Eden Hazard signs for Chelsea........ Or does he? *shifty eyes*

Donnielighto

Chelsea

Xavi6 wrote: »

I think it's great

understandable

cson

The financial steroids will catch up with City and Chelsea at some stage.

And I will laugh, heartily.

Donnielighto

Chelsea

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Different amounts, but money gets higher as time goes by. Nobody could compete with United for more than one or two years. Just like nobody can compete with City now. It's the exact same in regards outspending your opponents.

How each club got the money is another matter, but the point remains they both heavily outspent their rivals. United didnt do it every season, but they did most.

It isnt just the amounts paid though but the frequency. United didnt outbid teams on a lot of players because they didnt want a lot. They were pretty stable in personnel terms. I think city will be soon enough mind and Chelsea have calmed down a good bit lately.

Fart

Man City

Xavi6 wrote: »

I think it's great

My God, as City fans you don't want to develop any relationships with your teams players, do you?

You'll never see the proper development of some great young talent.

More players at an incredible level will probably join City, more get bored as they're not always starting. Conflicts happen. Not how a club should be run imo.

Sgt Pepper 64

cson wrote: »

The financial steroids will catch up with City and Chelsea at some stage.

And I will laugh, heartily.

Yep, but hey, we're making hay still

Three Premier League titles, four FA Cups, two League Cups and two Champions League finals — one of them coming up in eleven days on May 19

Oh and the possibilty of an iconic new stadium.

Flow my tears!

DoctorGonzo08

Donnielighto wrote: »

It isnt just the amounts paid though but the frequency. United didnt outbid teams on a lot of players because they didnt want a lot. They were pretty stable in personnel terms. I think city will be soon enough mind and Chelsea have calmed down a good bit lately.

As a matter of interest, who is it City outbid Utd for? Tevez? Ye had first refusal didn't you?

In all fairness you should be grateful City and Chelsea are spending money to compete. It allows you to be seen as the victim as opposed to the stock market company you 'used' to be.

As for Hazard, I'd agree with a few on here that he is still largely unproven. I think Arsenal and City would be contenders, given International teammates that might have a word. But overall I think Arsenal would suit his style of play and progression better than City would. So I guess it will come down to what he values more, or how he values himself I guess.

cson

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

Yep, but hey, we're making hay still

Three Premier League titles, four FA Cups, two League Cups and two Champions League finals — one of them coming up in eleven days on May 19

Oh and the possibilty of an iconic new stadium.

Flow my tears!

Enjoy it while it lasts

Mitch Connor

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

As a matter of interest, who is it City outbid Utd for? Tevez? Ye had first refusal didn't you?

In all fairness you should be grateful City and Chelsea are spending money to compete. It allows you to be seen as the victim as opposed to the stock market company you 'used' to be.

As for Hazard, I'd agree with a few on here that he is still largely unproven. I think Arsenal and City would be contenders, given International teammates that might have a word. But overall I think Arsenal would suit his style of play and progression better than City would. So I guess it will come down to what he values more, or how he values himself I guess.

according to rumour, and that is all we have.... Silva and Yaya were wanted, but we couldnt' compete. We had a deal agreed with Nasri until City offered a lot more wage (Fergie was apparently furious with Nasri for going back on his word). Don't think there are others that have gone through for either team but talk is City were in for Sneijder and upped the ante there (he has since been offered to United at the terms he rejected). Honestly can't think of others.

Hazard seems like it will rumble for a while. I'm not convinved it will come down to simple wages though - if he was only interested in money he wouldn't have rejected Real Madrids advances last summer in order to continue actually playing football. At the end of the day though, City are bound to be more appealing than United now, regardless of wages, as they are a team on the up, while United need a lot of investment in top talent (like Hazard) to maintain competitiveness.

All United can really offer him, that may matter, is that he would be the star at Old Trafford and sharing time/position with Silva at City. We need him a lot more than City do, but that could count for little.

Sgt Pepper 64

cson wrote: »

Enjoy it while it lasts

I enjoyed the early ****e years, so I might as well enjoy the good times

DoctorGonzo08

Mitch Connor wrote: »

according to rumour, and that is all we have....

At least you're honest. Rumours are the important word. Nasri, yes was direct competition, but Karma goes around and comes around. Fergie poached Giggs the exact same way, if not more underhand off City. We lost Sturridge to Chelsea the same way as we poached Nasri from Arsenal. What goes around comes around in the end.

Xavi6

Fart wrote: »

My God, as City fans you don't want to develop any relationships with your teams players, do you?

I want to win trophies, it's the benchmark afterall.

You'll never see the proper development of some great young talent.

Like all those other top clubs who have nurtured talent into their first team? Oh hang on...

More players at an incredible level will probably join City, more get bored as they're not always starting. Conflicts happen. Not how a club should be run imo.

Been hearing that for three years now and look where we are.

cson

cson wrote: »

The financial steroids will catch up with City and Chelsea at some stage.

And I will laugh, heartily.

Why just those two?

Mitch Connor

rarnes1 wrote: »

Why just those two?

probably just talking from a premiership point of view. Who else would be in trouble? Villa?

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

cson

rarnes1 wrote: »

Why just those two?

Because they're the two most conspicuous examples of where a billionaire has decided to play Football Manager in real life and throw money at a club until he achieves desired result/gets bored.

They're not in it for profit anyway, and that's for sure.

If Chelsea and City fans are happy having a club that's effectively a billionaires plaything, and I don't doubt that they are, that's cool. But don't expect any sympathy from other fans when those particular financial chickens come home to roost.

DoctorGonzo08

cson wrote: »

Because they're the two most conspicuous examples of where a billionaire has decided to play Football Manager in real life and throw money at a club until he achieves desired result/gets bored.

They're not in it for profit anyway, and that's for sure.

If Chelsea and City fans are happy having a club that's effectively a billionaires plaything, and I don't doubt that they are, that's cool. But don't expect any sympathy from other fans when those particular financial chickens come home to roost.

Can I ask who you support? I hope it's not Utd.

cson

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Can I ask who you support? I hope it's not Utd.

Arsenal.

We're probably the club that has suffered the most due to Abramovich and the Sheikhs, though largely due the former moreso than the latter.

Yes, I'm bitter.

Very bitter.

Sgt Pepper 64

cson wrote: »

If Chelsea and City fans are happy having a club that's effectively a billionaires plaything, and I don't doubt that they are, that's cool. But don't expect any sympathy from other fans when those particular financial chickens come home to roost.

What exactly can we as fans do about it if we dont like it?

I'm not going to stop supporting them now am i - "through thick and thin" I think is the phrase!

But I say to you, what fan wouldnt be happy, if their team was suddenly bought by a billionaire and had millions pumped into it?

LuckyLloyd

cson wrote: »

The financial steroids will catch up with City and Chelsea at some stage.

And I will laugh, heartily.

Hmm, let's say City are guaranteed to be broke and in, lets say, League One in ten years time. If I was a City fan I'd happily trade that for the coming five year golden period. They are going to sweep all before them in the coming seasons and build up an awful lot of sustaining memories. This is a club that was in League One not too long ago, and hadn't won a trophy in decades. Do you think they give a ****?

As for Chelsea, they went through a barren spell for a long time. And with Bates and Roman, they've now enjoyed a run towards the top of the football tree for coming on 15 years. League titles and (maybe) a Champions League to remember fondly for a long time to come.

The sneering 'oh we'll get you eventually' stuff misses the point for me. You play to win the game, not hang around the game for ever more.

Professional Griefer

Chelsea

So Hazard eh??

kippy

plasmaguy wrote: »

I haven't heard of the guy.

However, the French League is vastly inferior to the EPL and has been for years now, the last French Team to reach the CL final was Monaco, and before that Marseille over ten years before.

I'd rate the Portuguese League above the French league in standard.

Some of the best players in the past two decades to have played in the PL came from the "french league" at some point.
There are often big fish in small ponds when it comes to players.

cson

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Hmm, let's say City are guaranteed to be broke and in, lets say, League One in ten years time. If I was a City fan I'd happily trade that for the coming five year golden period. They are going to sweep all before them in the coming seasons and build up an awful lot of sustaining memories. This is a club that was in League One not too long ago, and hadn't won a trophy in decades. Do you think they give a ****?

As for Chelsea, they went through a barren spell for a long time. And with Bates and Roman, they've now enjoyed a run towards the top of the football tree for coming on 15 years. League titles and (maybe) a Champions League to remember fondly for a long time to come.

The sneering 'oh we'll get you eventually' stuff misses the point for me. You play to win the game, not hang around the game for ever more.

Oh I agree completely.

I'm mainly sneering/bitter because they probably denied us winning stuff over the last decade or so.

Anyway Hazard would do well to avoid the bigger clubs and further his development. He's 21 so he's got a lot of time in the game so attuning himself to the demands of the Premiership or La Liga before moving to City/United, where he'll be expected to perform instantly and get results for the team, might be a better option.

LuckyLloyd

Footballers don't think like that - probably rightly too. He could go over on his knee tomorrow and snap all his ligaments and never be the same player again. He'll also believe deep down that he is actually the best player in the world. If City are willing to give him a five year contract at £200k a week when they are also capable of competing in the Champions League then it is probably far and away the correct life and career decision to take it...

kippy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Footballers don't think like that - probably rightly too. He could go over on his knee tomorrow and snap all his ligaments and never be the same player again. He'll also believe deep down that he is actually the best player in the world. If City are willing to give him a five year contract at £200k a week when they are also capable of competing in the Champions League then it is probably far and away the correct life and career decision to take it...

Totally agree.
If you put yourself in the players position, things become a lot clearer.

There are also other considerations (family, language etc) however for a young player who plays a sport where your next injury could be your last, money is a major factor.

Donnielighto

Chelsea

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Can I ask who you support? I hope it's not Utd.

Is that a crack at the glazers? dont think any united fans are too happy with that lot but united are surviving despite their input as opposed to benefiting from it more along the lines of H&G as opposed to abromovich. In fairness to city they are trying to make a brand of the club that will become self financing but their wages are unjustified and the stadium thing is just fraud in my eyes with the FFP coming in. I actually like city but i dont think the overstrechting is intelligent, the club should grow in a more measured fashion incase the bottom falls out.

Donnielighto

Chelsea

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

What exactly can we as fans do about it if we dont like it?

I'm not going to stop supporting them now am i - "through thick and thin" I think is the phrase!

But I say to you, what fan wouldnt be happy, if their team was suddenly bought by a billionaire and had millions pumped into it?

I wouldn't I'm a United fan, but that is not why i dont want to see these lads coming in. I dont think it is good from football as a whole, in any sport it is bad over and is kinda like a prisoners dilemma game. FYI i wouldnt be happy if bill gates bought connacht and did a toulon on us.

DoctorGonzo08

Donnielighto wrote: »

Is that a crack at the glazers? dont think any united fans are too happy with that lot but united are surviving despite their input as opposed to benefiting from it more along the lines of H&G as opposed to abromovich. In fairness to city they are trying to make a brand of the club that will become self financing but their wages are unjustified and the stadium thing is just fraud in my eyes with the FFP coming in. I actually like city but i dont think the overstrechting is intelligent, the club should grow in a more measured fashion incase the bottom falls out.

It wasn't a crack at the Glazers, it was a crack at Utd floating the 'company' on the stock market long before cash injections were frowned upon. What's the difference in 1 billion investors giving 1 pound and 1 person giving 1 billion pound? Nothing. As for wages, you only have to go back to 2003 and Utd are back in charge in the 'overspending'.

The overstretching and measured fashion is discussed in detail over in the UFFP - Will it work ? thread.

cson

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Footballers don't think like that - probably rightly too. He could go over on his knee tomorrow and snap all his ligaments and never be the same player again. He'll also believe deep down that he is actually the best player in the world. If City are willing to give him a five year contract at £200k a week when they are also capable of competing in the Champions League then it is probably far and away the correct life and career decision to take it...

Absolutely and I meant to add that in at the end of my first post; weighing it up if for instance City and Arsenal both had bids matched he'd be mad to turn down the 200k/wk he'd likely get. He'd earn in one season what would take 3 elsewhere.

Liam O

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

It wasn't a crack at the Glazers, it was a crack at Utd floating the 'company' on the stock market long before cash injections were frowned upon. What's the difference in 1 billion investors giving 1 pound and 1 person giving 1 billion pound? Nothing. As for wages, you only have to go back to 2003 and Utd are back in charge in the 'overspending'.

The overstretching and measured fashion is discussed in detail over in the UFFP - Will it work ? thread.

What 'overspending' did United do out of interest? Don't remember the club making too many losses or going into debt to make signings, might just be my memory though...

Donnielighto

Chelsea

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

It wasn't a crack at the Glazers, it was a crack at Utd floating the 'company' on the stock market long before cash injections were frowned upon. What's the difference in 1 billion investors giving 1 pound and 1 person giving 1 billion pound? Nothing. As for wages, you only have to go back to 2003 and Utd are back in charge in the 'overspending'.

The overstretching and measured fashion is discussed in detail over in the UFFP - Will it work ? thread.

Whoever it is floated to injecting more money wouldnt really happen...?

Arsenal dont act like they have a sugar daddy even though usmanov is worth 3B more than roman. Topping the wage list is not neccesarily overspending. I dont think that United are angels in white but they havent gone near the same extremes.


If I had said I was a Bolton or D&G fan would that affect where my point comes from?

plasmaguy

kippy wrote: »

Some of the best players in the past two decades to have played in the PL came from the "french league" at some point.
There are often big fish in small ponds when it comes to players.

It's a fair point, but the league itself is of an average quality so if someone does well there, that doesn't mean much.

As for some of the best players doing well, yes, the best left France fairly young and proved themselves elsewhere, Anelka in England, Trezeque in Italy, Henry in England, Zidane, Lizarazou, and so on.

Of the French team who won the WC in 98, most were not playing in France.

Proving yourself in the French League is pretty meaningless. Apparantly Girvinho was "world class" in the French league, but has been poor in the EPL.

I wouldn't buy someone like Hazard until he proves himself in a top 4 European league which France certainly is not.

plasmaguy

greendom wrote: »

Forgive me for not placing too much store on your opinion. If you haven't heard of Eden Hazard, how could you possibly have any idea on the relative standards of the French and Portuguese leagues ?

Because the French League to put it frankly is of a poor standard.

There are very few if any world class players playing in France.

Girvonho, Chamac, a couple of Arsenal centre-backs, all done well in France, but put them in a top 4 league and they are nobodies.

It's easy to look good in a sh*t league.

plasmaguy

Laika1986 wrote: »

The French League is far better than the Portuguese league imo. Lille, Marseille,PSG,Lyon, Montpellier, Bordeaux whereas Portugal have Porto,Benfica and Lisbon that's it really.

Much of a muchness to be fair, I'd give it to Portugal myself, but not much in it, others might give it to France.

Portugal dominated Europa League last year, 3 out of 4 semi finalists, and 1 again this year, whereas France didn't have any semi finalist the last few years.

Champions League, France and Portugal teams usually achieve about the same level, Portugal has one win in last 10 years, France a finalist.

Players like Hazard whoever he is, clearly has decided he's too big for the French League.

It's possibly a question of money, in fact it more than likely is and there just isn't the money in France, although PSG are changing that.

French League has always been a stepping stone for really good players to a top 4 league.

Frisbee

plasmaguy wrote: »

Because the French League to put it frankly is of a poor standard.

There are very few if any world class players playing in France.

Girvonho, Chamac, a couple of Arsenal centre-backs, all done well in France, but put them in a top 4 league and they are nobodies.

It's easy to look good in a sh*t league.

Koscielny is the only CB we've signed from Ligue 1 in recent years and he's been our best player along with RVP this season.

plasmaguy

Donnielighto wrote: »

United should table bids for half the players they think are over rated in europe and a few that they actually want. Let City splurge the oil money and get knackered by FFP. Then pick up 3 decent players who they kept under the radar towards the end of the summer.

The Mansour family have money and assets of 440 billion. They aren't going to run out of cash soon.

A billion is loose change to them, and in any bidding war there will only ever be one winner.

Don't think Utd can complain though, they had it their way for at least a decade and could outbid anyone until Abramovich came along.

plasmaguy

Frisbee wrote: »

Koscielny is the only CB we've signed from Ligue 1 in recent years and he's been our best player along with RVP this season.

He's been better this year but when he first arrived he wasn't great, to be fair.

Chamac is awful and Girvinho isn't much better.

There's plenty more examples of French "stars" of Ligue 1 flopping as soon as they made the direct swap to the EPL, not just with Arsenal but other sides too.

plasmaguy

Anyways the whole thing about buying league titles needs to be addressed.

They are trying to bring in rules about teams living within their means, but City, Chelsea, etc are not complying and making no attempt to comply.

Wouldn't it be great if they had a draft system like in American football?

Frisbee

plasmaguy wrote: »

He's been better this year but when he first arrived he wasn't great, to be fair.

Chamac is awful and Girvinho isn't much better.

There's plenty more examples of French "stars" of Ligue 1 flopping as soon as they made the direct swap to the EPL, not just with Arsenal but other sides too.

I agree on Chamakh and Gervinho.

But at no stage has Koscielny flopped. He took half a season to bed in and was very solid in the 2nd half of last season aside from that mistake with Szczesny. This season he'd held our defence together; singlehandedly at times. Our two best defenders were signed from Ligue 1.

greendom

Chelsea

plasmaguy wrote: »

He's been better this year but when he first arrived he wasn't great, to be fair.

Chamac is awful and Girvinho isn't much better.

There's plenty more examples of French "stars" of Ligue 1 flopping as soon as they made the direct swap to the EPL, not just with Arsenal but other sides too.

Just as well Alan Carr's dad doesn't listen to you !

And I think the successes over the years far far outweigh the flops

G.K.

Aquila wrote: »

Oh the Bates era..what a rollercoaster eh?

Lucky so and so's. Wish we were shot of him.

plasmaguy

greendom wrote: »

Just as well Alan Carr's dad doesn't listen to you !

And I think the successes over the years far far outweigh the flops

We will see how well this Hazard guy does in any case in a top league.

Just for the record, here's how the leagues are in Europe.

Tier 1

Spain, England, Germany, Italy

(Champions League finalists/winners come from this tier most of time)

Tier 2

Portugal, France, Russia, Holland, Greece(sometimes)

(Good for getting to Europa League semis and finals, rare once a decade does a team from each of the countries in this tier get to CL final or wins.

Tier 3

Most of the rest.

So he's playing in a Tier 2 league and like I said it's easy to be a star in one of those leagues.

Proving your stuff in France is one thing. Proving it in England, Spain, Italy and Germany is another.

Just stating the obvious by the way, although it seems around here the obvious has to be stated over and over again.

plasmaguy

Here's some highlights of the last "big thing" in French football.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wypv7-IwMY8

There is a a big step up these days from French League to EPL. Maybe in the past the leagues were closer, but the gap seems to have widened lately.

G.K.

When Gervinho's played in his proper position - the left of an attacking 3, he's not looked too bad - even against Norwich that was the case. When he's been on the right he's not been so good, again shown against norwich.

greendom

Chelsea

plasmaguy wrote: »

We will see how well this Hazard guy does in any case in a top league.

Just for the record, here's how the leagues are in Europe.

Tier 1

Spain, England, Germany, Italy

(Champions League finalists/winners come from this tier most of time)

Tier 2

Portugal, France, Russia, Holland, Greece(sometimes)

(Good for getting to Europa League semis and finals, rare once a decade does a team from each of the countries in this tier get to CL final or wins.

Tier 3

Most of the rest.

So he's playing in a Tier 2 league and like I said it's easy to be a star in one of those leagues.

Proving your stuff in France is one thing. Proving it in England, Spain, Italy and Germany is another.

Just stating the obvious by the way, although it seems around here the obvious has to be stated over and over again.

i agree with the level of Ligue 1 as a tier 2 league. But in terms of the quality of players the French system creates/develops makes it absolutely a tier 1 country (probably replacing England in that category). The problem is the finances there don't enable those players to stay. They move on for richer pickings and the league suffers as a result.

greendom

Chelsea

plasmaguy wrote: »

Here's some highlights of the last "big thing" in French football.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wypv7-IwMY8

There is a a big step up these days from French League to EPL. Maybe in the past the leagues were closer, but the gap seems to have widened lately.

What about Cabaye who came from the same team ? There will always be flops - players that don't adjust to the differences in style (not saying that is necessarily true of Gervinho although he's had a difficult first season). Look at it the other way round. Cole has come from the premier league to Hazard's club and very rarely starts for them.

Samich

Chelsea

Hazard has no hope of coming to Utd I think, City for money, or Arsenal for his liking of Arsenal imo.

plasmaguy

To be fair, he would want to be outstanding to get into the Manchester City midfield.

And from the research I've done today, he doesn't strike me as outstanding, I haven't even heard of the guy before today which indicates he hasn't featured at the sharp end of the CL, and the French League isn't something I watch or follow.

He's played 26 times for Belgium, scored only 1 for them, had 8 assists which is fair enough, never played in a major championships, didn't help Belgium qualify for the Euros or score crucial goals for them, he's done well for Lille but then Gervinho done well for Lille and we know how that turned out.

To be honest he's not good enough for Man City, and probably not good enough for Man Utd or Chelsea either.

Kind of player Wenger would buy though so I expect him to be with Arsenal next year.

G.K.

plasmaguy wrote: »

To be fair, he would want to be outstanding to get into the Manchester City midfield.

And from the research I've done today, he doesn't strike me as outstanding, I haven't even heard of the guy before today which indicates he hasn't featured at the sharp end of the CL, and the French League isn't something I watch or follow.

He's played 26 times for Belgium, scored only 1 for them, had 8 assists which is fair enough, never played in a major championships, didn't help Belgium qualify for the Euros or score crucial goals for them, he's done well for Lille but then Gervinho done well for Lille and we know how that turned out.

To be honest he's not good enough for Man City, and probably not good enough for Man Utd or Chelsea either.

Kind of player Wenger would buy though so I expect him to be with Arsenal next year.

Yes, better than you are claiming it did. Also Cabaye came from Lille, a point made to you before which you ignored.

plasmaguy

G.K. wrote: »

Yes, better than you are claiming it did. Also Cabaye came from Lille, a point made to you before which you ignored.

Not sure using Cabaye as an example helps. He was awful against Man City on Sunday and at fault for the last goal. Certainly not good enough for Man City or Chelsea.

Why would either Man City or Chelsea bring in a player like Hazard when he isn't even as good as the players they have who are proven at EPL level in both cases and proven at CL level up to and including semis and finals in Chelsea's case?

G.K.

plasmaguy wrote: »

Not sure using Cabaye as an example helps. He was awful against Man City on Sunday and at fault for the last goal.

Because 1 game defines players' seasons...