|
On November 28 2014 22:37 Pandemona wrote:Haha i see  Hmm i didn't get that joke  sorry Read a nice article about how clinical Diegooooooooo Costa has been at his time in Chelsea Clinical Costa
this makes much better reading for me:
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Lol that article...was it written by Steveling by any chance XD
|
Woah that article is such a good read. Miss the old days when legendary clubs like liverpool were on top of things. Now it's all plastic.
|
"It's sad to see teams like Arsenal and Liverpool, having to play catch up due to their lack of resources..." best quote from that link
|
lol i posted it as a joke :/
|
On November 29 2014 00:08 Jockmcplop wrote: lol i posted it as a joke :/
Q_Q
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Like i said before ages back. Reason why Liverpool was on top years back is because they did exactly what City Chelsea PSG are doing now and buying up all the talent lol.
Back in 1960 the record in England for buying a player was £115,000 by the start of 1970 it was £200,000. By the start of 1980 Bryan Robson was bought for 1.5million.
A random signing of Souness plucked out by me Liverpool signed him for £378,000 in 1978 where they spent 500,000 that transfer window just out of random. Where also the record was "broken" for highest signing by Man Utd where they bought McQueen for £495,000. So they weren't exactly being conservative!
Also they were the first team to hand out £10,000 a week wages in 1992 when the average player wage was £1,700 a week!
So whilst you can say Chelsea / City / PSG success now is due to rich owners, you can't say that the "old school" clubs didn't do it. Hell Arsenal were the first team in England to give someone £100,000 wages! (Sol Campbell)
Source Source 1978 Wiki
|
On November 29 2014 00:10 Pandemona wrote:Like i said before ages back. Reason why Liverpool was on top years back is because they did exactly what City Chelsea PSG are doing now and buying up all the talent lol. Back in 1960 the record in England for buying a player was £115,000 by the start of 1970 it was £200,000. By the start of 1980 Bryan Robson was bought for 1.5million. A random signing of Souness plucked out by me Liverpool signed him for £378,000 in 1978 where they spent 500,000 that transfer window just out of random. Where also the record was "broken" for highest signing by Man Utd where they bought McQueen for £495,000. So they weren't exactly being conservative! Also they were the first team to hand out £10,000 a week wages in 1992 when the average player wage was £1,700 a week! So whilst you can say Chelsea / City / PSG success now is due to rich owners, you can't say that the "old school" clubs didn't do it. Hell Arsenal were the first team in England to give someone £100,000 wages! (Sol Campbell) SourceSource1978 Wiki
The greatest club of all time were the first to spend £1 million 
|
I agree with this but these clubs have earned the right to spend through decades of building up their reputation. They have the status already, so they throw money to keep being up there. People hate when average teams jump 30 years ahead just by splashing enough green in a couple of seasons. I mean, rm buys every damn best player there is every year, no one complains about them because they are real madrid. If say, getafe spends half a billion next couple seasons and reach the top people gonna hate them like chelsea/psg/mancity.
|
|
|
On November 29 2014 00:19 Steveling wrote: I agree with this but these clubs have earned the right to spend through decades of building up their reputation. They have the status already, so they throw money to keep being up there. People hate when average teams jump 30 years ahead just by splashing enough green in a couple of seasons. I mean, rm buys every damn best player there is every year, no one complains about them because they are real madrid. If say, getafe spends half a billion next couple seasons and reach the top people gonna hate them like chelsea/psg/mancity. I loved it when City got rich. It really made things interesting in England. What we need is probably MORE massive rich clubs not just a few.
|
On November 29 2014 00:22 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2014 00:19 Steveling wrote: I agree with this but these clubs have earned the right to spend through decades of building up their reputation. They have the status already, so they throw money to keep being up there. People hate when average teams jump 30 years ahead just by splashing enough green in a couple of seasons. I mean, rm buys every damn best player there is every year, no one complains about them because they are real madrid. If say, getafe spends half a billion next couple seasons and reach the top people gonna hate them like chelsea/psg/mancity. I loved it when City got rich. It really made things interesting in England. What we need is probably MORE massive rich clubs not just a few.
Yes, agreed. That's not the point though.
|
On November 29 2014 00:20 Pandemona wrote:Haha, they were so rich back then  Shame again like the previous season Liverpool who spent alot finished 2nd TT as Forest finish 2nd that year.
It points to bad business management on Forest's part that they ended up where they are now, after consecutive European cup wins. That should have ensured a massive footballing dynasty, but i guess prize + TV money wasn't as extreme in those days
|
pot calling the kettle black..
|
What happened to Forest anyway? They stuck with Clough for too long or something?
|
On November 29 2014 00:24 themartinez wrote: pot calling the kettle black..
Exactly xavi.
|
On November 29 2014 00:08 Jockmcplop wrote: lol i posted it as a joke :/ I thought Germany was the joke? Now I confuse :/
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On November 29 2014 00:26 zulu_nation8 wrote: What happened to Forest anyway? They stuck with Clough for too long or something?
Think was bad buisness management. Much like the fall of Leeds. Leeds got to the semi finals of Champions League? Following season had to sell everyone of their players or something and now look at them. Mid tier championship level club. It is crazy.
|
On November 29 2014 00:26 zulu_nation8 wrote: What happened to Forest anyway? They stuck with Clough for too long or something?
Yeah i think that was it. There were also huge financial problems for us in the 90s that led to the bad kind of takeover, and some disastrous managerial appointments after Clough. On the Forest forum i use you can't even type in David P****s name. That knobhead spent an absolute shitload of cash on a team that got relegated to the third tier. Hopefully Forest legend Stuart Pearce can get us back to where we belong.
|
On November 29 2014 00:26 Steveling wrote:Exactly xavi. El Maestro! Cameleon eyes! - Ray Hodgson
|
|
|
|
|
|