|
Jose
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 13 2008, 10:58 PM (144 Views)
|
|
El Nino
|
Jan 14 2008, 12:51 PM
Post #21
|
|
Unregistered
|
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
|
|
|
| |
|
El Nino
|
Jan 14 2008, 12:52 PM
Post #22
|
|
Unregistered
|
anways the inital topic was about the possiblity about jose joining liverpool not going thru the same old stuff about roman and his money .
|
|
|
| |
|
definitelynotmowipromise
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
Post #23
|
|
Unregistered
|
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all.
Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so.
Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
|
|
|
| |
|
El Nino
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:04 PM
Post #24
|
|
Unregistered
|
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
|
|
|
| |
|
definitelynotmowipromise
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
Post #25
|
|
Unregistered
|
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz".
That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres.
If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
|
|
|
| |
|
El Nino
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:08 PM
Post #26
|
|
Unregistered
|
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
|
|
|
| |
|
definitelynotmowipromise
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:13 PM
Post #27
|
|
Unregistered
|
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:08 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
I'll give you Mikel.
But unless you can prove the Robben, SWP and Ballack ones on anything other than hearsay from the press, then you're talking balls.
Still didn't address my argument either.
|
|
|
| |
|
El Nino
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:15 PM
Post #28
|
|
Unregistered
|
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:13 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:08 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
I'll give you Mikel. But unless you can prove the Robben, SWP and Ballack ones on anything other than hearsay from the press, then you're talking balls. Still didn't address my argument either.
which argument is that ?
|
|
|
| |
|
definitelynotmowipromise
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:16 PM
Post #29
|
|
Unregistered
|
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:15 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:13 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:08 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
I'll give you Mikel. But unless you can prove the Robben, SWP and Ballack ones on anything other than hearsay from the press, then you're talking balls. Still didn't address my argument either.
which argument is that ?
Enough!
I can't be arsed with you. It's like arguing with a fucking parrot.
|
|
|
| |
|
El Nino
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:18 PM
Post #30
|
|
Unregistered
|
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:16 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:15 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:13 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:08 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
I'll give you Mikel. But unless you can prove the Robben, SWP and Ballack ones on anything other than hearsay from the press, then you're talking balls. Still didn't address my argument either.
which argument is that ?
Enough! I can't be arsed with you. It's like arguing with a fucking parrot.
well which argument you on about ?
oh well anyway back on topic before it was changed
|
|
|
| |
|
definitelynotmowipromise
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:18 PM
Post #31
|
|
Unregistered
|
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:18 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:16 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:15 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:13 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:08 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
I'll give you Mikel. But unless you can prove the Robben, SWP and Ballack ones on anything other than hearsay from the press, then you're talking balls. Still didn't address my argument either.
which argument is that ?
Enough! I can't be arsed with you. It's like arguing with a fucking parrot.
well which argument you on about ? oh well anyway back on topic before it was changed
BY YOU!!!!
Oh my god.
|
|
|
| |
Gerrard You Diver Son
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:20 PM
Post #32
|
London Pride
- Posts:
- 783
- Group:
- Chelsea
- Member
- #156
- Joined:
- October 24, 2007
|
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:08 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
Well I never even read about the last two. There must have been 10 clubs looking or talking to Ballack, when a player of his stature comes on the market in normally happens. Terms were agreed and he joined us.
As for Mikel there was a long standing case involving that which I won't go into as it's been done to death, & as for Robben, PSV told Utd to do one when they offered £5 million less than originally agreed confirmed in fact by PSV's president. We stepped in and met their price and took the player. Same as any other transfer business involving ANY club.
|
|
|
| |
|
El Nino
|
Jan 14 2008, 01:28 PM
Post #33
|
|
Unregistered
|
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 01:20 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:08 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:06 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 02:04 PM
- definitelynotmowipromise
- Jan 14 2008, 01:01 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:51 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:42 PM
- El Nino
- Jan 14 2008, 01:32 PM
- Gerrard You Diver Son
- Jan 14 2008, 12:21 PM
Talking of extremes Phil, £8.5 million on Collymore? Defened that if you can!
and in the two seasons he was with us formed the highest scoring parnership in th prem at the time with fowler . prob scored morein a couple of matches than sheva has all season . 28 goals in 60 games .as opposed to 8 in 41 ? who has mentioned destroying football ? how has roman made the prem better ? by buying all the players to stop other teams getting them ?
Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about transfer fees. not what they have done since signing. That was the point of the discussion. How did Roman make the prem better? By changing the league from the usual Arsenal-Man Utd monolpoly into a three horse race whilst also revitalising a heavily stagnated transfer market & then that money filters through to other clubs. Where did West Ham, Southampton, Blackburn & Charlton spend the money we gave them for Cole, Johnson, Bridge, Duff & Parker? Most of it went to other English/British clubs Many clubs benefited from the cash injection and further down the chain I am sure it did some clubs a huge favour.
you ask me to defend the transfer of colleymore o i have done ,im pretty sure that is the only time we have broken the transfer record in uk .there is two sides to it yes the clubs get money but loose their best players - where are charlton southampton now ? also west ham nearly went down - money is everything . clubs now have to pay over the odds for players to compete against yourself in the transfer market , is that good for the clubs ? also most of the big transfers have come from abroad - crepo,essien,robben,sheva,cech,drogba,carvahlo so the money isnt going to clubs in this country . yes i know its the selling clubs fault for raising the prices . before roman came along the transfer market was fine and everyone competeed now you have to pay big bucks , way over what the player is worth .
The transfer market was dead...Man United would make the occasional huge signing but apart from that, fuck all. Remember all the talk of the football bubble bursting? Remember ITV Digital going down? Not saying that Abramovich has himself fixed all of this but he has gone a long way towards doing so. Before Abramovich, it was United (mainly) and occasionally Arsenal. Roman coming in has meant that everyone has had to up their game and it means that there are now three genuine contenders to the title with Liverpool surely to amount some sort of challenge in the near future. How is that bad for the game?
ITV digital was to do with the championship not the prem , same with the bubble bursting , the money in the prem has always been there . there is two sides to the coin , yes the fees have gone up meaning other clubs get more money but now because of inflated fees other clubs cant spend that manoey on the top players due to the fact chelsea can outbid anyone they want and ensure the player they want goes to them instead of others due to higher wages also . so is that good for football ?
What are you talking about? "Coz u hav lots of monee u can outbid ova clubz 4 playerz". That is such a simple view of how the transfer market works! We buy players that we want. When have we ever been in a bidding war and just said "ok we'll double what you want"? I didn't see us bidding a stupid amount for Hargreaves or Carrick or Torres. If you're going to resort to such a basic uninformed argument, then there really is no point.
mikel ? robben was on his way to man utd? , swp on his way to arsenal ?ballack joining man utd ?
Well I never even read about the last two. There must have been 10 clubs looking or talking to Ballack, when a player of his stature comes on the market in normally happens. Terms were agreed and he joined us. As for Mikel there was a long standing case involving that which I won't go into as it's been done to death, & as for Robben, PSV told Utd to do one when they offered £5 million less than originally agreed confirmed in fact by PSV's president. We stepped in and met their price and took the player. Same as any other transfer business involving ANY club.
thats cool mate , just go by what is read in the papers .
|
|
|
| |
Stam
|
Jan 15 2008, 06:23 AM
Post #34
|
International
- Posts:
- 4,592
- Group:
- Manchester United
- Member
- #8
- Joined:
- May 31, 2007
|
- Blinkered Red
- Jan 14 2008, 09:48 AM
be a test for him to really manager a club rather than just play at it
best of a bad bunch i spose but i dont really think maureen has the stickability factor that we need
Porto "thumb"
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|