The mancityfans.net football forum

Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..


Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

When you consider the amount that Hughes paid for the players he got, then 'gave' is a very accurate assessment.

Personally, I couldn't give a toss where the money goes. People will whinge either way.

Yeah, I don't mind where the money goes as long as we get value for it

£30m to Villa would be a disaster.... They would get 4 good players with that

Abu Dhabi wrote:Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..

Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

140? Where did it all go?

Given- Needed, and not overpriced
Bellamy- Overpriced, but we could see why Hughes paid that
Bridge- Overpriced
SWP- Haven't heard anyone complain about the price tag
Adebayor- This and Toure were the foolish transfers for me. Money was given to direct competitors who needed it, and have a manager with a top-class transfer record.
Toure- See above
Santa Cruz- Possibly the most overpriced purchase in Premiership football. Any other team could have got him for around 8, and would have subjected him to a half-decent medical.
Barry- decent buy. Was surprised we paid so little for him.
Lescott- Schoolboy error allowing Everton to bend us over a barrel like that.

However, I make that to be around 125 mil on 9 players. The Bridge and SWP transfers don't 'affect the competition' (Chelsea), and Blackburn, West Ham and Newcastle can't be considered direct enough competitors to use the transfer money paid to them to impact upon our targets in any meaningful way, the same can be said for Mancini's AJ transfer. Hughes targeted players with Prem experience to upgrade a mid-table Prem squad. Mancini has taken an upper table Prem squad, into which foreign players can be introduced and allowed to gel.

sweenyuk wrote:£30m to Villa would be a disaster.... They would get 4 good players with that

I cannot believe some people still think of us as fighting out of mid-table!

Looking forward a bit you should be more concerned about the money we are giving Barcelona (keeping them afloat!) and Inter, not Villa (FFS) buying 4 crappy players.

Forget Villa - they are not a threat to us.

It's one reason why we're less popular this year. Previously, we were subsidising other teams in the prem and giving them some much needed transfer funds. Who was going to slate us when they were trying to sell us players (Moyes aside)?

Now though, we're raising the standard of the prem and bringing in exciting names when Barcelona and Madrid had been hoovering up all the talent.

BlueinBosnia wrote:

Abu Dhabi wrote:Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..

Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

140? Where did it all go?

Given- Needed, and not overpriced
Bellamy- Overpriced, but we could see why Hughes paid that
Bridge- Overpriced
SWP- Haven't heard anyone complain about the price tag
Adebayor- This and Toure were the foolish transfers for me. Money was given to direct competitors who needed it, and have a manager with a top-class transfer record.
Toure- See above
Santa Cruz- Possibly the most overpriced purchase in Premiership football. Any other team could have got him for around 8, and would have subjected him to a half-decent medical.
Barry- decent buy. Was surprised we paid so little for him.
Lescott- Schoolboy error allowing Everton to bend us over a barrel like that.

However, I make that to be around 125 mil on 9 players. The Bridge and SWP transfers don't 'affect the competition' (Chelsea), and Blackburn, West Ham and Newcastle can't be considered direct enough competitors to use the transfer money paid to them to impact upon our targets in any meaningful way, the same can be said for Mancini's AJ transfer. Hughes targeted players with Prem experience to upgrade a mid-table Prem squad. Mancini has taken an upper table Prem squad, into which foreign players can be introduced and allowed to gel.

agree with most of that.. you missed out Tevez though.. and he was worth every penny

brite blu sky wrote:agree with most of that.. you missed out Tevez though.. and he was worth every penny

No he didn't. No prem club received a fee for Tevez.

BlueinBosnia wrote:

Abu Dhabi wrote:Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..

Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

140? Where did it all go?

Given- Needed, and not overpriced
Bellamy- Overpriced, but we could see why Hughes paid that
Bridge- Overpriced
SWP- Haven't heard anyone complain about the price tag
Adebayor- This and Toure were the foolish transfers for me. Money was given to direct competitors who needed it, and have a manager with a top-class transfer record.
Toure- See above
Santa Cruz- Possibly the most overpriced purchase in Premiership football. Any other team could have got him for around 8, and would have subjected him to a half-decent medical.
Barry- decent buy. Was surprised we paid so little for him.
Lescott- Schoolboy error allowing Everton to bend us over a barrel like that.

However, I make that to be around 125 mil on 9 players. The Bridge and SWP transfers don't 'affect the competition' (Chelsea), and Blackburn, West Ham and Newcastle can't be considered direct enough competitors to use the transfer money paid to them to impact upon our targets in any meaningful way, the same can be said for Mancini's AJ transfer. Hughes targeted players with Prem experience to upgrade a mid-table Prem squad. Mancini has taken an upper table Prem squad, into which foreign players can be introduced and allowed to gel.

Blue in Bosnia,

That would be true about Toure and Adebayor except Wenger has hardly spent a penny of it.

ronk wrote:

brite blu sky wrote:agree with most of that.. you missed out Tevez though.. and he was worth every penny

No he didn't. No prem club received a fee for Tevez.

oops.

now where did i put the sunscreen..

Mohammed Atta wrote:

BlueinBosnia wrote:

Abu Dhabi wrote:Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..

Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

140? Where did it all go?

Given- Needed, and not overpriced
Bellamy- Overpriced, but we could see why Hughes paid that
Bridge- Overpriced
SWP- Haven't heard anyone complain about the price tag
Adebayor- This and Toure were the foolish transfers for me. Money was given to direct competitors who needed it, and have a manager with a top-class transfer record.
Toure- See above
Santa Cruz- Possibly the most overpriced purchase in Premiership football. Any other team could have got him for around 8, and would have subjected him to a half-decent medical.
Barry- decent buy. Was surprised we paid so little for him.
Lescott- Schoolboy error allowing Everton to bend us over a barrel like that.

However, I make that to be around 125 mil on 9 players. The Bridge and SWP transfers don't 'affect the competition' (Chelsea), and Blackburn, West Ham and Newcastle can't be considered direct enough competitors to use the transfer money paid to them to impact upon our targets in any meaningful way, the same can be said for Mancini's AJ transfer. Hughes targeted players with Prem experience to upgrade a mid-table Prem squad. Mancini has taken an upper table Prem squad, into which foreign players can be introduced and allowed to gel.

Blue in Bosnia,

That would be true about Toure and Adebayor except Wenger has hardly spent a penny of it.

No he hasn't. Yet. But he now has the potential to spend around £40 million more than he would have done if these players hadn't been sold, or had been sold for less.

Abu Dhabi wrote:Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..


Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

I'm happy not to be lining the pockets of [strike]our rivals[/strike] other clubs in the same league.

Sadly, the law of supply and demand means that until we start winning pots and become a club that players want to play for, we will have to pay the City price in order to rise to the top.
Give it a few seasons and things will change.

King Kev wrote:

Abu Dhabi wrote:Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..


Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

I'm happy not to be lining the pockets of [strike]our rivals[/strike] other clubs in the same league.

Although I suppose that you could argue that giving money to West Ham, Newcastle and Blackburn allows them to compete for players that would otherwise be heading to clubs chasing us (ie Everton and Villa)...

BlueinBosnia wrote:

King Kev wrote:

Abu Dhabi wrote:Hughes gave 140M to English clubs..
Mancini gave only 7M so far..


Does it make a difference in affecting competition, and what do you prefer?

I'm happy not to be lining the pockets of [strike]our rivals[/strike] other clubs in the same league.

Although I suppose that you could argue that giving money to West Ham, Newcastle and Blackburn allows them to compete for players that would otherwise be heading to clubs chasing us (ie Everton and Villa)...

You could argue that losing Given was the difference in relegating Newcastle. Or you could say it was the reverse transfer that saw them getting Thanks Joey. If I were a Newcastle fan I'd want Given for twice the money they got.

I am no Hughes knocker - but I think that the difference in transfer targets demonstrates the differences between the managers and not only the fact that we were mid-table then and that we are now on CL threshold. I mean in terms of the level of comfort / aspiration - understanding of the market for players around Europe - not just in the PL

Ya Ya, Silva and Kolarov are tremendous signings - right in the top percentage of players in their positions in the world - Boateng could develop into similar - these are more refreshing than 'proven journeymen' - who can give you what you ask for but are limited in the end

A consequence is that we have not been restricted to PL clubs - a very good thing IMO

This sounds like a criticsm of Hughes - not at all intended - probably more a compliment to Mancini - and very much so to the management team - Cook and Marwood who seem to get strangely criticised on here

i agree with the lad over at TLDORC - getting young players in from overseas leagues make them feel more ours. fuck the competition, if we want to win the pots we will have to beat the best teams.