animal.crackers wrote:How much did Bayern spend in 07? After "that" season.

Players out:

1 Roy Makaay: Undisclosed fee
2 Pizarro: Free
3 Hargreaves: £17m
4: Salihamidzic: Free
5: Santa Cruz: £3.5m


Players in:

1: Klose £10m
2: Ze Roberto Free
3: Luca Toni: £7.5m
4: Ribery: £17m
5: Hamit: Free


We spent £34.5m in transfer and earned £20.5. You don't want to go down there, we bought those player with reasonable price and sold our players for reasonable price, even allowed some to leave for free.


I forgot about Makaay transfer fee, add that to the £20.5m


We're talking about spending just £34.5m to buy all those players, now compared that to how much Barca spent on Sanchez, Fabregas, Dmytro Chygrynskiy, Man City, Liverpool £100m, Madrid on Ronaldo, Coentrao etc


compare Coentrao transfer fee to Rafinha or Alaba's

Add to that, we made profit that years as well.

There is no such thing as a reasonable price.

People pay what they want.

It's not from your pocket.

Moral of the story: All clubs spend.

Question for Bayern fans: Will you spend more money to become as good as Dortmund?

Bayern spend just like other clubs. They don't spend as much as Barcelona maybe, but look at their lack of success. They have been under-performing in the CL because they dont spend as much.

The Messiah wrote:

animal.crackers wrote:How much did Bayern spend in 07? After "that" season.

Players out:

1 Roy Makaay: Undisclosed fee
2 Pizarro: Free
3 Hargreaves: £17m
4: Salihamidzic: Free
5: Santa Cruz: £3.5m


Players in:

1: Klose £10m
2: Ze Roberto Free
3: Luca Toni: £7.5m
4: Ribery: £17m
5: Hamit: Free


We spent £34.5m in transfer and earned £20.5. You don't want to go down there, we bought those player with reasonable price and sold our players for reasonable price, even allowed some to leave for free.


I forgot about Makaay transfer fee, add that to the £20.5m


We're talking about spending just £34.5m to buy all those players, now compared that to how much Barca spent on Sanchez, Fabregas, Dmytro Chygrynskiy, Man City, Liverpool £100m, Madrid on Ronaldo, Coentrao etc


compare Coentrao transfer fee to Rafinha or Alaba's

Competely missing the point. We're talking about buying players, not the fee. Your being extremely selective as well.
25mil for Ribery
25mil for Robben
35mil for Gomez.

Big sums right there.

RED 80s. wrote:City basically won the lottery. The Michael Carroll(google him) of football. A team with as much history as Huddersfield Town.

They just got lucky that some Billionaire Arab decided to play real life Football Manager...on cheat mode.

With Chelsea it's kinda different, atleast they were playing CL football and competing for a top 4 place before Abramovic came.

Maybe City won the lottery, so what?

Does that make you bitter? Does that make your blood boil?

I loved it when so many hypocritical United fans were loving it when they heard the Qatar rumours.

And City had a lot of things going for it. It's not like the owners decided to invest money into some random club.

Nice stadium, very solid fanbase, free marketing potential, etc.

Football manager with cheat mode? *bleep* off. City are spending in 5 years the inflated equivalent of what clubs spend in 20 years to catch back up to WHERE WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALL ALONG (until our owner in the 70's fukced us sideways).

So because Chelsea were top 4 it's okay for them to be backed by billions? Sound logic.

animal.crackers wrote:There is no such thing as a reasonable price.

Rafinha £4.5 transfer fee was reasonable, but Coentrao £28m or so transfer fee wasn't. Performance wise, Rafinha out played him.

animal.crackers wrote:People pay what they want.

That's why we refused to pay £20million city demanded for Boateng, £11.5m was reasonable now compare it to what Barca paid for Dmytro Chygrynskiy and how instrumental both players were for their clubs.

People pay what they want, not what the selling club wants

animal.crackers wrote:It's not from your pocket.

Moral of the story: All clubs spend.

Well I buy Bayern Jersey, so also do other Bayern fans, I pay for sky so I can watch Bayern matches, I bought Bayern Jerseys for my nephews and Nieces, so also do all Bayern fans, who pay for tickets etc,

Actually it's partly from my pocket, but I can understand, from City fans perspective , it's not from their pocket.


I don't have anything against City, I prefer City above any other English team, but let the truth be told, it's risky having a billionaire owner, it's for the betterment of the club, imagine if he pulls all his funds, you wouldn't be smiling like you are doing now.

Madrid's case is different, they are top dogs, but I hate how they buy player with ridiculous transfer fee, Coentrao would've been playing for Bayern if it wasn't for Madrid buying a player they don't need with such amount.

I thank you Madrid, for the development of Contento, Alaba and having a good player like Rafinha as back-up, it wouldn't have been possible if it wasn't for your extravagant buying

The Messiah wrote:That's why we refused to pay £20million city demanded for Boateng, £11.5m was reasonable now compare it to what Barca paid for Dmytro Chygrynskiy and how instrumental both players were for their clubs.

Yes, and you cheap bastards tapped him up because you wouldn't pay 9 million more.

You *bleep* would probably laugh at even a 15m offer right now.

animal.crackers wrote:

The Messiah wrote:That's why we refused to pay £20million city demanded for Boateng, £11.5m was reasonable now compare it to what Barca paid for Dmytro Chygrynskiy and how instrumental both players were for their clubs.

Yes, and you cheap bastards tapped him up because you wouldn't pay 9 million more.

You *bleep* would probably laugh at even a 15m offer right now.

Point being you pay what you think it's reasonable for you to pay, not what the selling club wants

Messiah, what is Bayern's plan to become as good as Dortmund?

animal.crackers wrote:Messiah, what is Bayern's plan to become as good as Dortmund?

Get a batter Manager

Hoeness is jelly it took him decades of hard work for Bayern to be the economic powerhouse it is currently. Of course, most historical clubs are pretty well off due to extended support, being based in pretty large cities, European football, or big corporation ties...

I can see why an old-schooler would get mad at a smallish club going filthy rich a day to the next. It's a slap in the face to what his beliefs are.

Not that it's totally "wrong". That's just the way the world is. FFP's a joke, and I doubt it would be implemented unless Platini wants to see a lot of big clubs go tits up.

It's still nice having stable clubs, but without huge fan suppport and some sort of success it's just easier going the easy way.

And it can easily be argued that money coming into football from outside sources is good for the industry.

I hope I don't have to explain why.

animal.crackers wrote:And it can easily be argued that money coming into football from outside sources is good for the industry.

I hope I don't have to explain why.

Tell that to Racing or Valencia.

I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

Lord Hispano wrote:I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

La Liga needs like 17 more.

Sushi Master wrote:

Lord Hispano wrote:I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

La Liga needs like 17 more.

La Liga needs it more than any other league.

One of the bad things that can be attributed with plastic clubs, is that they ruin other hard-working club, look at Villarreal and Malaga

Sushi Master wrote:La Liga needs like 17 more.

No kidding. It's really uncompetitive for a top league. 2 teams with a real chance. That's it.

Has to be said that those two teams in their current state would make any other league look uncompetitive as well, though.

The Messiah wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:

Lord Hispano wrote:I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

La Liga needs like 17 more.

La Liga needs it more than any other league.

One of the bad things that can be attributed with plastic clubs, is that they ruin other hard-working club, look at Villarreal and Malaga

Well... Villarreal were shit, no excuse there.

Málaga are a sugar daddy club but don't get much shit for it because they didn't spend that much, got a lot of average players and trust in their youth (Rondón, Camacho, Isco).

Just shows that you can have reasonable billionaire backed clubs.

Lord Hispano wrote:
Has to be said that those two teams in their current state would make any other league look uncompetitive as well, though.

You mean the clubs not present in the CL final? :vagi:

I think that's a myth. Any of them would have to slug it out with City/ManU, Juventus/Milan, Bayern/Dortmund.

Come on, 30 point gaps between 2nd and 3rd? No way are Valencia/Bilbao/Málaga that bad.

Sushi Master wrote:

The Messiah wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:

Lord Hispano wrote:I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

La Liga needs like 17 more.

La Liga needs it more than any other league.

One of the bad things that can be attributed with plastic clubs, is that they ruin other hard-working club, look at Villarreal and Malaga

Well... Villarreal were shit, no excuse there.

Málaga are a sugar daddy club but don't get much shit for it because they didn't spend that much, got a lot of average players and trust in their youth (Rondón, Camacho, Isco).

Just shows that you can have reasonable billionaire backed clubs.

Santi Cazorla

Sushi Master wrote:

The Messiah wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:

Lord Hispano wrote:I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

La Liga needs like 17 more.

La Liga needs it more than any other league.

One of the bad things that can be attributed with plastic clubs, is that they ruin other hard-working club, look at Villarreal and Malaga

Well... Villarreal were shit, no excuse there.

Málaga are a sugar daddy club but don't get much shit for it because they didn't spend that much, got a lot of average players and trust in their youth (Rondón, Camacho, Isco).

Just shows that you can have reasonable billionaire backed clubs.

What makes it "reasonable"? The fact that their Billionaire probably doesn't want to spend as much as a Roman Abramovich would?

Lord Hispano wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:La Liga needs like 17 more.

No kidding. It's really uncompetitive for a top league. 2 teams with a real chance. That's it.

Has to be said that those two teams in their current state would make any other league look uncompetitive as well, though.

Bayern against La Liga teams this season.


Won 3, loss 1.

Then again even that loss was still a win

The bitterness in this thread is unreal.

The Messiah wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:

The Messiah wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:

Lord Hispano wrote:I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

La Liga needs like 17 more.

La Liga needs it more than any other league.

One of the bad things that can be attributed with plastic clubs, is that they ruin other hard-working club, look at Villarreal and Malaga

Well... Villarreal were shit, no excuse there.

Málaga are a sugar daddy club but don't get much shit for it because they didn't spend that much, got a lot of average players and trust in their youth (Rondón, Camacho, Isco).

Just shows that you can have reasonable billionaries backed clubs.

Santi Cazorla

Yeah, 21m but that's a reasonable price because he's an awesome player.

But the rest? Toulalan 11m, Monreal 6m, Mathisjen 2m... and before that it was a slew of guys not 1 more expensive than 4m.

Very reasonable buyers for being billinaries.

Barrettinator wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:

The Messiah wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:

Lord Hispano wrote:I think we need more "plastic" clubs now.

La Liga needs like 17 more.

La Liga needs it more than any other league.

One of the bad things that can be attributed with plastic clubs, is that they ruin other hard-working club, look at Villarreal and Malaga

Well... Villarreal were shit, no excuse there.

Málaga are a sugar daddy club but don't get much shit for it because they didn't spend that much, got a lot of average players and trust in their youth (Rondón, Camacho, Isco).

Just shows that you can have reasonable billionaire backed clubs.

What makes it "reasonable"? The fact that their Billionaire probably doesn't want to spend as much as a Roman Abramovich would?

Sushi trying to mess everything up with this attitude of reasonable billionaire, spender, forgetting that's how they all start.

They get decent players, to attract good players, then from good players to quality ones.


It's their strategy and it will always remain like that