Re: Who is at fault for the inflated player prices?

by Red Alert Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:03 pm

Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:madrid, city, chelsea, liverpool. but mainly madrid.

lol what?

people are forgetting barca and spurs btw.
Barca generate most of their players from their youth academy. A couple stupid signings don't make them accountable for the ridiculous prices players go for currently

They've bought a shit load of players in the last decade for a large fee.

by pdolson Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:05 pm

ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:madrid, city, chelsea, liverpool. but mainly madrid.

lol what?

people are forgetting barca and spurs btw.

ok maybe ibra's transfer. but david villa's price wasn't so bad. and if barca pay 50 mil euros for fabregas, that's arsenal's fault not barca's. barca are trying to keep it reasonable.

not really sure what you mean by what the spurs did.

by Albiceleste Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:06 pm

ynwa wrote:
Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:madrid, city, chelsea, liverpool. but mainly madrid.

lol what?

people are forgetting barca and spurs btw.
Barca generate most of their players from their youth academy. A couple stupid signings don't make them accountable for the ridiculous prices players go for currently

They've bought a shit load of players in the last decade for a large fee.

4-5 players in the last 10 years hardly qualifies as 'a shit load'.

by Red Alert Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:08 pm

pdolson wrote:
ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:madrid, city, chelsea, liverpool. but mainly madrid.

lol what?

people are forgetting barca and spurs btw.

ok maybe ibra's transfer. but david villa's price wasn't so bad. and if barca pay 50 mil euros for fabregas, that's arsenal's fault not barca's. barca are trying to keep it reasonable.

not really sure what you mean by what the spurs did.

Spurs tried to be like Arsenal buying youngsters, paying heaps for them. Basically what LFC is doing now...

Also, I'm sorry to break it to you, but Villa and Ibra aren't the only two Barca has signed with a hefty fee. affraid

by izzy Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:09 pm

Lionel Messi wrote:
4-5 players in the last 10 years hardly qualifies as 'a shit load'.

It was a lot more than 4-5. Everyone knows that.

But, I think you are hinting at the prices aren't you?

by pdolson Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:14 pm

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

by Albiceleste Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:16 pm

izzy26 wrote:
Lionel Messi wrote:
4-5 players in the last 10 years hardly qualifies as 'a shit load'.

It was a lot more than 4-5. Everyone knows that.

But, I think you are hinting at the prices aren't you?

Well it depends what the poster means in large fee.

by Red Alert Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:16 pm

pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

1. You havn't seen Henderson play for us. Nobody has. Has had no time to justify his price. Not a really good point.
2. Carroll was basically free from Chelsea after selling Torres.
3. We're talking about who inflated the transfer market. The market didn't (start) inflate 2011.

Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:madrid, city, chelsea, liverpool. but mainly madrid.

lol what?

people are forgetting barca and spurs btw.
Barca generate most of their players from their youth academy. A couple stupid signings don't make them accountable for the ridiculous prices players go for currently

They've bought a shit load of players in the last decade for a large fee.
4-5 players in the last 10 years hardly qualifies as 'a shit load'.

They were still bought at inflated prices... Most hardly featured for your club.

by Albiceleste Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:19 pm

ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

1. You havn't seen Henderson play for us. Nobody has. Has had no time to justify his price. Not a really good point.
2. Carroll was basically free from Chelsea after selling Torres.
3. We're talking about who inflated the transfer market. The market didn't (start) inflate 2011.

Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:madrid, city, chelsea, liverpool. but mainly madrid.

lol what?

people are forgetting barca and spurs btw.
Barca generate most of their players from their youth academy. A couple stupid signings don't make them accountable for the ridiculous prices players go for currently

They've bought a shit load of players in the last decade for a large fee.
4-5 players in the last 10 years hardly qualifies as 'a shit load'.

They were still bought at inflated prices... Most hardly featured for your club.

Barcelona bought 3 players over or at 25 million in the past 2 years, which according to you is when the market inflated. Chygrynskiy is the only one that didn't play regularly

by pdolson Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:21 pm

henderson will flop i can tell. so what if chelsea's money paid for carroll, no way is carroll worth 35 mil pounds. so most of it was wasted.

torres>carroll

by Red Alert Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:27 pm

pdolson wrote:henderson will flop i can tell. so what if chelsea's money paid for carroll, no way is carroll worth 35 mil pounds. so most of it was wasted.

torres>carroll

Torres may be better than Carroll (sarcasm soon to follow), and I'm sure he's showing that with Chelsea at the moment, but 35m wasted? Based on what? You? I guess that's justified then. I guess I can trust somebody that can just "tell".

by ÖMARz Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:30 pm

you cant blame one club, and its also going to get worse. you got all my fellow arab buddies who are filthy rich buying clubs and injecting X money to make it a competitive club. Expect to see alot more in the near future.

by Red Alert Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:30 pm

Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

1. You havn't seen Henderson play for us. Nobody has. Has had no time to justify his price. Not a really good point.
2. Carroll was basically free from Chelsea after selling Torres.
3. We're talking about who inflated the transfer market. The market didn't (start) inflate 2011.

Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
Lionel Messi wrote:
ynwa wrote:
pdolson wrote:madrid, city, chelsea, liverpool. but mainly madrid.

lol what?

people are forgetting barca and spurs btw.
Barca generate most of their players from their youth academy. A couple stupid signings don't make them accountable for the ridiculous prices players go for currently

They've bought a shit load of players in the last decade for a large fee.
4-5 players in the last 10 years hardly qualifies as 'a shit load'.

They were still bought at inflated prices... Most hardly featured for your club.
Barcelona bought 3 players over or at 25 million in the past 2 years, which according to you is when the market inflated. Chygrynskiy is the only one that didn't play regularly

Just admit it dude... you know you've overspent in recent years. You helped inflate the market in the last few years. It was only going to get inflated by City/RM.

by Red Alert Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:31 pm

OMARz wrote:you cant blame one club, and its also going to get worse. you got all my fellow arab buddies who are filthy rich buying clubs and injecting X money to make it a competitive club. Expect to see alot more in the near future.

Someone that talks sense. affraid

by pdolson Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:33 pm

won't the uefa financial rules coming soon stop that

by Ali Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:33 pm

Seppuku wrote:Madrid?

ahh other than the Ballon D'Or winners which players did R.M buy for crazy prices?

umm...DI MARIA!?

by Albiceleste Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:44 pm

Seppuku wrote:Madrid?

ahh other than the Ballon D'Or winners which players did R.M buy for crazy prices?

and you call me a 2008 fan boy?

Di Maria - 30 million
Xabi Alonso - 30 million
Benzema - 30 million
Robben - 31 million
Pepe - 27 million
Zidane - 65 million
Ronaldo - 40 million
Beckham - 33 million

This is all from transfermarkt.de btw.

by Lord Spencer Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:51 pm

@Everyone, I think it is funny how no one bothered to read my neutral argument, and instead resorted to mud slinging the other team (barca or real) and now are turning this thread into another Clasico.

by pdolson Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:01 pm

Lionel Messi wrote:
Seppuku wrote:Madrid?

ahh other than the Ballon D'Or winners which players did R.M buy for crazy prices?

and you call me a 2008 fan boy?

Di Maria - 30 million
Xabi Alonso - 30 million
Benzema - 30 million
Robben - 31 million
Pepe - 27 million
Zidane - 65 million
Ronaldo - 40 million
Beckham - 33 million

This is all from transfermarkt.de btw.

sneijder 27 mil

by NiallQuinnsdiscoPants Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:04 pm

Its All Sunderlands fault we started it.

As well as the "Team of All Talents" at the turn of the 20th century,[21] Sunderland were known as the "Bank of England club" during the 1950s. This was a reference to the club's spending in the transfer market at the time, which saw the transfer-record broken twice

FA Suspends Sunderland football club directors and players which rises the question of fair pay to footballers.
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=32811

In 1904, Sunderland's management was embroiled in a payment scandal involving player Andrew McCombie. The club was said to have given the player £100 (£8 thousand today) to help him start his own business, on the understanding that he would repay the money after his benefit game.[11] However, McCombie refused to repay the money, claiming it had been a gift. An investigation conducted by the Football Association concluded that the money given to McCombie was part of a "re-signing/win/draw bonus", which violated the Association's rules. Sunderland were fined £250 (£20 thousand today), and six directors were suspended for two and a half years for not showing a true record of the club's financial dealings. Sunderland manager Alex Mackie was also suspended for three months for his involvement in the affair

by fatman123 Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:07 pm

pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

thats some quality stuff you got there!
do you know where you can find those sorts of tables for other clubs?

by pdolson Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:25 pm

fatman123 wrote:
pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

thats some quality stuff you got there!
do you know where you can find those sorts of tables for other clubs?

i only know of barca's up until 1973. but this site is pretty good for english transfers:

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/

it's got info from the early 90s

by fatman123 Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:36 pm

pdolson wrote:
fatman123 wrote:
pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

thats some quality stuff you got there!
do you know where you can find those sorts of tables for other clubs?

i only know of barca's up until 1973. but this site is pretty good for english transfers:

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/

it's got info from the early 90s

surely this cant be right:
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/2006-2011.html

it says united have spent more then twice what chelsea have on transfers between 06-11

by pdolson Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:40 pm

fatman123 wrote:
pdolson wrote:
fatman123 wrote:
pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

thats some quality stuff you got there!
do you know where you can find those sorts of tables for other clubs?

i only know of barca's up until 1973. but this site is pretty good for english transfers:

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/

it's got info from the early 90s

surely this cant be right:
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/2006-2011.html

it says united have spent more then twice what chelsea have on transfers between 06-11

united? or do you mean city?

by fatman123 Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:52 pm

pdolson wrote:
fatman123 wrote:
pdolson wrote:
fatman123 wrote:
pdolson wrote:https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ajm7FLwxa9txdFJpcS1pWXVPRTNTdWpkcUVXck9PTGc&gid=2

yeah i know. saviola and overmars were too much. much ronaldinho and eto'o were worth it.

still not as bad as madrid, chelsea, city and liverpool. liverpool only until recently. carroll for 35 mil pounds will never be okay. and this henderson transfer seems pretty dumb too.

thats some quality stuff you got there!
do you know where you can find those sorts of tables for other clubs?

i only know of barca's up until 1973. but this site is pretty good for english transfers:

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/

it's got info from the early 90s

surely this cant be right:
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/2006-2011.html

it says united have spent more then twice what chelsea have on transfers between 06-11

united? or do you mean city?

major fail there on my behalf its city not united!
still the spend of city is quite surprising i must say, i guess from that its fair to deduce that since 06 city are more to blame for player inflation then chelsea are

although IMO i put it down to the great economic prosperity before the GFC and the economic growth within football that made alot more money available to clubs then impact the large foreign investment, although it is impossible to ignore the role of the Abramoviches, Perezes and others in the inflation of player pricing

by Albiceleste Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:28 pm

Lionel Bieber wrote:messi you are a fu cking bandwagon fan from florida just face it and stfu now

Face what? Why are you so angry?

by Sponsored content