IMO signing all these top players don't equal success- look at Real Madrid

CorkMan

We signed Kaka and Cristiano Ronaldo, at the time the two former players of the year. Yet no trophies.

If you ask me Villa to Barca (and possibly Fabregas) won't equal a season with 6 trophies. Kaka and Ronaldo joining Real are as much "dream moves" as Villa and possibly Fabregas joining Barca, yet look at the stats.

If Barca reach the champions league semi final next year again (which you would think they would) all it takes is a stubbon Italian/German side to score 1 or 2 at home and park the bus on the pitch at Nou Camp. Who knows, they could go out in the last 16?

gimmick

The point of this thread is????

SantryRed

There is a huge difference in Kaka And Ronaldo signing for Madrid and Villa and Fabregas signing for Barca.

Barca sign these players to fit a system.

Madrid just sign the players they see best regardless, and that's the difference.

CorkMan

gimmick wrote: »

The point of this thread is????

I am making a point on the "super signings" this summer and want to get a discussion going about it.

IvySlayer

It's only been a year ffs. Real got 96 points. They did very, very well.

They will win a trophy eventually.

Ush1

CorkMan wrote: »

We signed Kaka and Cristiano Ronaldo, at the time the two former players of the year. Yet no trophies.

If you ask me Villa to Barca (and possibly Fabregas) won't equal a season with 6 trophies. Kaka and Ronaldo joining Real are as much "dream moves" as Villa and possibly Fabregas joining Barca, yet look at the stats.

If Barca reach the champions league semi final next year again (which you would think they would) all it takes is a stubbon Italian/German side to score 1 or 2 at home and park the bus on the pitch at Nou Camp. Who knows, they could go out in the last 16?

It doesn't need to equal a season with six trophies.

So in your final paragraph, you say it doesn't matter about signing good/expensive players?

If you support Real Madrid, you surely recognise most if not all of their success has been based on big money. Throughout their history.

eagle eye

Barca are building on a solid foundation, Real Madrid are not.

CorkMan

Ush1 wrote: »

It doesn't need to equal a season with six trophies.

So in your final paragraph, you say it doesn't matter about signing good/expensive players?

If you support Real Madrid, you surely recognise most if not all of their success has been bassed on big money. Throughout their history.

What I am saying is it doesn't always equal success. Lots of money doesn't equal lots of trophies.

event

CorkMan wrote: »

What I am saying is it doesn't always equal success. Lots of money doesn't equal lots of trophies.

ok

IvySlayer

CorkMan wrote: »

What I am saying is it doesn't always equal success. Lots of money doesn't equal lots of trophies.

Yeah, like Barcelona have no money...

Money = success, as long as you can manage it correctly.

Spiritoftheseventies

Agreed. You look at city and some of their signings have been a bit off most namely Robinho while Adebayor has his good and bad days.
Chelsea to be fair have put a bit more imagination into who they buy.

CorkMan

IvySlayer wrote: »

Yeah, like Barcelona have no money...

Money = success, as long as you can manage it correctly.

Disagree. Real Madrid against Juventus in 2002/03. Against Lyon last season. 5 years without a league despite the vasts amount of money spend.

Ush1

CorkMan wrote: »

What I am saying is it doesn't always equal success. Lots of money doesn't equal lots of trophies.

It's not instant no, but give it time.

Barca have saved alot of money by bringing most of their squad through the youth system.

Ush1

CorkMan wrote: »

Disagree. Real Madrid against Juventus in 2002/03. Against Lyon last season. 5 years without a league despite the vasts amount of money spend.

5 years without a league???

CorkMan

Ush1 wrote: »

5 years without a league???

I think maybe 4 years. It was a pretty damn long wait for the club anyway.

IvySlayer

CorkMan wrote: »

Disagree. Real Madrid against Juventus in 2002/03. Against Lyon last season. 5 years without a league despite the vasts amount of money spend.

5 years? Get your facts straight. They won it in 2008.

Real can beat every team in La Liga apart from Barcelona, who are also a rich club. Chelsea did the Double, Man City are on the up.

The Recliner

CorkMan wrote: »

despite the vasts amount of money spend.

Yes but it was spent unwisely and against the managers wishes

Ush1

CorkMan wrote: »

I think maybe 4 years. It was a pretty damn long wait for the club anyway.

Maybe you've lost me. Real Madrid last won La Liga 2 years ago.

Warper

If Real didnt sign those players last year they would be even further behind Barca. Ronaldo has proven to be an excellent signing as he carried them a lot this season as he had carried Utd. the previous couple of seasons. Real amassed their most points ever in 96 pts, which would have won every other La Liga title but they were up against a very special side in Barcelona. Of course top players improve a team.

TheBigLebowski

CorkMan wrote: »

We signed Kaka and Cristiano Ronaldo, at the time the two former players of the year. Yet no trophies.

We? You're from Cork and you don't even know when they last won the league. What's all this 'we' business?

Peyton Manning

Madrid were incredible this season. Domestically, they were only 1/99th worse than Barcelona, the bestest most super incredible team of all time.

I think they'll be fine.

Especially with Jose in charge.

Spiritoftheseventies

Archimedes wrote: »

Madrid were incredible this season. Domestically, they were only 1/99th worse than Barcelona, the bestest most super incredible team of all time.

I think they'll be fine.

Especially with Jose in charge.

Real Madrid for the money they spent during the summer would not have been happy with their form in Europe.

Peyton Manning

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Real Madrid for the money they spent during the summer would not have been happy with their form in Europe.

And thats completely relevant to what I said, how exactly?

Also, you do realise your sig makes you seem like a chick dont you....

Xavi6

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Agreed. You look at city and some of their signings have been a bit off most namely Robinho while Adebayor has his good and bad days.
Chelsea to be fair have put a bit more imagination into who they buy.

Up from 10th to 5th in one season.

Success

Spiritoftheseventies

Don't get me wrong City have improved but like Pool they need a better success rate when it comes to buying players.
Read recently that Mancini was taking double sessions with the team which hadnt gone down with some in there.
Maybe that has to be factored in as well

Peyton Manning

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Don't get me wrong City have improved but like Pool they need a better success rate when it comes to buying players.
Read recently that Mancini was taking double sessions with the team which hadnt gone down with some in there.
Maybe that has to be factored in as well

Why are you judging them after one season?

What about Tevez, Johnson, Bellamy, Given, Barry, De Jong? All have been terrific signings. Even Bridge and Kompany have proven to be good players to have round. Still question marks over Toure and Lescott, but I wouldnt call them poor signings by any means.

Spiritoftheseventies

Archimedes wrote: »

Also, you do realise your sig makes you seem like a chick dont you....

As opposed to a jaundiced potato with a tea cosy on it :rolleyes:

Scuba Ste

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Don't get me wrong City have improved but like Pool they need a better success rate when it comes to buying players.

Except for when you consider the facts, which show this

Xavi6 wrote: »

Up from 10th to 5th in one season.

Success

Plus a league cup semi. Not a lot like Liverpool tbh.

Peyton Manning

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

As opposed to a jaundiced potato with a tea cosy on it :rolleyes:

Im glad you get it

GavRedKing

As a Chelsea fan I can say money can change a clubs fortunes, there is no doubt about it, as has being said previous though the big difference is how you spend it and who you spend it on.

Real Madrid were unlucky this year that they happened to be playing against a better team, 95 points is a brillant return from 38 games, if they can keep the core of there team and maybe get some stability, like keep a manger for longer then 30 seconds then they could go on and win La Liga next year or in the very near future.

Real's problems are well known and documented at this stage.

Spiritoftheseventies

Did Real Madrid make any real progress in Europe from last year. They had kaka, Alonso and um.... Ronaldo in their team.
And still they felt short of expectations in Europe. League is all well and good but Madrid earned their reputation further afield.
They pride themselves on their European record and given their expenditure they have been poor in it as of late

CorkMan

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

We? You're from Cork and you don't even know when they last won the league. What's all this 'we' business?

Who do you follow? I've been to Madrid before and seen the team play, paying 100 euros for a ticket. Don't question my loyalty to the club, I am entitled to comment on them.

Voye al Madrid en el ano de 2008 a veo el Real Madrid juego al Numancia en el Bernabeu. Mi espanol esta bien y veo el Real Madrid todos mesos. (I went to Madrid in 2008 to see Real Madrid play Numancia en the Bernabeu. My spanish is good and I watch Real Madrid every month)

PHB

Of course it doesn't equal success, but if bloody helps.

event

CorkMan wrote: »

Who do you follow? I've been to Madrid before and seen the team play, paying 100 euros for a ticket. Don't question my loyalty to the club, I am entitled to comment on them.

Voye al Madrid en el ano de 2008 a veo el Real Madrid juego al Numancia en el Bernabeu. Mi espanol esta bien y veo el Real Madrid todos mesos. (I went to Madrid in 2008 to see Real Madrid play Numancia en the Bernabeu. My spanish is good and I watch Real Madrid every month)

yet didnt know they won the league in 2008

davyjose

event wrote: »

yet didnt know they won the league in 2008

Or 2007

SantryRed

But he's been to Madrid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And can speak Spanish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

adamski8

SantryRed wrote: »

But he's been to Madrid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And can speak Spanish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't forget he spends €100 on a ticket! thats a real fan there

You know you can buy much cheaper tickets at the bernabeu corkman?

Xavi6

Can we please leave the debate over a fan's integrity out of this.

It's gone beyond tedious at this stage.

Cheers

LuckyLloyd

Real Madrid did magnificently in La Liga this year, and are essentially ruing a few missed chances over the course of two or three games as the difference between a league and Champions League double and what they did win. Watch out for them next season...

evil_seed

The difference between the 2 is glaringly obvious to me. Barca sign players that will fit into the team and the system that they play. Real sign players that are marquee names and will generate money through jersey sales.

It really is that simple :cool:

rossie1977

evil_seed wrote: »

The difference between the 2 is glaringly obvious to me. Barca sign players that will fit into the team and the system that they play. Real sign players that are marquee names and will generate money through jersey sales.

It really is that simple :cool:

in fairness to madrid, if you were to give anybody on this forum unlimited money to buy 4-5 players at the start of season 2009-10, two of the names on everybodys list would have been kaka and ronaldo

madrid were seriously lacking in all departments in 2008-09, in midfield they signed alonso and kaka, upfront they signed ronaldo and benz and at the back arbeloa and albiol. it was clear to me at least that defensively they didn't fully address the problem in close season

AIR-AUSSIE

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Agreed. You look at city and some of their signings have been a bit off most namely Robinho while Adebayor has his good and bad days.
Chelsea to be fair have put a bit more imagination into who they buy.

Man City bought Robinho to make a point imo-to show they were a 'big-time' club to attract other players who wouldn't really have considered man city previously, rather than specifically his performances on the pitch.

I think you can't use one season as a bench mark on whether big signings are a success or failure. Real made a big change to their line-up with the players they bought. they need time to mould no matter if they cost 8million or 80.

I'd argue that Barca buying Ibrahimovic was a mistake last season rather than buying villa. I've always thought he was a bit overrated since leaving juve and certainly fit the playing style of barca.

nullzero

SantryRed wrote: »

There is a huge difference in Kaka And Ronaldo signing for Madrid and Villa and Fabregas signing for Barca.

Barca sign these players to fit a system.

Madrid just sign the players they see best regardless, and that's the difference.

While I can agree with the spirit of your post I cant agree with it outright.
Look at Ibrahimovic. Why swap Eto'o for an far inferior player? What sort of system is that?
Madrid are comical and the fact that they are the bad guys of football makes their biggest rivals Barca look like saints, which they're not. Barca aren't the footballing Messiahs, they're very naughty boys (sprinklers after Inter defeat).

sprinkles

Real had a great season domestically but how much of that was down to the poor opposition. Look at the gap between the top 2 and the rest of the league (25 points back to 3rd place Valencia). The gulf is widening and, imo, not entirely due to the fact that the top 2 are getting better. Villa moving to Barcelona is only going to worsen challenge from outside the top 2 even more - taking him from their closest challengers (other than Real) in the process.


Back to the original topic - money isn't everything but it damn well helps. Chelsea and Man City have proven what a huge injection of cash can do for the fortunes of the club and in Chelsea's case with proper management of the club as a whole it can lead to continued success on and off the pitch - we'll wait and see what happens with City. However Real have not had an extended period of calm for a number of years (if ever!). Managers and players rotated out of the club with little or no thought to the impact on how it effects the team. They have for a long time been a club of mercenaries with little or no pressure to act as a team - Capello did wonders to curb that mercenary streak somewhat albeit alienating players to his detriment at times. The problem with Real is a lack of patience from both fans and president alike.

Rome wasn't built in a day but I'm damn sure it cost a lot!

flahavaj

If Madrid get Jose, God help us all.

All he'd ask the board for is a couple of defenders I reckon and he'd be happy out.

flahavaj

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Did Real Madrid make any real progress in Europe from last year. They had kaka, Alonso and um.... Ronaldo in their team.
And still they felt short of expectations in Europe. League is all well and good but Madrid earned their reputation further afield.
They pride themselves on their European record and given their expenditure they have been poor in it as of late

^^^^^^^^^^^

Jorge Valdano posts on boards.:eek:

parker kent

IvySlayer wrote: »

5 years? Get your facts straight. They won it in 2008.

Real can beat every team in La Liga apart from Barcelona, who are also a rich club. Chelsea did the Double, Man City are on the up.

I had presumed he meant the 4 year gap between winning it in 2003 and regaining it in 2007. Even if he didn't, it does highlight his basic point that just throwing money at a team does not mean they will win anything.

I actually think he might have stumbled on something here too, how will Barcelona get on if they buy Fabregas as well as Villa. I know there will be some thrilling football, but will it upset the balance of the team? Same as when Madrid bought Beckham.

everdead.ie

The funny thing is everyone talks about the money from these transfers trickling down the leagues but the inflated prices mean it's more expensive to replace the guy you just lost. And everytime there's a transfer the player and his agent take a slice of the money so the real value is actually quite small. The real winners of these transfers are agents and players.

parker kent

everdead.ie wrote: »

The funny thing is everyone talks about the money from these transfers trickling down the leagues but the inflated prices mean it's more expensive to replace the guy you just lost. And everytime there's a transfer the player and his agent take a slice of the money so the real value is actually quite small. The real winners of these transfers are agents and players.

Sadly that is all too true. Shyster agents are a blight on football.