I think the debt repayments were taking a lot of our spending power away back then too. As it became more manageable and our income increased drastically I think it's allowed us to spend more.
Hopefully in a season or 2 we'll just see tinkering of the squad with 2/3 signings rather than these big changes that are fun but also risky with big changed happening.
Busby / 1982 / United_Mike
I can't believe the whole 'value in the market' mantra was purely Fergie's philosophy. It's documented that he lusted over the signings of some of the world's best players over the years - Batistuta, Brazilian Ronaldo - and he was happy enough to spend huge sums (for that time) on the likes of Van Nistelrooy, Veron and Ferdinand.
I'm sure he did see the sense in buying relatively young, hungry, improving players over stars at and past their peak. At the same time, we weren't particularly competitive in the transfer market for the world's finest and most expensive footballers in the 18-22 age bracket in the years following the sale of Ronaldo, when we had a massive gap in the squad to plug and it took us a few windows to return to a positive net spend.
For the Glazers, success on the field is a means to an end. The increasingly lucrative environment means it's worth speculating to accumulate now in a way it was not in around 2009, when there was no threat to our ability to challenge for the title every year and income wasn't quite so wedded to glamour. And the debt repayments constituted a much higher proportion of our turnover.
RR,
Logically I think you're right, but my gut tells me Fergie genuinely didn't like the way the game was going transfer-wise. He did spent - Jones, De Gea, Berbatov, Kagawa, RvP, the apparent bidding for Hazard, Lucas etc...
I think a combination of being a bit old-school, over reliance and sentimentality towards the old guard and the homegrown players and an unshakable confidence in his own ability to win football matches meant, in his mind at least, there wasn't much value in the market.
To be fair, I can see where he was coming from. At the peak of our spending power, £25-£30m would get you a world class striker (RvN), a world class midfielder (Veron) and a world class defender (Rio). Consider the prices going for players like Sterling, Carroll and others and, given the Fergie was a man of such principle (even if flawed, at times - see his support for Labour as exhibit A), I sense he meant what he said.
Of course, we could all see that there was value in the market, but remember we were comparing the latest name of the week with our current players, many of whom were past their peaks are not quite to the level we wished, whereas Fergie would have been comparing them to his much trusted old guard and youngsters, a blind spot, surely, in his latter years.
You know what? F it let's get Cavani
Page 3 of 3
posted on 14/7/15
The glazers are business men. It wasn't necessary to spend this amount of money to achieve trophies while we we had SAF in charge.
posted on 14/7/15
I think the debt repayments were taking a lot of our spending power away back then too. As it became more manageable and our income increased drastically I think it's allowed us to spend more.
Hopefully in a season or 2 we'll just see tinkering of the squad with 2/3 signings rather than these big changes that are fun but also risky with big changed happening.
posted on 14/7/15
We're not getting Muller or Lewandowski. Bayern won't sell another of their big names to us in the same window. The fans are already annoyed about Pig-mounter going.
Cavani is a possibility. Especially if ADM is part of the dealio.
posted on 14/7/15
Busby / 1982 / United_Mike
I can't believe the whole 'value in the market' mantra was purely Fergie's philosophy. It's documented that he lusted over the signings of some of the world's best players over the years - Batistuta, Brazilian Ronaldo - and he was happy enough to spend huge sums (for that time) on the likes of Van Nistelrooy, Veron and Ferdinand.
I'm sure he did see the sense in buying relatively young, hungry, improving players over stars at and past their peak. At the same time, we weren't particularly competitive in the transfer market for the world's finest and most expensive footballers in the 18-22 age bracket in the years following the sale of Ronaldo, when we had a massive gap in the squad to plug and it took us a few windows to return to a positive net spend.
For the Glazers, success on the field is a means to an end. The increasingly lucrative environment means it's worth speculating to accumulate now in a way it was not in around 2009, when there was no threat to our ability to challenge for the title every year and income wasn't quite so wedded to glamour. And the debt repayments constituted a much higher proportion of our turnover.
posted on 14/7/15
RR,
Logically I think you're right, but my gut tells me Fergie genuinely didn't like the way the game was going transfer-wise. He did spent - Jones, De Gea, Berbatov, Kagawa, RvP, the apparent bidding for Hazard, Lucas etc...
I think a combination of being a bit old-school, over reliance and sentimentality towards the old guard and the homegrown players and an unshakable confidence in his own ability to win football matches meant, in his mind at least, there wasn't much value in the market.
To be fair, I can see where he was coming from. At the peak of our spending power, £25-£30m would get you a world class striker (RvN), a world class midfielder (Veron) and a world class defender (Rio). Consider the prices going for players like Sterling, Carroll and others and, given the Fergie was a man of such principle (even if flawed, at times - see his support for Labour as exhibit A), I sense he meant what he said.
Of course, we could all see that there was value in the market, but remember we were comparing the latest name of the week with our current players, many of whom were past their peaks are not quite to the level we wished, whereas Fergie would have been comparing them to his much trusted old guard and youngsters, a blind spot, surely, in his latter years.
posted on 14/7/15
has somebody frapped RRs account
Page 3 of 3