City's spending b/c they have higher levels of commercial revenue.

Few teams in the world if any can match City's and PSG's spending. By undermining FFP, allegedly, City are able to continually extend the size of its "sponsorship"...

[Cristao II]

Goals! Goals! Goals! Trophies everywhere. Emirates Marketing Project were brilliant on Saturday, relentless and remorseless and thoroughly deserving of equalling the record-ever margin of victory in a FA Cup final. The domestic treble is unprecedented and so too is the quality of their football: 169 goals in 61 games in all competitions, 11 times they’ve scored five or more in a game this season. And yet, and yet ...

It’s not just that this feels so unlike City, not just that it feels a few episodes have been skipped in a satisfying character arc from likeable buffoons to ruthless killing machine, it’s that this felt so unlike a Cup final. In terms of competitiveness, you may as well have placed a yellow and black blancmange in the middle of pitch and smashed it with a sky blue oar.

This is City’s problem. They’re too good – and that has bought to the surface concerns about their ownership and financing that perhaps should have been more prominent earlier. There’s no doubt that Pep Guardiola makes players better, and there’s no doubt that City have spent their money incredibly efficiently. But equally the scale and source of those resources is something unprecedented – even if the latest Uefa investigation doesn’t prove wrong-doing. Saturday’s final wasn’t a game; it was a strangely gruesome exhibition.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... -is-broken

[Cristao II]

Meanwhile, Conte's team is winning 5-0 against one of the so-called "seven title contenders." Is Conte not from a league that EPL pundits consider "dead"? How come his team is humiliating one of the solid teams in the "toughest" league?

so you now using Conte to bail out Pep?
You're not listening. We keep saying, you need to bring your A game everytime, all the time. You snooze, you lose. Kai. The team in the bottom half can worry the top team. Nature of the beast

What does Pep do? He buys a second squad...

Who did he buy?

All monies used in this post are in pounds. The source of this information is https://www.transferleague.co.uk/manche ... -transfers.

I have included 2015/2016 to include the spend just before he took over. Note that even before now City had spent the following - 2014/15 (87.5m), 2013/14 (103.2m), 2012/13 (54m), 2011/12 (76m), 2010/11 (154.8m), 2009/10 (125m), 2008/09 (127.7m), 2007/08 (45.8m), 2006/07 (2.4m). Compare this to their spending in prior years to 2006/07 when the largest was 32.7m in 2001/02 and lowest was 0 in 2004/05. Their average spending would be less than 10m for the period pre-2006/07 if calculated (I estimated).

Point of the above paragraph is to illustrate the continued spending on City. City became faves not because they were a big club but rather they were now a rich club. Expectations grew due to the investment. Below are the further details for the last 4 seasons. City have spent 520.4m since Guardiola took over i.e. 2016/17 to 2018/2019 (3 seasons). The spend pre-Guardiola i.e. 2007/08 to 2015/2016 (9 seasons) is 926.1m. Total investment from Mansour's take over is 1446.5m.

2015/2016 (152.1m)

Enes Unal - 2m
Raheem Sterling - 44m
Patrick Roberts - 11m
Fabian Delph - 8m
Nicolas Otamendi - 32m
Kevin De Bruyne - 66m
Anthony Caveres - 0.1m

2016/17 (168.85m)

Ilkay Gundogan (20m)
Aaron Mooy (Free)
Nolito (13.8m)
Oleksandr Zinchenko (1.7m)
Leroy Sané (37m)
Gabriel Jesus (27m)
Marlos Moreno (4.75m)
John Stones (47.5m)
Claudio Bravo (17.1m)

2017/18 (272.2m)

Ederson (35m)
Bernardo Silva (43m)
Douglas Luiz (10.7m)
Kyle Walker (45m)
Danilo (26.5m)
Benjamin Mendy (52m)
Aymeric Laporte (57m)
Jack Harrison Undisclosed
Olarenwaju Kayode (3m)

2018/19 (79.35m)

Riyad Mahrez (60m)
Philippe Sandler (2.25m)
Claudio Gomes Free
Daniel Arzani (0.5m)
Ashley Smith-Brown Undisclosed
Zack Steffen (7m)
Rabbi Matondo (9.6m)

Abu Dhabi billionaire Sheikh Mansour took over City in 2008 to make City one of the richest clubs in the world.

[Mr. Piffington]

Meanwhile, Conte's team is winning 5-0 against one of the so-called "seven title contenders." Is Conte not from a league that EPL pundits consider "dead"? How come his team is humiliating one of the solid teams in the "toughest" league?

so you now using Conte to bail out Pep?
You're not listening. We keep saying, you need to bring your A game everytime, all the time. You snooze, you lose. Kai. The team in the bottom half can worry the top team. Nature of the beast

What does Pep do? He buys a second squad...

Who did he buy?

All monies used in this post are in pounds. The source of this information is https://www.transferleague.co.uk/manche ... -transfers.

I have included 2015/2016 to include the spend just before he took over. Note that even before now City had spent the following - 2014/15 (87.5m), 2013/14 (103.2m), 2012/13 (54m), 2011/12 (76m), 2010/11 (154.8m), 2009/10 (125m), 2008/09 (127.7m), 2007/08 (45.8m), 2006/07 (2.4m). Compare this to their spending in prior years to 2006/07 when the largest was 32.7m in 2001/02 and lowest was 0 in 2004/05. Their average spending would be less than 10m for the period pre-2006/07 if calculated (I estimated).

Point of the above paragraph is to illustrate the continued spending on City. City became faves not because they were a big club but rather they were now a rich club. Expectations grew due to the investment. Below are the further details for the last 4 seasons. City have spent 520.4m since Guardiola took over i.e. 2016/17 to 2018/2019 (3 seasons). The spend pre-Guardiola i.e. 2007/08 to 2015/2016 (9 seasons) is 926.1m. Total investment from Mansour's take over is 1446.5m.

2015/2016 (152.1m)

Enes Unal - 2m
Raheem Sterling - 44m
Patrick Roberts - 11m
Fabian Delph - 8m
Nicolas Otamendi - 32m
Kevin De Bruyne - 66m
Anthony Caveres - 0.1m

2016/17 (168.85m)

Ilkay Gundogan (20m)
Aaron Mooy (Free)
Nolito (13.8m)
Oleksandr Zinchenko (1.7m)
Leroy Sané (37m)
Gabriel Jesus (27m)
Marlos Moreno (4.75m)
John Stones (47.5m)
Claudio Bravo (17.1m)

2017/18 (272.2m)

Ederson (35m)
Bernardo Silva (43m)
Douglas Luiz (10.7m)
Kyle Walker (45m)
Danilo (26.5m)
Benjamin Mendy (52m)
Aymeric Laporte (57m)
Jack Harrison Undisclosed
Olarenwaju Kayode (3m)

2018/19 (79.35m)

Riyad Mahrez (60m)
Philippe Sandler (2.25m)
Claudio Gomes Free
Daniel Arzani (0.5m)
Ashley Smith-Brown Undisclosed
Zack Steffen (7m)
Rabbi Matondo (9.6m)

Abu Dhabi billionaire Sheikh Mansour took over City in 2008 to make City one of the richest clubs in the world.

You still didn’t answer my question.

[cic old boy]

I am speaking about spending over a sustained period. You cannot measure this accurately with a snapshot in time. City are trying to bridge the gap by cooking the books and inflating the sponsorship, allegedly. That is why they are being investigated. That is not a constraint.

I talked specifically about Pelle wrt the preparatory spending in expectation of Pep's arrival, in the final year of his rein.

Jose's presser may have been largely self serving, but his point about football heritage is applicable beyond Manure/Sevilla. Its about the quality of squad and the heritage of that which a new manager inherits.

LFC's wage bill without the CL bonus can be deducted from the very report you posted. Both sides earned bonuses from the PL, which embodies several factors including global viewership.

Few teams in the world if any can match City's and PSG's spending. By undermining FFP, allegedly, City are able to continually extend the size of its "sponsorship"...

City are basically inflating sponsorship from oil money and presenting it as commercial revenue. That's simply b/c they are not as popular as Liverpool or Manure and can't attract commercial revenue like those 2. FFP was really about maintaining the financial advantages clubs like Liverpool and Manure have against new money like Chelski and City. So people in the know are not moved by their crocodile tears about the spending of City, PSG, etc. This is b/c they want to be the only ones spending from their huge pot of commercial revenue.

You may have talked about so-called preparatory spending in the period just b/4 Pep's arrival, but you also spoke about spending a decade ago. What was the point of that? You were scrambling around looking for excuses, from wage bill to 10 year spending - as if in that period the likes of Liverpool were not also blowing fortunes on Andy Carroll and co.

Borinho was talking about Sevilla's European pedigree. It is ironic you should be mentioning it in a discussion about City spending. Sevilla knocked out and outplayed Manure with a squad nowhere near what Manure spent on Pogba.

How much was the CL bonus for Liverpool? If both Liverpool and City players got bonuses for successes that season, what is the relevance of the bonuses in a wage bill comparison b/w the 2?

Manure and Liverpool have been matching City's spending. City pulled out of chasing Van Dijk b/c Liverpool outbid them. City pulled out of a deal with Alexis Sanchez when Manure put 500k a week on the table. City are being investigated b/c they are presenting state aid as commercial sponsorship. This is due to the fact that they don't have the sort of money Liverpool and Manure have from real commercial revenue.

Money is not the reason City are above Liverpool and Manure. Oil money just allowed City to be able to compete with the traditional big spenders and they don't like it!

[Cristao II]

Meanwhile, Conte's team is winning 5-0 against one of the so-called "seven title contenders." Is Conte not from a league that EPL pundits consider "dead"? How come his team is humiliating one of the solid teams in the "toughest" league?

so you now using Conte to bail out Pep?
You're not listening. We keep saying, you need to bring your A game everytime, all the time. You snooze, you lose. Kai. The team in the bottom half can worry the top team. Nature of the beast

What does Pep do? He buys a second squad...

Who did he buy?

All monies used in this post are in pounds. The source of this information is https://www.transferleague.co.uk/manche ... -transfers.

I have included 2015/2016 to include the spend just before he took over. Note that even before now City had spent the following - 2014/15 (87.5m), 2013/14 (103.2m), 2012/13 (54m), 2011/12 (76m), 2010/11 (154.8m), 2009/10 (125m), 2008/09 (127.7m), 2007/08 (45.8m), 2006/07 (2.4m). Compare this to their spending in prior years to 2006/07 when the largest was 32.7m in 2001/02 and lowest was 0 in 2004/05. Their average spending would be less than 10m for the period pre-2006/07 if calculated (I estimated).

Point of the above paragraph is to illustrate the continued spending on City. City became faves not because they were a big club but rather they were now a rich club. Expectations grew due to the investment. Below are the further details for the last 4 seasons. City have spent 520.4m since Guardiola took over i.e. 2016/17 to 2018/2019 (3 seasons). The spend pre-Guardiola i.e. 2007/08 to 2015/2016 (9 seasons) is 926.1m. Total investment from Mansour's take over is 1446.5m.

2015/2016 (152.1m)

Enes Unal - 2m
Raheem Sterling - 44m
Patrick Roberts - 11m
Fabian Delph - 8m
Nicolas Otamendi - 32m
Kevin De Bruyne - 66m
Anthony Caveres - 0.1m

2016/17 (168.85m)

Ilkay Gundogan (20m)
Aaron Mooy (Free)
Nolito (13.8m)
Oleksandr Zinchenko (1.7m)
Leroy Sané (37m)
Gabriel Jesus (27m)
Marlos Moreno (4.75m)
John Stones (47.5m)
Claudio Bravo (17.1m)

2017/18 (272.2m)

Ederson (35m)
Bernardo Silva (43m)
Douglas Luiz (10.7m)
Kyle Walker (45m)
Danilo (26.5m)
Benjamin Mendy (52m)
Aymeric Laporte (57m)
Jack Harrison Undisclosed
Olarenwaju Kayode (3m)

2018/19 (79.35m)

Riyad Mahrez (60m)
Philippe Sandler (2.25m)
Claudio Gomes Free
Daniel Arzani (0.5m)
Ashley Smith-Brown Undisclosed
Zack Steffen (7m)
Rabbi Matondo (9.6m)

Abu Dhabi billionaire Sheikh Mansour took over City in 2008 to make City one of the richest clubs in the world.

You still didn’t answer my question.

Your question was - who did he buy! If you cant see the answer from above then that is the end of the discussion.

[Cristao II]

I am speaking about spending over a sustained period. You cannot measure this accurately with a snapshot in time. City are trying to bridge the gap by cooking the books and inflating the sponsorship, allegedly. That is why they are being investigated. That is not a constraint.

I talked specifically about Pelle wrt the preparatory spending in expectation of Pep's arrival, in the final year of his rein.

Jose's presser may have been largely self serving, but his point about football heritage is applicable beyond Manure/Sevilla. Its about the quality of squad and the heritage of that which a new manager inherits.

LFC's wage bill without the CL bonus can be deducted from the very report you posted. Both sides earned bonuses from the PL, which embodies several factors including global viewership.

Few teams in the world if any can match City's and PSG's spending. By undermining FFP, allegedly, City are able to continually extend the size of its "sponsorship"...

City are basically inflating sponsorship from oil money and presenting it as commercial revenue. That's simply b/c they are not as popular as Liverpool or Manure and can't attract commercial revenue like those 2. FFP was really about maintaining the financial advantages clubs like Liverpool and Manure have against new money like Chelski and City. So people in the know are not moved by their crocodile tears about the spending of City, PSG, etc. This is b/c they want to be the only ones spending from their huge pot of commercial revenue.

You may have talked about so-called preparatory spending in the period just b/4 Pep's arrival, but you also spoke about spending a decade ago. What was the point of that? You were scrambling around looking for excuses, from wage bill to 10 year spending - as if in that period the likes of Liverpool were not also blowing fortunes on Andy Carroll and co.

Borinho was talking about Sevilla's European pedigree. It is ironic you should be mentioning it in a discussion about City spending. Sevilla knocked out and outplayed Manure with a squad nowhere near what Manure spent on Pogba.

How much was the CL bonus for Liverpool? If both Liverpool and City players got bonuses for successes that season, what is the relevance of the bonuses in a wage bill comparison b/w the 2?

Manure and Liverpool have been matching City's spending. City pulled out of chasing Van Dijk b/c Liverpool outbid them. City pulled out of a deal with Alexis Sanchez when Manure put 500k a week on the table. City are being investigated b/c they are presenting state aid as commercial sponsorship. This is due to the fact that they don't have the sort of money Liverpool and Manure have from real commercial revenue.

Money is not the only reason City are above Liverpool and Manure. Oil money just allowed City to be able to compete with the traditional big spenders and they don't like it!

Corrected (red font). At least it is agreed that money is required to compete (underlined).

[Mr. Piffington]

Meanwhile, Conte's team is winning 5-0 against one of the so-called "seven title contenders." Is Conte not from a league that EPL pundits consider "dead"? How come his team is humiliating one of the solid teams in the "toughest" league?

so you now using Conte to bail out Pep?
You're not listening. We keep saying, you need to bring your A game everytime, all the time. You snooze, you lose. Kai. The team in the bottom half can worry the top team. Nature of the beast

What does Pep do? He buys a second squad...

Who did he buy?

All monies used in this post are in pounds. The source of this information is https://www.transferleague.co.uk/manche ... -transfers.

I have included 2015/2016 to include the spend just before he took over. Note that even before now City had spent the following - 2014/15 (87.5m), 2013/14 (103.2m), 2012/13 (54m), 2011/12 (76m), 2010/11 (154.8m), 2009/10 (125m), 2008/09 (127.7m), 2007/08 (45.8m), 2006/07 (2.4m). Compare this to their spending in prior years to 2006/07 when the largest was 32.7m in 2001/02 and lowest was 0 in 2004/05. Their average spending would be less than 10m for the period pre-2006/07 if calculated (I estimated).

Point of the above paragraph is to illustrate the continued spending on City. City became faves not because they were a big club but rather they were now a rich club. Expectations grew due to the investment. Below are the further details for the last 4 seasons. City have spent 520.4m since Guardiola took over i.e. 2016/17 to 2018/2019 (3 seasons). The spend pre-Guardiola i.e. 2007/08 to 2015/2016 (9 seasons) is 926.1m. Total investment from Mansour's take over is 1446.5m.

2015/2016 (152.1m)

Enes Unal - 2m
Raheem Sterling - 44m
Patrick Roberts - 11m
Fabian Delph - 8m
Nicolas Otamendi - 32m
Kevin De Bruyne - 66m
Anthony Caveres - 0.1m

2016/17 (168.85m)

Ilkay Gundogan (20m)
Aaron Mooy (Free)
Nolito (13.8m)
Oleksandr Zinchenko (1.7m)
Leroy Sané (37m)
Gabriel Jesus (27m)
Marlos Moreno (4.75m)
John Stones (47.5m)
Claudio Bravo (17.1m)

2017/18 (272.2m)

Ederson (35m)
Bernardo Silva (43m)
Douglas Luiz (10.7m)
Kyle Walker (45m)
Danilo (26.5m)
Benjamin Mendy (52m)
Aymeric Laporte (57m)
Jack Harrison Undisclosed
Olarenwaju Kayode (3m)

2018/19 (79.35m)

Riyad Mahrez (60m)
Philippe Sandler (2.25m)
Claudio Gomes Free
Daniel Arzani (0.5m)
Ashley Smith-Brown Undisclosed
Zack Steffen (7m)
Rabbi Matondo (9.6m)

Abu Dhabi billionaire Sheikh Mansour took over City in 2008 to make City one of the richest clubs in the world.

You still didn’t answer my question.

Your question was - who did he buy! If you cant see the answer from above then that is the end of the discussion.

I see. The tactic is to post a bunch of figures to overwhelm and confuse so it makes it seem like you know what you’re talking about. My question was simple: what team did Pep buy? Not how much City has spent since the Arabs took over.

[Cristao II]

Read Piffington - the answer is very clearly there. I actually mentally predicted that you would post the above. If you are confused by the above, then I really cant help you.

[Mr. Piffington]

Read Piffington - the answer is very clearly there. I actually mentally predicted that you would post the above. If you are confused by the above, then I really cant help you.

Pep didn’t buy a new team, he didn’t renew the contracts of the fullbacks he inherited and got in new ones. He replaced the goal keeper. What “new team” did he buy?

[txj]

I am speaking about spending over a sustained period. You cannot measure this accurately with a snapshot in time. City are trying to bridge the gap by cooking the books and inflating the sponsorship, allegedly. That is why they are being investigated. That is not a constraint.

I talked specifically about Pelle wrt the preparatory spending in expectation of Pep's arrival, in the final year of his rein.

Jose's presser may have been largely self serving, but his point about football heritage is applicable beyond Manure/Sevilla. Its about the quality of squad and the heritage of that which a new manager inherits.

LFC's wage bill without the CL bonus can be deducted from the very report you posted. Both sides earned bonuses from the PL, which embodies several factors including global viewership.

Few teams in the world if any can match City's and PSG's spending. By undermining FFP, allegedly, City are able to continually extend the size of its "sponsorship"...

City are basically inflating sponsorship from oil money and presenting it as commercial revenue. That's simply b/c they are not as popular as Liverpool or Manure and can't attract commercial revenue like those 2. FFP was really about maintaining the financial advantages clubs like Liverpool and Manure have against new money like Chelski and City. So people in the know are not moved by their crocodile tears about the spending of City, PSG, etc. This is b/c they want to be the only ones spending from their huge pot of commercial revenue.

Everybody is subject to the same rules. FSG is having to spend within the constraint of the rules. Its not about crocodile tears; nobody at LFC has complained about City's finances. Just that they have to follow the rules like everybody else.... Not sure what ur point is...

You may have talked about so-called preparatory spending in the period just b/4 Pep's arrival, but you also spoke about spending a decade ago. What was the point of that? You were scrambling around looking for excuses, from wage bill to 10 year spending - as if in that period the likes of Liverpool were not also blowing fortunes on Andy Carroll and co.

The point of that is that to measure a club's spending, you have to look across a time series of investment, not a snapshot in time.

Borinho was talking about Sevilla's European pedigree. It is ironic you should be mentioning it in a discussion about City spending. Sevilla knocked out and outplayed Manure with a squad nowhere near what Manure spent on Pogba.

Its only ironic if you take his words literally. Here is a portion of his statement: "When I arrived in Real Madrid, do you know how many players had played in the quarter-final of the Champions League? Xabi Alonso with Liverpool, Iker Casillas with Real Madrid and Cristiano Ronaldo with Manchester United. All the others not even a quarter-final. That's football heritage.

"Do you know what is also heritage? Is that [Nicolas] Otamendi, Kevin De Bruyne, Fernandinho, [David] Silva, [Raheem] Sterling, [Sergio] Aguero, they are investments from the past, not from the last two years.

How much was the CL bonus for Liverpool? If both Liverpool and City players got bonuses for successes that season, what is the relevance of the bonuses in a wage bill comparison b/w the 2?

Look at the report you posted!

Manure and Liverpool have been matching City's spending. City pulled out of chasing Van Dijk b/c Liverpool outbid them. City pulled out of a deal with Alexis Sanchez when Manure put 500k a week on the table.

Only if you look at it from a snapshot in time! VVD's transfer was not b/c LFC outbid MCFC...

City are being investigated b/c they are presenting state aid as commercial sponsorship. This is due to the fact that they don't have the sort of money Liverpool and Manure have from real commercial revenue.

Money is not the reason City are above Liverpool and Manure. Oil money just allowed City to be able to compete with the traditional big spenders and they don't like it!

Money is not the SOLE reason. But to say "money is not the reason" as above is preposterous...

[cic old boy]

Everybody is subject to the same rules. FSG is having to spend within the constraint of the rules. Its not about crocodile tears; nobody at LFC has complained about City's finances. Just that they have to follow the rules like everybody else.... Not sure what ur point is...

The point of that is that to measure a club's spending, you have to look across a time series of investment, not a snapshot in time.

Its only ironic if you take his words literally. Here is a portion of his statement: "When I arrived in Real Madrid, do you know how many players had played in the quarter-final of the Champions League? Xabi Alonso with Liverpool, Iker Casillas with Real Madrid and Cristiano Ronaldo with Manchester United. All the others not even a quarter-final. That's football heritage.

"Do you know what is also heritage? Is that [Nicolas] Otamendi, Kevin De Bruyne, Fernandinho, [David] Silva, [Raheem] Sterling, [Sergio] Aguero, they are investments from the past, not from the last two years.

Look at the report you posted!

Only if you look at it from a snapshot in time! VVD's transfer was not b/c LFC outbid MCFC...


Money is not the SOLE reason. But to say "money is not the reason" as above is preposterous...

My point about spending is clear - City are spending similar amounts to the other elite clubs. You guys then started talking about FFP and I had to break it down for you. The traditional elite clubs had an advantage over City b/c they had a bigger following and stronger commercial income as a result. So City were trying to catch up by masking state aid as commercial revenue. The fact they are breaking the rules doesn't translate as spending more money.

You can't pick and choose which "snapshot" of time you use. B/4 the Arabs came, City were yoyo-ing from top div to relegation, while the likes of Liverpool and Manure were spending big. City spent big just to catch up and match the advantage of the other elite clubs.

Your Borinho quote gets even more ridiculous. How many Sevilla players had played in the CL quarters b/4 they knocked out Manure? Manure were also investing in the years b/4 the past 2 - Martial, Mata, De Gea and his favourite Fellaini were all bought b/4 he arrived.

The report said nothing about City players' bonuses for winning the EPL.

If City were willing to match Liverpool, Van Dijk could have ended up at City.

Money is the reason City are far superior to the likes of Watford. Money doesn't matter b/w City, Liverpool, Manure, etc b/c they neutralise each other.

[txj]

Everybody is subject to the same rules. FSG is having to spend within the constraint of the rules. Its not about crocodile tears; nobody at LFC has complained about City's finances. Just that they have to follow the rules like everybody else.... Not sure what ur point is...

The point of that is that to measure a club's spending, you have to look across a time series of investment, not a snapshot in time.

Its only ironic if you take his words literally. Here is a portion of his statement: "When I arrived in Real Madrid, do you know how many players had played in the quarter-final of the Champions League? Xabi Alonso with Liverpool, Iker Casillas with Real Madrid and Cristiano Ronaldo with Manchester United. All the others not even a quarter-final. That's football heritage.

"Do you know what is also heritage? Is that [Nicolas] Otamendi, Kevin De Bruyne, Fernandinho, [David] Silva, [Raheem] Sterling, [Sergio] Aguero, they are investments from the past, not from the last two years.

Look at the report you posted!

Only if you look at it from a snapshot in time! VVD's transfer was not b/c LFC outbid MCFC...


Money is not the SOLE reason. But to say "money is not the reason" as above is preposterous...

My point about spending is clear - City are spending similar amounts to the other elite clubs. You guys then started talking about FFP and I had to break it down for you. The traditional elite clubs had an advantage over City b/c they had a bigger following and stronger commercial income as a result. So City were trying to catch up by masking state aid as commercial revenue. The fact they are breaking the rules doesn't translate as spending more money.

You have to be kidding me! There is not a single journalist out there with a view that supports yours...They are not breaking the rules for the fun of it. They are doing so to avail themselves of the full capacity of a sovereign wealth fund. If City are trying to catch up, they would develop and spend from their commercial revenue, like other clubs, including those funded by oligarchs, rather than a SWF.


You can't pick and choose which "snapshot" of time you use. B/4 the Arabs came, City were yoyo-ing from top div to relegation, while the likes of Liverpool and Manure were spending big. City spent big just to catch up and match the advantage of the other elite clubs.

Its not about a snapshot in time, but a measurement period of years, one that captures spending as teams evolve from one period to another; such as a 5-10yr period.

Your Borinho quote gets even more ridiculous. How many Sevilla players had played in the CL quarters b/4 they knocked out Manure? Manure were also investing in the years b/4 the past 2 - Martial, Mata, De Gea and his favourite Fellaini were all bought b/4 he arrived.

The quote is more about his explanation of value of squads and what value transitions from one manager to another. Your constant reference to Sevilla is a poor ruse.

The report said nothing about City players' bonuses for winning the EPL.

But it spoke about the impact of CL bonus on LFC's wages. It isolated it in the analysis of the accounts b/c its never a true measure of squad wages/value. Read the report you posted!

If City were willing to match Liverpool, Van Dijk could have ended up at City.

Again not based on any known fact. VVD had a commitment to LFC; specifically to Klopp and cited this in interviews...

Money is the reason City are far superior to the likes of Watford. Money doesn't matter b/w City, Liverpool, Manure, etc b/c they neutralise each other.

Again quite preposterous, and not backed by any known reporting.

[Cristao II]

Read Piffington - the answer is very clearly there. I actually mentally predicted that you would post the above. If you are confused by the above, then I really cant help you.

Pep didn’t buy a new team, he didn’t renew the contracts of the fullbacks he inherited and got in new ones. He replaced the goal keeper. What “new team” did he buy?

Typically when I answer questions like above, I like to dig in and show in-depth analysis et al. I am not going to bother with the above for one reason. It would be a waste of energy as I doubt you would want to read the answer and would start claiming that I am trying to 'confuse, befuddle' etc

My short response is 'look at the list of players'.