Manchester City vs. Manchester United - 30.04.2012

  • Thread starter Thread starter iNickStuff
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 216
  • Views Views 16K
The thing that irks me is the habit of some MUFC fans claiming sugar daddy, bought the title etc - but Man Uniteds team wasn't cheap either. Being a Newcastle fan, this season has got me thinking of the price of a team, so I crunched some numbers (These are all googled, obviously not 100%). I have rounded up to total fee - i.e Joe Hart was 600k initially, but could rise to 1.5 so I just put him down for 1.5, the same with one of the MU players I've forgotten). Using the starting line-ups for the derby, there's only 33.5m difference, in terms of football transfers not exactly a sugar daddy style difference. Also bear in mind that the MUFC line up included Giggs and Scholes - players that won't be around in 1 or 2 years (probably, can never rule out the immortal Giggs) and world class players from the MUFC academy, something City will have in time.

The numbers I crunched (feel free to correct as I am not a MUFC or MCFC fan so):

Hart 1.5
Zabaleta 6
Lescott 22
Kompany 6
Clichy 7
Barry 12
Toure Yaya 24
Silva 24
Tevez 25
Nasri 25
Aguero 35
187.5m

De Gea 18
Jones 16.5
Ferdinand 30
Smalling 10
Evra 5.5
Nani 20.5
Carrick 18.5
Scholes 0
Park 4
Giggs 0
Rooney 25.5
154m

Also in my research, it turns out Ryan Giggs had a spell at MCFC before moving to MUFC as a youth. That's just funny.

I've been meaning to do this for so long as all the MCFC sugar daddy claims were annoying me as I knew Rooney, Ferdinand and Nani weren't cheap. P.s if you bother reading this, you're awesome.
 
The thing that irks me is the habit of some MUFC fans claiming sugar daddy, bought the title etc - but Man Uniteds team wasn't cheap either. Being a Newcastle fan, this season has got me thinking of the price of a team, so I crunched some numbers (These are all googled, obviously not 100%). I have rounded up to total fee - i.e Joe Hart was 600k initially, but could rise to 1.5 so I just put him down for 1.5, the same with one of the MU players I've forgotten). Using the starting line-ups for the derby, there's only 33.5m difference, in terms of football transfers not exactly a sugar daddy style difference. Also bear in mind that the MUFC line up included Giggs and Scholes - players that won't be around in 1 or 2 years (probably, can never rule out the immortal Giggs) and world class players from the MUFC academy, something City will have in time.

The numbers I crunched (feel free to correct as I am not a MUFC or MCFC fan so):

Hart 1.5
Zabaleta 6
Lescott 22
Kompany 6
Clichy 7
Barry 12
Toure Yaya 24
Silva 24
Tevez 25
Nasri 25
Aguero 35
187.5m

De Gea 18
Jones 16.5
Ferdinand 30
Smalling 10
Evra 5.5
Nani 20.5
Carrick 18.5
Scholes 0
Park 4
Giggs 0
Rooney 25.5
154m

Also in my research, it turns out Ryan Giggs had a spell at MCFC before moving to MUFC as a youth. That's just funny.

I've been meaning to do this for so long as all the MCFC sugar daddy claims were annoying me as I knew Rooney, Ferdinand and Nani weren't cheap. P.s if you bother reading this, you're awesome.

I don't really care, but this does nothing for the sugar daddy argument. United are almost self made from continued success, would be making clear profits if not for debt payments whereas City have the largest losses in world football, from a sugar daddy. Few clubs in the world can match United's efficiency in revenue to trophies.
 
I don't think anybody argues the fact that we also spend big from time to time but more than not, the money we spend is money the club has generated threw success and marketing, not because off some rich arab.

Not getting to carried away though, we didn't turn up last night simple as that! City players wanted it more than us and it's obvious now Sir Alex got the tactics all wrong.
 
I don't really care, but this does nothing for the sugar daddy argument. United are almost self made from continued success, would be making clear profits if not for debt payments whereas City have the largest losses in world football, from a sugar daddy. Few clubs in the world can match United's efficiency in revenue to trophies.

Those are fair points. I think the game today is different, the money involved now I think clubs need an external source of money to challenge quickly. I'm not saying you need to spend lots of money to be successful - look at Arsenal, Newcastle - but to go from Man City circa 2007 to Man City now couldn't be done on just an amazing scouting system. MCFC put up with all sorts of highs and (primarily) lows until a few years ago, maybe it's just how I think but I don't see the fairness in turning on them now they're finally scaling new heights. I guess it's different with a rival club, I imagine I wouldn't enjoy Sunderland at the top of the EPL.
 
The thing that irks me is the habit of some MUFC fans claiming sugar daddy, bought the title etc - but Man Uniteds team wasn't cheap either. Being a Newcastle fan, this season has got me thinking of the price of a team, so I crunched some numbers (These are all googled, obviously not 100%). I have rounded up to total fee - i.e Joe Hart was 600k initially, but could rise to 1.5 so I just put him down for 1.5, the same with one of the MU players I've forgotten). Using the starting line-ups for the derby, there's only 33.5m difference, in terms of football transfers not exactly a sugar daddy style difference. Also bear in mind that the MUFC line up included Giggs and Scholes - players that won't be around in 1 or 2 years (probably, can never rule out the immortal Giggs) and world class players from the MUFC academy, something City will have in time.

The numbers I crunched (feel free to correct as I am not a MUFC or MCFC fan so):

Hart 1.5
Zabaleta 6
Lescott 22
Kompany 6
Clichy 7
Barry 12
Toure Yaya 24
Silva 24
Tevez 25
Nasri 25
Aguero 35
187.5m

De Gea 18
Jones 16.5
Ferdinand 30
Smalling 10
Evra 5.5
Nani 20.5
Carrick 18.5
Scholes 0
Park 4
Giggs 0
Rooney 25.5
154m

Also in my research, it turns out Ryan Giggs had a spell at MCFC before moving to MUFC as a youth. That's just funny.

I've been meaning to do this for so long as all the MCFC sugar daddy claims were annoying me as I knew Rooney, Ferdinand and Nani weren't cheap. P.s if you bother reading this, you're awesome.


Nobody is saying we don't spend money. What people dislike is that City did not earn their money.....and trust me, it's not just United fans that feel this way.....
 
Nobody is saying we don't spend money. What people dislike is that City did not earn their money.....and trust me, it's not just United fans that feel this way.....

Jealousy is a powerful tool I guess.
 
When they have more titles, more European trophies... then and only then I will be jealous of them.

10 years then? ;)

Nah seriously I think within 4 years it will become a shock when any domestic trophy goes anywhere other than Manchester. Unless we crank Graham Carr full of steroids and topple you both </dream>
 
Those are fair points. I think the game today is different, the money involved now I think clubs need an external source of money to challenge quickly. I'm not saying you need to spend lots of money to be successful - look at Arsenal, Newcastle - but to go from Man City circa 2007 to Man City now couldn't be done on just an amazing scouting system. MCFC put up with all sorts of highs and (primarily) lows until a few years ago, maybe it's just how I think but I don't see the fairness in turning on them now they're finally scaling new heights. I guess it's different with a rival club, I imagine I wouldn't enjoy Sunderland at the top of the EPL.

I don't particularly like it, but I don't really care. I do care when City blatantly try to bypass the FFP rules to pass while everyone else adheres to them, but that's another story. :)

City have (and Chelsea did/are) making the league more exciting. Also, the fact that every man and his dog hates United, for reasons no more than them being successful (as far as I can tell), makes United fans want to dismiss their rivals' success as undeserved or whatever, as easily as our own success is dismissed by others.
 
10 years then? ;)

Nah seriously I think within 4 years it will become a shock when any domestic trophy goes anywhere other than Manchester. Unless we crank Graham Carr full of steroids and topple you both </dream>

It's going to take City 10 decades to be the club Manchester United.
 
Lol.........just........lol. For starters you haven't even won the ******* thing yet!

Okay, its not "me", read my posts, and I never said they had (with the real "us" on form I'd say MC have a tougher last 2 games) but the result definitely indicates that they are going to win a lot over the next few years.
 
I don't particularly like it, but I don't really care. I do care when City blatantly try to bypass the FFP rules to pass while everyone else adheres to them, but that's another story. :)

City have (and Chelsea did/are) making the league more exciting. Also, the fact that every man and his dog hates United, for reasons no more than them being successful (as far as I can tell), makes United fans want to dismiss their rivals' success as undeserved or whatever, as easily as our own success is dismissed by others.

Financial fair play is just going to lead to the biggest clubs staying at the top. Makes the league boring and less competitive.
 
Financial fair play is just going to lead to the biggest clubs staying at the top. Makes the league boring and less competitive.

But it also helps the smaller euro clubs. Everyone focuses on the big clubs, and ignore lots of the smaller european football playing in the other leagues. And both Milan clubs are in danger of missing out too.
 
Its unusual for a fergie side to lose ground like this it really is. My explanation, this side just is not anywhere good enough. That and the fact other premierleague sides have improved making it harder to win games but the former is my main point. You look at Clichy today i thought he was brilliant and i have never rated him, he has learnt more and improved more at City in this one season than he did in 8 at Arsenal. Every tackle City went into they just wanted it more, at one point Tevez disposessed Rooney about 20 yards away from Citys goal!!
We blew an 11 point lead in the 97/98 season. I assume you remember what happened in 98/99.
Obviously not saying that's going to happen but blowing a lead doesn't mean we're nowhere near good enough. A fairly bizarre conclusion given we've got the same amount of points as the team who apparently are good enough, Man city.
If that was the case he wouldn't have left Liverpool.. Nor would he be content with a place in the United reserves.
You can't see any reason other than money that a player would leave Liverpool for Real Madrid? Wow.
Also he may be a reserve with us but he did manage to pick up his only premier league medal so you can see why he'd prefer us to his other options. ( I think hull were the only other club who made contact with him)
 
Last edited:
We blew an 11 point lead in the 97/98 season. I assume you remember what happened in 98/99.
Obviously not saying that's going to happen but blowing a lead doesn't mean we're nowhere near good enough. A fairly bizarre conclusion given we've got the same amount of points as the team who apparently are good enough, Man city.

You can't see any reason other than money that a player would leave Liverpool for Real Madrid? Wow.
Also he may be a reserve with us but he did manage to pick up his only premier league medal so you can see why he'd prefer us to his other options. ( I think hull were the only other club who made contact with him)

Well they are different seasons so i don't get your point. You are joint on points as City but my statement is that strength in depth is just not good enough this season. You have had quite a few injuries but failed to cope with them so that tells me your squad on the whole is not strong enough ability wise and mental wise.
 
Don't know whether this was mentioned but wasn't Niall Quinn a complete **** commentating last night. He spent the whole night licking the rim of the club and this is coming from someone who was up for City and Irish. I thought the game was quite poor and but for the occasion I would not have watched it. I'm glad City won but I still believe they will think their job is done now and bottle the league. I think they will be up for Newcastle but take QPR for granted on the last day.

Zabaleta and Clichy were immense last night both defensively and going forward. Clichy banished any doubts I had over his positional sense in that game.
 
Well they are different seasons so i don't get your point. You are joint on points as City but my statement is that strength in depth is just not good enough this season. You have had quite a few injuries but failed to cope with them so that tells me your squad on the whole is not strong enough ability wise and mental wise.

If the squad strength in depth was not good enough we would have been in 4th or 5th place fighting for 4th place. If anything it is our strength in depth that has kept us in the race. Any other team in the league would have suffered hugely and much worse than us.
 
Back
Top