Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
I've noticed before that City fans get dewy-eyed over the seasons watching City in the depths of the leagues, slogging away in the rain and mud in a dump of a stadium and hankering after those 'good old days'.
It's almost like they enjoy wallowing in watching poor quality football - even having an inferiority complex, not really wanting to watch their team in the big time.
It's such a shame. When I started watching City they were an old first division team. It's time fans held their heads up and didn't accept the terrible football that's now on display and demanded the standard which should be served up in a city that could support Premiership football.
Not lightweight? Take Flint out of the team, and City are powder puffs. They used to be feared for what they brought to games. Not anymore. The result is flirting with relegation and a dour immediate future.
You read what I've been writing for the last five years or more and tell me that I've accepted "the terrible football that's now on display" - I'm always going on, far too often in many people's minds I'm sure, about it, but I don't see us being too lightweight as a current problem. Besides Flint, we have McGuinness, Morrison, Hugill and Ikpiazu, while Vaulks, Ralls and Pack are hardly what I'd call lightweights, neither is Doyle - I accept the team that lost eight in a row was a more "heavyweight" outfit than the current one, but I'd say the introduction of more athletic and technical players such as Drameh, Doyle and Doughty has improved us as has the introduction of the technically superior Ng into the back three. It's just your use of the term lightweight I don't get.