Ive been reading the papers like eveyone else has,

£41m for Neymar,

£44m for pastore,

£33m Sanchez,

£30+m Modric,

£30m + Essien + Malouda for Sneijder

And it really f**king riles me.. I hate it but really if we didnt spend stupid when Roman first took control

would they be so high?

21m Shaun wright-phillips

18m Veron?

31m Shevchenko

25m Essien (worth it)

24m Drogba (worth it)

50m Torres

18m Zhirkov

8m Khalid Bhoularouz

10m Del horno

10m Scott parker

8m Geremi

15m Mutu

17m Crespo

not too mention the wages we probably paid.. Kezman, Ballack, Sidwell

and that guy who went to germany, striker.. f**k forgot his name started with a P think we got him same season as sidwell??

So is it all our fault prices are ridiculous??

Edited June 19, 201115 yr by Keiron

No, clubs were paying ridiculous fees way before roman arrived.

Pizzaro....

pizarro?

fee's seem to go up and up these days as it is, and i dont believe that could possibly be down to our big spending, big money was spent before he came here, and with man city spending more than us now, i dont see it getting easier to attract big players without having to spend alot of money. Maybe the huge prices are as a result of players being better than they were?

a tricky debate and i dont see the point in getting angry over spending in football, we all know its a disgrace but if it means getting top quality players, how many people actually mind?

Whayy Pizzarro!!!

ok then dkw is it mainly our fault?

Zidane and figo massive fees but where massive players

what i mean is we paid two or three times what players were worth

del horno boularhouz SWP ??

Veron cost United 28 million. They also spent 28 million on Rio and 30 on Berbatov. Hargreaves, a complete bust, cost them 17 million. Feel free to look at what Barca and Madrid pay for players too. It's what the market is demanding now, it seems if you want to get the best you have to pay out some crazy money now unfortunately.

Whayy Pizzarro!!!

ok then dkw is it mainly our fault?

Zidane and figo massive fees but where massive players

what i mean is we paid two or three times what players were worth

del horno boularhouz SWP ??

bouldarhouz if i remember rightly, was signed for £9 m? although he wasnt great, i dont think 9 million was too over the top for an international player.

I would say that Real, Barca, and Man City also have a hand in the prices going up over the last decade. And of course, there are others.

We aren't the only ones.

So to answer you, I think they would still be as high even if we hadn't been spending as we did.

Go look at the fees italian clubs were paying in the 90s, specifically lazio under errikson. Spanish clubs velike madrid and barca have always spent big, even teams like real betis spent ridiculous amounts on a brazillian player years before we did.

i find it funny united fans always blame us for inflated fees but lazio were massive spenders but real madrid are bad as well they spent 30 odd mil on a croat who i cant even remember his name. And the fact united fans say we brought the league with valencia costing 16 mil carrick 17 mil nani 18 mil rooney 30 mil berbatov 30 mil ferdinand 30 mil. The press just jump on chelsea for it but any succesful club spends big money even barcelona who are busting with homegrown talent they spent 30mil on villa and about that on alves.

pizarro?

fee's seem to go up and up these days as it is, and i dont believe that could possibly be down to our big spending, big money was spent before he came here, and with man city spending more than us now, i dont see it getting easier to attract big players without having to spend alot of money. Maybe the huge prices are as a result of players being better than they were?

a tricky debate and i dont see the point in getting angry over spending in football, we all know its a disgrace but if it means getting top quality players, how many people actually mind?

it doesnt bother you thast santos are demanding 41 million pounds for a player that plays in a league around championship standard ??

or that udinese are askin 44 million for a player whos a hot prospect and not much else so far and who plays in the slowest league on the planet?

I think the problem is nowadays there are more clubs who can afford the higher fees, if there was a bidding war going on for Zidane when he was at Juventus I'd love to see how high the price was pushed.

Nah Liverpool destroyed the entire market after they payed £35m for Andy f***king Carroll and then followed that up with £20 for Jordan Henderson who looks completely out of his depth even at U-21 level.

So is it all our fault prices are ridiculous??

Dont think a single club can be at fault but looking at the way City going about splashing cash for some very average players I would like to think they are the biggest culprits in britain. Needless to say the likes of Madrid/ United have always flexed their muscles and therefore we are not the only ones that should be blamed for the transfer market situation.

The problem with blaming us for the rise is your ignoring the reason we had to spend so heavily in the first place. When Roman arrived Utd and Arsenal had been able to build much better squads than anyone else in our league because of their financial muscle, Utd especially. They had no worries over breaking transfer records, buying plenty of players for money no-one else could afford, paying wages no other clubs could get anywhere near. We therefore had to spend big to even begin to catch those two up, such was their duopoly at the time.

A classic case of media getting to you Kieron. A lot of clubs have been doing the very same thing for years and decades but we were made villains by our beloved journos.

It would be hard to argue that we haven’t played our part in the increased transfer fees. I think that while other clubs were spending large sums on players, particularly United, perhaps because we bought quite a few in a short space of time it exacerbated the situation. And I’d argue that while our purchases weren’t the biggest ever, we did pay a lot for some lesser players – SWP for example.

I reckon City’s contribution so far is not so much on transfer fees, but on wages. In order to attract top foreign players to move to Manchester (with its rain and only 2 small restaurants), and not even play for the red team, they have had to offer wages that even we wouldn’t dream of.

So it isn’t all our fault but we haven’t exactly helped.

But ultimately I blame the agents and to a small extent the written sports press. Between them they do all the sh*t stirring, agitating and bigging up of players that leads to these fees.

I made a post about this in some thread, unfortunately I can't find it :(

But we didn't do it, Real, Barca and many others did. We barely increased what they spent, and everyone turned on us.

EDIT:

Here

Edited June 20, 201115 yr by Crystal Phallus

it doesnt bother you thast santos are demanding 41 million pounds for a player that plays in a league around championship standard ??

?

The Brazillian league is far, far better than that. I'd say as good as one of the Eastern European leagues, like maybe the Romanian or Ukranian.

I dont think his value is so much due to his league form. The way he burst on the international scene scoring 3 goals in last 5 games and his overall performance might have something to do with it.

Whats also frustrating is that we sell our players at rock bottom prices. I can remember only Robben who was sold at a reasonably good profit. We buy high, sell low. Something is seriously wrong with our transfer policy and/or scouting network.

Whats also frustrating is that we sell our players at rock bottom prices. I can remember only Robben who was sold at a reasonably good profit. We buy high, sell low. Something is seriously wrong with our transfer policy and/or scouting network.

We got decent money for Flo too.

But that's the thing about having a billionaire owner and why many opposing fans moan about the unlevel playing field. We CAN afford to spend £50M on one player with no real worry about it being successful.

Of course I want us to compete at the highest level but I don't really want it to be because we have spent £50M on player X and £35M on player Y etc etc..... That's why for me, it would mean so much more if we did have more youngsters coming through who haven't cost us obscene amounts of money.

I think we somehow managed to sell Kezman for a profit also, and maybe even Thiago. God only knows how we made money on Kezman though. Whoever brokered that deal is a genius.

Whats also frustrating is that we sell our players at rock bottom prices. I can remember only Robben who was sold at a reasonably good profit. We buy high, sell low. Something is seriously wrong with our transfer policy and/or scouting network.

True, but ALL big clubs have that same issue. The only teams that could afford to buy a player from us with a fee that generates us profit are Real Madrid and Man City, in terms of monetary spending power, we are a tier above even Barcelona and Man United. Real Madrid, City and Chelsea attract a 5-10m premium above Barcelona/Utd, and they attract a 5-10m premium over other clubs in turn.

I agree we have inflated the market, but some of that is also due to the trickle-down effect of big spending in the EPL meaning smaller clubs have more money to spend. For some reason, the trickle down effect has not been as noticeable in Serie A or La Liga. I believe this is because of the way TV rights money is handled in those countries, which results in a far less generous spread than in England, meaning that any hefty transfer fees are not reinvested into squads but into the small club's barely serviceable debt.

The Brazillian league is far, far better than that. I'd say as good as one of the Eastern European leagues, like maybe the Romanian or Ukranian.

I think you're underestimating the quality of the Championship - admittedly I don't know much about the Brazilian league and how good it is, but I'd say that the Championship is probably as good as most of the eastern European leagues.