Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Neymar Deal: The Clusterfúck

124678

Comments

  • #152
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    NIMAN wrote: »
    This is the day football officially began to die.


    Why this day? Crazy fees have been happening for years now.


  • #153
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    Osmosis Jones wrote: »
    As inevitable as it all was, seeing this officially announced is still a bit mental. When was the last time Barca actually lost one of their stars?

    Figo, obviously is the only one comparable to Neymar and 50 bloody million almost 2 decades ago!!

    Re players that club would have liked to keep, YaYa was well valued at the club, of course Sanchez, Eto'o, Ronaldinho, and then back as far as Ronaldo and Stoichkov and dare I say Hagi!!


  • #154
    ~Rebel~
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,023 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    NIMAN wrote: »
    This is the day football officially began to die.

    Meh, we've been at crazy astronomical levels of nonsense money for years now. This is the latest peak. The figures we see popping up are always fairly in line with the amount of money in the game. We're pretty much at peak capacity right now, I think it can only go down from here as people are less willing to shell out an arm and a leg to watch, when there are easier, better ways to watch for cheap/free. They'll have to lower the cost to keep customers.

    And it'll make no difference ot what we actually see. If clubs made half the money, I reckon we'd see all the same deals taking place, just for half the cost. It's not really money for them, it's a % of the footballing industry.


  • #155
    Dirty Dingus McGee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Dirty Dingus McGee


    RoboKlopp wrote: »
    Neymar is a massive name. PSG will gain plenty of plastic fans now worldwide.


    Just like all the plastic fans every other major club has.


  • #156
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    NIMAN wrote: »
    This is the day football officially began to die.

    May get the best out of 5 aside now while I can then!


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    NIMAN
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,050 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    RoboKlopp wrote: »
    Why this day? Crazy fees have been happening for years now.

    They have indeed been crazy for a long time, but this has taken the craziness to an exponentially new level.

    It will affect all other deals now.

    I can't see the tv companies pumping enough money into the game to sustain this, and the teams with unlimited wealth like PSG, Man city etc may well move on to a different level if they can outbid everyone else.

    I was losing interest in top level football over recent years, and this is another nail in the coffin.


  • #158
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    NIMAN wrote: »
    They have indeed been crazy for a long time, but this has taken the craziness to an exponentially new level.

    It will affect all other deals now.

    I can't see the tv companies pumping enough money into the game to sustain this, and the teams with unlimited wealth like PSG, Man city etc may well move on to a different level if they can outbid everyone else.

    I was losing interest in top level football over recent years, and this is another nail in the coffin.

    Figo went to Real for 50 million 17 years ago. A summer where Crespo sold for about 45 million and Anelka was sold for circa 30 million. Didn't see anyone questioning the future of soccer back then


  • #159
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »
    Just like all the plastic fans every other major club has.

    Exactly.

    Casual fans.


  • #160
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    The Talking Bread wrote: »
    Figo went to Real for 50 million 17 years ago. A summer where Crespo sold for about 45 million and Anelka was sold for circa 30 million. Didn't see anyone questioning the future of soccer back then


    You probably would have if social media was a thing back then.


  • #161
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    RoboKlopp wrote: »
    You probably would have if social media was a thing back then.

    Ha! Could you imagine the hypothetical scenario of AIG''s online breakdown when Figo left for Madrid!!


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    The Talking Bread wrote: »
    Ha! Could you imagine the hypothetical scenario of AIG''s online breakdown when Figo left for Madrid!!

    Ah now everyone knows the crack with AIG. It cracks me up that so many take his posts so seriously. Posters here for years too that should know better. Makes for good reading anyway.

    Keep it up folks!


  • #163
    ERG89
    Registered Users Posts: 11,611 ✭✭✭✭ERG89


    Dirty Dingus McGee wrote:
    Just like all the plastic fans every other major club has.

    It's not just football that gains these momentary fans. The week it is everyone now is a horse racing expert, in a few weeks time it'll be the boxing match & so on.
    It's plays a part in why ratings are so....I'll be kind, erratic now as some just don't watch games as much as before when they can find highlights immediately there is no point in watching Bournemouth vs West Ham or that.


  • #164
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    Some of us are still reeling from the Steve Daley transfer.


  • #165
    LiamoSail
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,294 ✭✭✭LiamoSail


    The Talking Bread wrote: »
    Figo went to Real for 50 million 17 years ago. A summer where Crespo sold for about 45 million and Anelka was sold for circa 30 million. Didn't see anyone questioning the future of soccer back then

    That fee was mentioned a few posts back, but I'm sure at the time it was reported as £37m (before we all became uber European).

    I'm sure that was shortly after Lazio signed Crespo (£35m I think, I remember it made him the World Record Transfer), and around the time too that Vieiri went to Lazio for about £32m. I remember a big thing about Crespo in fourfourtwo

    Anelka IIRC was £22m, after his Arsenal strop.


  • #166
    thebaz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,719 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    RoboKlopp wrote: »
    Exactly.

    Casual fans.


    great PSG have signed a top player -I'll ditch my team and buy the shirt - people will think I'm great in a PSG Neymar shirt - I find this a particularly sad day for football , it became a plaything or fad for Rich idle Quatar men - once they get bored they will move on to something else - PSG will just run away with there league whers the fun in that - like Celtic winning in Scotland -expectation with little competition - great


  • #167
    vicwatson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,404 ✭✭✭✭vicwatson


    PSG will do anything to win the champions league, anything.


  • #168
    Osmosis Jones
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,932 ✭✭✭✭Osmosis Jones


    thebaz wrote: »
    great PSG have signed a top player -I'll ditch my team and buy the shirt - people will think I'm great in a PSG Neymar shirt - I find this a particularly sad day for football , it became a plaything or fad for Rich idle Quatar men - once they get bored they will move on to something else - PSG will just run away with there league whers the fun in that - like Celtic winning in Scotland -expectation with little competition - great

    I hope they come for Rugby next.


  • #169
    martyos121
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,495 ✭✭✭✭martyos121


    vicwatson wrote: »
    PSG will do anything to win the champions league, anything.

    Except defend competently for 10 minutes at the Camp Nou unfortunately. :pac:


  • #170
    LiamoSail
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,294 ✭✭✭LiamoSail


    The problem with a laissez faire approach to the financing of clubs is that it's the fans who eventually pay.

    Granted it's money from the Middle East paying the Neymar fee, but what happens when United or Liverpool, Weat Ham or Sunderland want to then buy a player? The fees are inflated for everyone. It's not oil and gas money paying those fees, its increased ticket prices, hefty TV subscriptions and overspriced third choice Goal keepers kits.

    It's all very well saying let them do what they want with their money, but it does further inflate the cost of football for the average fan. The demograph that can least afford it are getting squeezed further for their pursuit of what is essentially a hobby, while those already wealthy beyond anything they could ever need just get wealthier. The sport, at the highest level, is digging its own grave


  • #171
    Mr.H
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,861 ✭✭✭Mr.H


    LiamoSail wrote:
    It's all very well saying let them do what they want with their money, but it does further inflate the cost of football for the average fan. The demograph that can least afford it are getting squeezed further for their pursuit of what is essentially a hobby, while those already wealthy beyond anything they could ever need just get wealthier. The sport, at the highest level, is digging its own grave


    I agree with what your saying but the thing is where the money comes from is irrelevant.

    United earn their money legitimately(as far as we all know at least). But they have always spent big. They were spending 30 million on players like Rooney rio and veron when arsenals biggest spend was kanu for 13-14 millon(iirc and open to correction).

    My point is Man United also inflated transfer fees with their spend. It meant other clubs spent more and again fans spent more.

    So how is it wrong for psg but OK for Man United?(not picking on united just using them as an example. They earnt their cash). Both have the same outcome for fans


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Mr.H
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,861 ✭✭✭Mr.H


    NIMAN wrote:
    I was losing interest in top level football over recent years, and this is another nail in the coffin.


    Unfortunately for every you that switches off because of deals like this, there will be 10 more switching on.

    This is huge hype that will do great things for French football.

    No different to the msl taking in top players. Getting significant coverage from it


  • #173
    LiamoSail
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,294 ✭✭✭LiamoSail


    Mr.H wrote: »
    I agree with what your saying but the thing is where the money comes from is irrelevant.

    United earn their money legitimately(as far as we all know at least). But they have always spent big. They were spending 30 million on players like Rooney rio and veron when arsenals biggest spend was kanu for 13-14 millon(iirc and open to correction).

    My point is Man United also inflated transfer fees with their spend. It meant other clubs spent more and again fans spent more.

    So how is it wrong for psg but OK for Man United?(not picking on united just using them as an example. They earnt their cash). Both have the same outcome for fans

    I'm not saying it's right for either. My point is just that fees will inflate naturally and fans will ultimately foot the bill.

    When Oil Rich countries and Millionaire crooks get involved, they inflate it at a quicker rate.

    On the face of it, it's fine. Why shouldn't they be allowed do what they want with their money? But there are implications and it's the fans that suffer them in the end


  • #174
    Mr.H
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,861 ✭✭✭Mr.H


    I do agree completely I just wish there was ways to protect fans. Maybe leagues could implement set prices for games. Not allow teams like arsenal to rip fans off (to be fair they all do it to a degree).

    Tickets for a game should be 20 quid Max. Offer extras if the club wants but it shouldn't be more than 20 to see your team play regardless of how close you are to the pitch


  • #175
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,403 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    There is something utterly intoxicating about money conquering supposed ingrained rules like this.

    Barcelona's tradition? **** you we have the money. FFP? **** you we have the money.

    That La Liga made some show of trying to refuse the fee makes them look all the weaker and more helpless. You had no choice. Money talks.

    This is the ultimate hater transfer. FIFA had already succumbed to big money from the Middle East when selling it their World Cup, and Barcelona had suckled at the teat of all that cash. It was all good, all gravy, until that money came for the golden calf and conquered it. People saying PSG now have to sell to balance the ledger? **** that. This was off the PSG books, no hassle. City and PSG are showing how its done - you can buy it. **** tradition and history, meaningless bull****. Time to feast on the goo!


  • #176
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    RoboKlopp wrote: »
    Ah now everyone knows the crack with AIG. It cracks me up that so many take his posts so seriously. Posters here for years too that should know better. Makes for good reading anyway.

    Keep it up folks!

    Ah, stop, I don't get wound up or take his posts "seriously " as such.

    I know what he is at most of the time! But he does offer some informative stuff, even disregarding the agenda as to how he twists things and contradicts himself and does get people talking when he drops in and leaves a nugget of a post and then sits back in his box room with his Messi, suarez and Neymar Alcacer posters surrounding him calmly rubbing his hands as he gets all the abuse!

    He loves it!


  • #177
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    LiamoSail wrote: »
    That fee was mentioned a few posts back, but I'm sure at the time it was reported as £37m (before we all became uber European).

    I'm sure that was shortly after Lazio signed Crespo (£35m I think, I remember it made him the World Record Transfer), and around the time too that Vieiri went to Lazio for about £32m. I remember a big thing about Crespo in fourfourtwo

    Anelka IIRC was £22m, after his Arsenal strop.

    I am obviously talking euro conversion to compare it somewhat to transfers today. And those prices don't account for inflation either since


  • #178
    thebaz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,719 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    There is something utterly intoxicating about money conquering supposed ingrained rules like this.

    Barcelona's tradition? **** you we have the money. FFP? **** you we have the money.

    That La Liga made some show of trying to refuse the fee makes them look all the weaker and more helpless. You had no choice. Money talks.

    This is the ultimate hater transfer. FIFA had already succumbed to big money from the Middle East when selling it their World Cup, and Barcelona had suckled at the teat of all that cash. It was all good, all gravy, until that money came for the golden calf and conquered it. People saying PSG now have to sell to balance the ledger? **** that. This was off the PSG books, no hassle. City and PSG are showing how its done - you can buy it. **** tradition and history, meaningless bull****. Time to feast on the goo!

    thankfully there is more to football than just money - I remember when Blackburn came a power and that was enjoyable - but this is just horrible - a million a week - The league of Ireland for me (thankfully)


  • #179
    Morzadec
    Registered Users Posts: 5,952 ✭✭✭Morzadec


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    There is something utterly intoxicating about money conquering supposed ingrained rules like this.

    Barcelona's tradition? **** you we have the money. FFP? **** you we have the money.

    That La Liga made some show of trying to refuse the fee makes them look all the weaker and more helpless. You had no choice. Money talks.

    This is the ultimate hater transfer. FIFA had already succumbed to big money from the Middle East when selling it their World Cup, and Barcelona had suckled at the teat of all that cash. It was all good, all gravy, until that money came for the golden calf and conquered it. People saying PSG now have to sell to balance the ledger? **** that. This was off the PSG books, no hassle. City and PSG are showing how its done - you can buy it. **** tradition and history, meaningless bull****. Time to feast on the goo!

    As much as I hate much of what this transfer represents, there is a sense of shadenfreude for the holier than thou, mes que un club Barvelona getting done over by the very country they "suckled at the teat" of as you so eloquently put it.

    That and the dodgy manner in which Barca initially signed Neymar really shows them up as hypocrits when they come in with their righteous indignation about this transfer.

    Also sense of satisfaction to see their reaction of having a top player leave them. All fine when they're tempting away Suarez etc.. but when a player dares leave them they're a "traitor" only in it for the money.

    Of course all football fans are guilty of this double standard, but it's satisfying to see Barca have to go through this for a change, and for once have their own hypocrisies exposed


  • #180
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    thebaz wrote: »
    thankfully there is more to football than just money - I remember when Blackburn came a power and that was enjoyable - but this is just horrible - a million a week - The league of Ireland for me (thankfully)

    You really don't know your football if you don't understand the circusmstances as to how Blackburn won the league in 95 then...........


    You have mentioned your admiration for the LOI. So what. I am sure they would welcome an influx of money.
    Just because they are relatively impoverished in that respect doesn't make it any more honourable. Any player playing LOI would want to step up and play in England and earn more money.

    I think the LOI is a horribly ran league at times, especially those that govern it.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    thebaz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,719 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    The Talking Bread wrote: »
    You really don't know your football if you don't understand the circusmstances as to how Blackburn won the league in 95 then...........

    I'm well aware how Blackburn won the league - Jack Walker - but it was somehow less greed infested than whats happening now at PSG


  • #182
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    thebaz wrote: »
    I'm well aware how Blackburn won the league - Jack Walker - but it was somehow less greed infested than whats happening now at PSG

    It is all relative. It was 22 years ago and the football market is completely different these days. The money wasn't in the game.

    Supply and demand.

    They broke records with spending back then. He invested 50 million into the club's accounts and that was back in 91 or 92. Crazy money. Shearer and Sutton both earning about 17K a week. Dalglish handed 1 million up front

    I just haven't a clue why you cited Blackburn in your post then and reminiscing over the wonderful Jack Walker era as they are a very poor example, relatively speaking, in the argument you are putting forward and your dismay as to how clubs are using financial power to dominate their respective competitions.


  • #183
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,661 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    There was a certain romance in the Blackburn title win, Walker being a life long fan of the club. Yes, they effectively bought the title, but it was at least bankrolled by a man who did have a genuine connection with the club and the area.

    I don't think it's possible to feel the same way about Qatari Billionaires.


  • #184
    Corholio
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,014 ✭✭✭✭Corholio


    The Talking Bread wrote: »
    Figo went to Real for 50 million 17 years ago. A summer where Crespo sold for about 45 million and Anelka was sold for circa 30 million. Didn't see anyone questioning the future of soccer back then

    They definitely were. The Crespo deal was certainly questioned and criticised for the money spent on him. He was a very good player but that time it was mad money and it was definitely queried similar to how transfers are these days.

    The Neymar one just stands out because it's over double the amount of the last world record fee, which was also a hell of a lot of money, even in the inflated market. It's not really a thing about questioning the future of soccer but I don't understand why people are surprised that people would be critical of such figures.


  • #185
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    Arghus wrote: »
    There was a certain romance in the Blackburn title win, Walker being a life long fan of the club. Yes, they effectively bought the title, but it was at least bankrolled by a man who did have a genuine connection with the club and the area.

    I don't think it's possible to feel the same way about Qatari Billionaires.

    The romance is diminished somewhat by the fact that he was a multi multi milionaire worth about 350 million of basically inherited fortune. Yes he was a fan but Blackburn was a toy for him also.


  • #186
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,661 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    The Talking Bread wrote: »
    The romance is diminished somewhat by the fact that he was a multi multi milionaire worth about 350 million of basically inherited fortune. Yes he was a fan but Blackburn was a toy for him also.

    I'm not disputing that he was rich or that Blackburn's success wasn't wholly reliant on money! But I do think you have to take into account that he was a genuine supporter of the club. Many fans dream of being of becoming so loaded that they can power their club to glory. That's what he did. I think there's some romance in that, whereas there's literally none in the oligarchs and billionaires approach of today.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    It remains to be seen if these PSG financiers invest some money into the club's youth infrastructure. I know soccer is not all that popular in the city of Paris , itself compared to the Turins, the Manchester's, the Glasgows, the Barcelona's, the Madrids (rugby arguably being the top team sport) but there is a wealth of talent to be found in France, and some young talent probably doesn't get the nourishment that they could.

    The best thing that could happen in Ligue 1 is, sadly for many, a club(s) like Lyon and Lille etc to get some big investment themselves.


  • #188
    ~Rebel~
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,023 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    LiamoSail wrote: »
    The problem with a laissez faire approach to the financing of clubs is that it's the fans who eventually pay.

    Granted it's money from the Middle East paying the Neymar fee, but what happens when United or Liverpool, Weat Ham or Sunderland want to then buy a player? The fees are inflated for everyone. It's not oil and gas money paying those fees, its increased ticket prices, hefty TV subscriptions and overspriced third choice Goal keepers kits.

    It's all very well saying let them do what they want with their money, but it does further inflate the cost of football for the average fan. The demograph that can least afford it are getting squeezed further for their pursuit of what is essentially a hobby, while those already wealthy beyond anything they could ever need just get wealthier. The sport, at the highest level, is digging its own grave

    Is it not the other way around? The TV company's gouged the average fan for the maximum amount of money possible, the clubs get this massive influx of cash from their TV deal, and then any time one of these clubs wants another clubs player, the seller can say "**** you, we're practically rich now so we don't need that meagre sum you're offering, give us 5 times that.". It's the influx of cash that led to the increased transfers.


  • #189
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    Arghus wrote: »
    I'm not disputing that he was rich or that Blackburn's success wasn't wholly reliant on money! But I do think you have to take into account that he was a genuine supporter of the club. Many fans dream of being of becoming so loaded that they can power their club to glory. That's what he did. I think there's some romance in that, whereas there's literally none in the oligarchs and billionaires approach of today.

    In fairness to Abramovich,the original bearer of the brunt of soccer romantics, his love for and commitment to the club, on a personal level, is indisputable now.


  • #190
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,661 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    The Talking Bread wrote: »
    In fairness to Abramovich,the original bearer of the brunt of soccer romantics, his love for and commitment to the club, on a personal level, is indisputable now.

    Pumping endless millions into something can be unbeatable catalyst for true love.


  • #191
    Kirby
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,084 ✭✭✭✭Kirby


    Chelsea still have the same owner after countless know-it-all's claimed he would ride off into the sunset over a decade ago after getting bored.

    Chelsea are self sufficient....and have been for years. I think any comparison to PSG and Qatar with Chelsea is a weak one. PSG are so far from balancing their books legitamtely it's hilarious.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,403 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    thebaz wrote: »
    thankfully there is more to football than just money - I remember when Blackburn came a power and that was enjoyable - but this is just horrible - a million a week - The league of Ireland for me (thankfully)

    Not at the top level. This is the direct consequence of FIFA selling their crown jewel to Qatar; Barcelona taking that sweet sweet Qatari cash for whoring their jerseys; Barca doing whatever dodginess was required to get Neymar in the first place. If you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas, etc. These boys have no loyalty, no respect of tradition. When it suited them, they took what they wanted from Barca. They will continue to take what they want, they are going to will Man City and PSG to the top of the European game through sheer resource and power, and nothing will stop them.

    This is beautiful to me, because FFP was such a hypocritical and cynical dog and pony show which most fans swallowed up whole. On one hand, talking about protecting clubs from financial ruin, while on the other selling the World Cup for brown envelopes. Out of one side of the mouth giving places to smaller teams in the group stages of the Champions League, while from the other attempting to pull up the drawbridge to seal off the very top table from the likes of City / PSG / Chelsea. Did the game think they could take those brown envelopes in one room, while trying to shut down that money in another? Pure folly.


  • #193
    Dirty Dingus McGee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Dirty Dingus McGee


    Kirby wrote: »
    Chelsea still have the same owner after countless know-it-all's claimed he would ride off into the sunset over a decade ago after getting bored.

    Chelsea are self sufficient....and have been for years. I think any comparison to PSG and Qatar with Chelsea is a weak one. PSG are so far from balancing their books legitamtely it's hilarious.


    So were Chelsea at one point.

    PSG's owners have only been there for 5 or 6 years.


  • #194
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Rezident wrote: »
    Barcelona didn't turn down the payment, La Liga did, could get interesting now.

    €222m is a great deal - especially for player who played very poorly for the whole first half of last season. He is a super player but nobody bar Messi is worth that sort of money.

    Even Messi isnt worth that much money. Not the actual contract which I dont have a problem with but the fee is to high, it will not be surpassed for me


  • #195
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    thebaz wrote: »
    great PSG have signed a top player -I'll ditch my team and buy the shirt - people will think I'm great in a PSG Neymar shirt - I find this a particularly sad day for football , it became a plaything or fad for Rich idle Quatar men - once they get bored they will move on to something else - PSG will just run away with there league whers the fun in that - like Celtic winning in Scotland -expectation with little competition - great

    Or Bayern in Germany
    Or Barcelona since they have won 6 of the last ten titles
    PSG are favourites for the title with or without Neymar


  • #196
    Liam McPoyle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,846 ✭✭✭✭Liam McPoyle


    irishman86 wrote: »
    Even Messi isnt worth that much money. Not the actual contract which I dont have a problem with but the fee is to high, it will not be surpassed for me

    Agreed.

    Imo it's the peak of footballing transfers and is the equivalent of the .com bubble.


  • #197
    thebaz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,719 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    The Talking Bread wrote: »

    I just haven't a clue why you cited Blackburn in your post then and reminiscing over the wonderful Jack Walker era as they are a very poor example, relatively speaking, in the argument you are putting forward and your dismay as to how clubs are using financial power to dominate their respective competitions.


    I gave an example stating why I didn't mind rich Sugar Daddies up to a point , today the greed has turned me completely of the top of the end game - that all - then you accuse me of not knowing football - you enjoy Neymar at PSG - I won't - good luck


  • #198
    Skylinehead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,690 ✭✭✭✭Skylinehead


    Rod Munch wrote: »
    Agreed.

    Imo it's the peak of footballing transfers and is the equivalent of the .com bubble.

    There's signs of money running out in England/Europe alright, we've reached saturation point there. But there's far bigger markets to get money out of yet.


  • #199
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Arghus wrote: »
    I'm not disputing that he was rich or that Blackburn's success wasn't wholly reliant on money! But I do think you have to take into account that he was a genuine supporter of the club. Many fans dream of being of becoming so loaded that they can power their club to glory. That's what he did. I think there's some romance in that, whereas there's literally none in the oligarchs and billionaires approach of today.

    Well the ones that buy English clubs. But there is eastern european clubs owned by fans that are oligarchs. Im nearly certain Zenit is owned by the guy who is the biggest petrol man in Russia


  • #200
    The Talking Bread
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,050 ✭✭✭✭The Talking Bread


    thebaz wrote: »
    I gave an example stating why I didn't mind rich Sugar Daddies up to a point , today the greed has turned me completely of the top of the end game - that all - then you accuse me of not knowing football - you enjoy Neymar at PSG - I won't - good luck

    Stop sulking with faux outrage.

    Every one of your posts ends in a roundabout "This isn't fair", "the game I love is ruined", "This isn't right" "I don't relate to the players anymore" ,"I'm off" "Enjoy yourselves watching modern football" huff like manner before you return again and start muttering on about the romantics of a very badly ran and desperately in need of funds League of Ireland or of the joyous real footballing days when a multi multi millionaire, Jack Walker was essentially using the same methods almost 30 years ago with his daddy's money in an effort to build a team to dominate English football (his own words)


  • #201
    ThunbergsAreGo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,399 ✭✭✭✭ThunbergsAreGo


    Skylinehead wrote: »
    There's signs of money running out in England/Europe alright, we've reached saturation point there. But there's far bigger markets to get money out of yet.

    I think on Football Weekly they said the Premier LEague are expecting a 3bn increase in TV money in next negotiations driven by the overseas market


  • Advertisement
Advertisement