£160 million!

[splott parker]

Re: £160 million!

City? Its getting as bad as United:facepalm:

[Citizen's Nephew]

Re: £160 million!

It'll be interesting to see how people react to the Premier League when there are crowds in the ground. Well before the ESL shambles, I'd had more than enough of the greedy league last season and often would watch National League or EFL matches before the Premier League. Although I can't be sure, I got the feeling that there were plenty of people who felt the same way.

If Man City are really trying to sign Kane and Grealish with their neighbours seemingly set to spend over £100 million themselves this summer at a time when so many other clubs have barely survived the last eighteen months, then the Manchester clubs' version of the game is one that I just can't be bothered with. When you consider Man City's complete lack of success in the Champions League, both Manchester clubs have had a terrible return for all of that money they've spent under their current managers.

As for Kane, if any current England player comes close to meriting their transfer valuation, then I'd say it's him because he added a dimension to his game that I for one didn't think he possessed last season, but, even so, £160 million just seems ridiculous for a football player.

There are a lot of football supporters who feel the same way. I can't stand TV football. There's a thriving non-league world out there complete with naff coffee & tea bars and home-printed programs. It's easy to think that it's all Sky and PL.

I'm now a proud owner of a 'Stuff Yer Superleague' T-shirt from the guys at When Saturday Comes.

Incidentally, Mr. TOBW, if you haven't ever listened to their podcasts, I'm pretty sure you'd really enjoy them. Oh, and get working on that next book too! :wave:

[Hilts]

Re: £160 million!

I think the money in football is obscene. If you object that much. Dont pay for Sky / BT.

However I quite like the fact that Man City have upset the likes of Liverpool and Man U and others.

[Citizen's Nephew]

Re: £160 million!

I think the money in football is obscene. If you object that much. Dont pay for Sky / BT.

However I quite like the fact that Man City have upset the likes of Liverpool and Man U and others.

100% agree. The connection of SKY, BT, The EFL, CL, FIFA/EA etc. and the betting companies' grubby fingers has been getting worse. I'd hoped that COVID may have re-booted the business model but it's not looking likely for the bigger clubs. Meanwhile, the lower league clubs still struggle.

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: £160 million!

Interestingly, only one of the current twelve most expensive transfer fees was paid by a Premier League club. The other eleven were paid by Spanish clubs (7), Italian clubs (2) and French clubs (2).

[Hilts]

Re: £160 million!

Interestingly, only one of the current twelve most expensive transfer fees was paid by a Premier League club. The other eleven were paid by Spanish clubs (7), Italian clubs (2) and French clubs (2).

And I believe thats Pogba who Man U had previously let go.

[StraightOuttaCanton]

Re: £160 million!

I honestly didn't know what point you were trying to make.

I can only speak for myself, but I ended up watching more Premier League football than ever before last season. The main reason for that is obvious - the lockdowns of various descriptions meant there wasn't much else to do. However, I watched a lot more of the Premier League and a lot less of the Championship than in previous seasons because, with the exception of a small handful of teams at the top, the standard of the football in the second tier was mostly garbage.

As of the National League, that's on BT, which I haven't subscribed to for several years.

I watched more too, but that was because of the staggered kick off times throughout the UK lockdown. I’m not sure about the UK, but over here every game is available live and I chose not to watch games because of the staggering there were just too many on at times…. In a regular season that isn’t something that I’d do. I didn’t lose interest so much.. was more about saturation, but having fans in the ground massively (and mich more that I’d imagined) improved the product.

I’m looking forward to Saturday and Sunday mornings where I have to make a choice again as to which games I’m going to watch

[J R Hartley]

Re: £160 million!

Imagine the fuss if Sterling didn't turn up for training to force a move....

Aaaaare you Tuerto in disguise?

[J R Hartley]

Re: £160 million!

Kane is a mug if he expects ruthless businessman and renowned tough negotiator, Daniel Levy, to honour some sort of 'gentleman's verbal agreement'.

[Park Life]

Re: £160 million!

There are a lot of football supporters who feel the same way. I can't stand TV football. There's a thriving non-league world out there complete with naff coffee & tea bars and home-printed programs. It's easy to think that it's all Sky and PL.

I'm now a proud owner of a 'Stuff Yer Superleague' T-shirt from the guys at When Saturday Comes.

Incidentally, Mr. TOBW, if you haven't ever listened to their podcasts, I'm pretty sure you'd really enjoy them. Oh, and get working on that next book too! :wave:

Never mind the Super League … here’s the Sunday League :-):thumbup:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Park-Life-Seasons-Rhondda-Sunday/dp/1784618101/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

[Citizen's Nephew]

Re: £160 million!

Never mind the Super League … here’s the Sunday League :-):thumbup:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Park-Life-S...=UTF8&qid=&sr=

That's a must-read for me! Thanks for the link. :thumbup:

[Park Life]

Re: £160 million!

That's a must-read for me! Thanks for the link. :thumbup:

Really hope you enjoy :thumbup:

[J R Hartley]

Re: £160 million!

How many of the 92 clubs actually spend within their means? Not many id say. I dont understand this notion that EPL are the bad guys and poor old EFL are blameless. The EPL clubs attract the money of course they will get the lion share. If they so choose to spend this money signing players for silly money then so be it. They are investing in assets for their business. Its not up to them to prop the rest of the pyramid anymore than they already are.

I listen to Simon Jordan a lot, and whilst hes a bit of a marmite character he certainly knows his onions when it comes to football finance. No matter how much money the EPL gives the EFL you will always get unscrupulous chairmen doing a Portsmouth, or a Bolton, or worse case scenario a Bury.

Dont get him started on football fan representatives on the board of directors either. :hehe:

[Citizen's Nephew]

Re: £160 million!

How many of the 92 clubs actually spend within their means? Not many id say. I dont understand this notion that EPL are the bad guys and poor old EFL are blameless. The EPL clubs attract the money of course they will get the lion share. If they so choose to spend this money signing players for silly money then so be it. They are investing in assets for their business. Its not up to them to prop the rest of the pyramid anymore than they already are.

I listen to Simon Jordan a lot, and whilst hes a bit of a marmite character he certainly knows his onions when it comes to football finance. No matter how much money the EPL gives the EFL you will always get unscrupulous chairmen doing a Portsmouth, or a Bolton, or worse case scenario a Bury.

Dont get him started on football fan representatives on the board of directors either. :hehe:

Totally agree with you. The EFL, to me, these days are just a shop front for a whole load of other hidden businesses out the back.

Jordan's history is interesting, and you're right about him being a marmite character - anyone having anything to do with Palace would ensure that anyway! :-)

[Jimmy the Jock]

Re: £160 million!

Imagine the fuss if Sterling didn't turn up for training to force a move....

There are new stop and search laws I believe.

Could be a perfectly good reason he didn't make it.