Fop 1 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I thought we were talking about earning cash. Pretty sure Sima was anyway. Man Utd generate loads of cash from various fan sources whereas Chelsea rely largely on a Sugar Daddy. Wasn't that the point? Aye, but even in that narrow context their fan base historically comes as much from off field issues as on field, and by the time they entered the Ferguson era of success they already had financial might beyond most clubs. So whilst there's technical differences with Chelski (in exactly how their advantage came about), there are a lot of similarities in the end. Neither of them "earned it" in the context of say Ipswich's success under Robson etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I thought we were talking about earning cash. Pretty sure Sima was anyway. Man Utd generate loads of cash from various fan sources whereas Chelsea rely largely on a Sugar Daddy. Wasn't that the point? Aye, but even in that narrow context their fan base historically comes as much from off field issues as on field, and by the time they entered the Ferguson era of success they already had financial might beyond most clubs. So whilst there's technical differences with Chelski (in exactly how their advantage came about), there are a lot of similarities in the end. Neither of them "earned it" in the context of say Ipswich's success under Robson etc. Everyone else seems to have grasped what he meant. Honestly, what are you like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 (edited) Man Utd's fanbase is equally if not more due to having the likes of Best, Law and Charlton in their team than the Munich air crash. They make a profit year on year and never overstretch their finances in buying players. They are very soundly run. Slight irony in saying Man Utd haven't financially earned their success coming from fans of Newcastle as well tbh Edited May 31, 2007 by Sima Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I thought we were talking about earning cash. Pretty sure Sima was anyway. Man Utd generate loads of cash from various fan sources whereas Chelsea rely largely on a Sugar Daddy. Wasn't that the point? Aye, but even in that narrow context their fan base historically comes as much from off field issues as on field, and by the time they entered the Ferguson era of success they already had financial might beyond most clubs. So whilst there's technical differences with Chelski (in exactly how their advantage came about), there are a lot of similarities in the end. Neither of them "earned it" in the context of say Ipswich's success under Robson etc. Everyone else seems to have grasped what he meant. Honestly, what are you like? Have you even read what I wrote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Man Utd's fanbase is equally if not more due to having the likes of Best, Law and Charlton in their team than the Munich air crash. They make a profit year on year and never overstretch their finances in buying players. They are very soundly run. Domestically maybe to a degree, but not internationally. And again as I said by the time Man U really started to build success on success (and the hordes of glory hunters descended) they were already way ahead of most clubs financially for mostly off-field reasons, just like Chelski. Neither earned it. Slight irony in saying Man Utd haven't financially earned their success coming from fans of Newcastle as well tbh I take it you're a ManUre fan then? Newcastle is a different kettle of fish, we simply squandered our financial power, we earned our failure if you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I thought we were talking about earning cash. Pretty sure Sima was anyway. Man Utd generate loads of cash from various fan sources whereas Chelsea rely largely on a Sugar Daddy. Wasn't that the point? Yeah, that was my point. Shouldn't this have ended the comprehension issues here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Love the mentality that just because I defend another team from utter bullshit being wrote about them then I must support them. Playground-esque tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Love the mentality that just because I defend another team from utter bullshit being wrote about them then I must support them. Playground-esque tbh Again if you can't attack the argument (and you can't quite obviously) attack the poster; ok it's expected. But at least come up with a decent come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I thought we were talking about earning cash. Pretty sure Sima was anyway. Man Utd generate loads of cash from various fan sources whereas Chelsea rely largely on a Sugar Daddy. Wasn't that the point? Yeah, that was my point. Shouldn't this have ended the comprehension issues here? It should if you understood what I was saying, although not in the way you seem to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Love the mentality that just because I defend another team from utter bullshit being wrote about them then I must support them. Playground-esque tbh I think it's the fact that you wank over them are their fans on quite a regular basis. Defending them is one thing; you go to another level. If Berbetov joined Man United then I'm pretty sure your balls would just explode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I thought we were talking about earning cash. Pretty sure Sima was anyway. Man Utd generate loads of cash from various fan sources whereas Chelsea rely largely on a Sugar Daddy. Wasn't that the point? Yeah, that was my point. Shouldn't this have ended the comprehension issues here? It should if you understood what I was saying, although not in the way you seem to think. Sorry, that doesn't even make sense to me mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia 0 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Love the mentality that just because I defend another team from utter bullshit being wrote about them then I must support them. Playground-esque tbh I think it's the fact that you wank over them are their fans on quite a regular basis. Defending them is one thing; you go to another level. If Berbetov joined Man United then I'm pretty sure your balls would just explode. *Thwap, thwap* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Love the mentality that just because I defend another team from utter bullshit being wrote about them then I must support them. Playground-esque tbh I think it's the fact that you wank over them are their fans on quite a regular basis. Defending them is one thing; you go to another level. If Berbetov joined Man United then I'm pretty sure your balls would just explode. *Thwap, thwap* Don't think I've ever denied being in love with Frankie boy though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 They seem to be stocking up on midfielders when what they really need is an out and out striker....... like Owen............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay 8 Posted June 1, 2007 Author Share Posted June 1, 2007 They seem to be stocking up on midfielders when what they really need is an out and out striker....... like Owen............ I would say they needed someone more like Drogba or Eto'o. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 Love the mentality that just because I defend another team from utter bullshit being wrote about them then I must support them. Playground-esque tbh I think it's the fact that you wank over them are their fans on quite a regular basis. Defending them is one thing; you go to another level. If Berbetov joined Man United then I'm pretty sure your balls would just explode. Aye, it's more the "man utd be so awesome next season " (which barely makes sense tbh) comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 They seem to be stocking up on midfielders when what they really need is an out and out striker....... like Owen............ I would say they needed someone more like Drogba or Eto'o. Aye. I think Hargreaves and Carrick will be class together in the middle of the park though. But someone of the type you mention alongside Rooney upfront could be the final piece in the jigsaw re: them winning the Champions League one more time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 I thought we were talking about earning cash. Pretty sure Sima was anyway. Man Utd generate loads of cash from various fan sources whereas Chelsea rely largely on a Sugar Daddy. Wasn't that the point? Yeah, that was my point. Shouldn't this have ended the comprehension issues here? It should if you understood what I was saying, although not in the way you seem to think. Sorry, that doesn't even make sense to me mate. Aye I know, but you seem to think I don't understand what he's saying, when my point is (from my very first comment) that what he's implying is different is the same thing (in terms of "earned") just through different avenues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 If you knew what he meant, I don't see your point. I disagree if you think they both clubs earned their wealth (more or less) equally though. Agree to disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 If you knew what he meant, I don't see your point. I disagree if you think they both clubs earned their wealth (more or less) equally though. Agree to disagree? I just think that neither really "earned" their wealth (which is what has brought them success ultimately) on the field (which is what he's implying, I think anyway, if not then I don't have a clue what he's saying), just the off field mechanisms that gave it to them were a bit different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 If you knew what he meant, I don't see your point. I disagree if you think they both clubs earned their wealth (more or less) equally though. Agree to disagree? I just think that neither really "earned" their wealth (which is what has brought them success ultimately) on the field (which is what he's implying, I think anyway, if not then I don't have a clue what he's saying), just the off field mechanisms that gave it to them were a bit different. He's already confirmed my interpretation was correct though. Confused.com tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9013 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 It's funny how many people now say what a fantastic buy he is for Manchester considering the hell that broke lose when he was selected in the WC squad last summer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 It's funny how many people now say what a fantastic buy he is for Manchester considering the hell that broke lose when he was selected in the WC squad last summer... Totally agree, countless games for England where he's looked shockingly bad yet plays 3 good matches in the World Cup and suddenly he's the dogs bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9013 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 It's funny how many people now say what a fantastic buy he is for Manchester considering the hell that broke lose when he was selected in the WC squad last summer... Totally agree, countless games for England where he's looked shockingly bad Just as most England players... yet plays 3 good matches in the World Cup and suddenly he's the dogs bollocks. To be fair to him, they were the first three games were he was starting in his favoured position and not thrown on late in the game to chase lost causes - as it was the case in the famous Northern Ireland game when loads of people had lynched him if they were given the chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 It's funny how many people now say what a fantastic buy he is for Manchester considering the hell that broke lose when he was selected in the WC squad last summer... Totally agree, countless games for England where he's looked shockingly bad Just as most England players... yet plays 3 good matches in the World Cup and suddenly he's the dogs bollocks. To be fair to him, they were the first three games were he was starting in his favoured position and not thrown on late in the game to chase lost causes - as it was the case in the famous Northern Ireland game when loads of people had lynched him if they were given the chance. I can't disagree, and to be fair, I've not seen him play for Bayern, but on his form for England I'm not impressed, regardless of the World Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now