Young_Chitlin
Carajo 🇵🇪🧩
Isn’t Man U playing Roma in 2 days?
Roma is going to win 7-1
Isn’t Man U playing Roma in 2 days?
Lol so now having history means nothing
Lol so now having history means nothing
Comparisons with the likes of Chelsea, psg and city isn't really a fair assessment because Chelsea and city investment is literally catch up money.Erm...not sure where you got that from.
The point is we should have more titles but you can clearly see that investment isn’t befitting the size of our club.
Comparisons with the likes of Chelsea, psg and city isn't really a fair assessment because Chelsea and city investment is literally catch up money.
The 3 teams mentioned investment was literally to change everything about the club, development, players (inflated wages) etc etc
Let's go to a hypothetical scenario if there wasn't a Chelsea or city in the premier League who could compete with the level of investment at United??? Arsenal no Liverpool no
To me investment doesn't seem to be the problem. Bad recruitment and the lack of a planning seems to be.I see the point your making but it’s irrelevant to the point I’m making.
The table literally points out what has happened at the clubs since their respective owners have taken charge.
Now that you’ve (Chelsea) have caught up, is it cool to stop investing??? Or you still want continued success??
To me investment doesn't seem to be the problem. Bad recruitment and the lack of a planning seems to be.
Bayern Munich for example have now adopted a model of signing some the best young players and letting them grow in the team. Look at the results.
Now look at Dortmund they have a great team but awful managers if klopp was in charge of this Dortmund we all agree this team would be challenging for champions League.
If Chelsea could find a way to corporate the youth team as well finding gems like Leicester I really don't see the need for heavily investment maybe one big signing a season. (What your club already does).
If Roman is still heavily investing in Chelsea in 10-20 years that means something went wrong.
I don't disagree that money changed football but they money is literally catch up money like i said paying that much for neymar and what was tuchel complaint and psg reply was there's no money for signings tuchel didn't get sacked because of results!Football changed due to Roman and the Middle Eastern oil money backed teams. It wasn't sustainable. How much did Neymar cost again? So you point is relevant to the current state of football. But your owner spent big on signings. He literally spent £250m during the height of the pandemic and wrote off your clubs debt. He did that so you can become more self sustainable and use revenue made to invest in the team rather than him just dipping into his savings.
But the problem comes when you buy a club with a loan and then sadle the club with the debt, the self sustainable model to stay at the top dies.
Imagine Roman sold the club tomorrow and the new owners rinse £1.5b from the club whilst investing just enough to attempt to get top 4? Is that good enough?
I agree on bad decision making.
I don't disagree that money changed football but they money is literally catch up money like i said paying that much for neymar and what was tuchel complaint and psg reply was there's no money for signings tuchel didn't get sacked because of results!
Again not ignoring your points simply suggesting comparing your club to teams with "no history" playing catch-up makes no sense!
To me united is just poorly run constantly over spending on players or not signing the right players. Bayern champions League team cost 130m when you see that you believe it's just investment???
Mason GreenwoodI know everyone is laughing at this but on current form who is better?