Joan Laporta

[serghei]

What is relevance of it either way?

The relevance is that players and managers count the most. Money doesn't buy you the best players if those players play for bigger clubs.

Doesn't buy you a new Ferguson, just because you pay 150m on some player doesn't mean you get the next Drogba etc. The whole talk around EPL is as if having more money is the end goal.

 

[JamDav1982]

The relevance is that players and managers count the most. Money doesn't buy you the best players if those players play for bigger clubs.

Doesn't buy you a new Ferguson, just because you pay 150m on some player doesn't mean you get the next Drogba etc. The whole talk around EPL is as if having more money is the end goal.

No that doesnt explain the relevance of why you are asking to compare eras.

I could think EPL was better then or now and it would not change any point made.

United were the biggest spenders for vast majority of Fergies time there and likes of Drogba ended up at Chelsea due to a billionaire owner with them being highest spending club going.

Fergie won 2 CLs in 26 years also.

Still not relevant at all though.

 

[serghei]

But you dont want to compare teams. You only think who wins counts.

There have been x3 winners from EPL and more runners up than anyone else in recent years.

EPL teams have beat other EPL teams to stop them winning it in finals etc.

Not just who wins. But who competes at the top. Few in EPL did consistently, bar City who are a mess now.

All this talk about Liverpool, but they got 3-0ed by Atalanta in Europa League at home not long ago.

 

[JamDav1982]

Not just who wins. But who competes at the top. Few in EPL did consistently, bar City who are a mess now.

All this talk about Liverpool, but they got 3-0ed by Atalanta in Europa League at home not long ago.

Few in EPL competed at top of CL?

There have been x3 different winners of CL in last ten years and multiple beaten finalists.

No other league has that.

Liverpool have won the CL and been to a final since anyone in Spain bar Real got to a final.

No is saying same teams dominate every year or dont get bad results.

 

[serghei]

No that doesnt explain the relevance of why you are asking to compare eras.

I could think EPL was better then or now and it would not change any point made.

United were the biggest spenders for vast majority of Fergies time there and likes of Drogba ended up at Chelsea due to a billionaire owner with them being highest spending club going.

Still not relevant at all though.

I'm comparing eras to show you there is no clear link between more money and better elite performances. The increase of money of EPL teams is just a bubble so far. It doesn't translate to any superiority. It mostly means you pay 80m for players you used to sign for 25 15 years ago.

It's a gold mine for smaller clubs, the feeders for these big clubs who simply sell at a much higher price point.

 

[JamDav1982]

I'm comparing eras to show you there is no clear link between more money and better elite performances. The increase of money of EPL teams is just a bubble so far. It doesn't translate to any superiority. It mostly means you pay 80m for players you used to sign for 25 15 years ago.

Money absolutely plays a huge part.

You are speaking nonsense.

Real, Barca, Bayern & PSG are taking players from mid to lower EPL teams and they are amongst some of their best players.

This absolutely was not happening in 05/06 etc.

 

[serghei]

Money absolutely plays a huge part.

Then why don't EPL teams dominate as much as in mid 00s with all that extra revenue?

Why only 1 CL semifinal appearance in last 2 seasons? Why most dominating EPL side of the last 5 years barely made it top 24 last season?

 

[JamDav1982]

Then why don't EPL dominate as much as in mid 00s with all that extra revenue?

Again.. Chelsea were the top spending club in world in that time.

When are you claiming was this time that EPL was at its most dominant? What seasons?

Even if I think it was better then it makes no difference to any point made.

 

[serghei]

Again.. Chelsea were the top spending club in world in that time.

So, inflation. Spending much more now, can yield lower results. You spend more for poorer players. The more teams have money in EPL, the higher the price gets for same or lower quality.

 

[JamDav1982]

So, inflation. Spending much more now, can yield lower results. You spend more for poorer players.

Again... Barca, Real, Bayern and PSG are signing players from mid to lower EPL teams.

Didnt happen back then.

 

[serghei]

Few in EPL competed at top of CL?

There have been x3 different winners of CL in last ten years and multiple beaten finalists.

No other league has that.

Liverpool have won the CL and been to a final since anyone in Spain bar Real got to a final.

No is saying same teams dominate every year or dont get bad results.

Not at the same time. When one is good, other is bad. It's nature of sports. If 4 teams have objective to win a league, at least 2 will be pissed they got nothing. Sacking the manager, turmoil, fans pissed.

Either 2 sides become true powerhouses and dominate the rest, or no one does.

This supposed top 6 is bullshit. Top 6 means you don't have a team great enough to be a front runner. When City and Liverpool upped their level they choked the league at the top. They had no issues turning it into a 2-team affair at some point.

 

[JamDav1982]

3 teams being the best in Europe is more than any other league has had in that time frame.

Also defeated finalists on multiple occassions so yes at the same time.

Moan about 2 teams while no other league even has more than one team winning it.

When was the mid 00s golden era you are referring to in comparison?

Made out to be a negative if multiple teams can win CL.. top stuff.

 

[serghei]

3 teams being the best in Europe is more than any other league has had in that time frame.

Also defeated finalists on multiple occassions so yes at the same time.

Moan about 2 teams while no other league even has more than one team winning it.

When was the mid 00s golden era you are referring to in comparison?

They took turns. They didn't dominate at the same time. Chelsea were a fluke, went from winning the CL to being a midtable side soon after.

 

[JamDav1982]

They took turns. They didn't dominate at the same time.

As opposed to Spain, Germany and France who never took any turns and one team won CL.

And no they didnt take turns EPL teams defeated other EPL teams in finals etc.

Not happening elsewhere in same time.

When was the mid 00s golden era for EPL?

 

[serghei]

As opposed to Spain, Germany and France who never took any turns and one team won CL.

And no they didnt take turns EPL teams defeated other EPL teams in finals etc.

Not happening elsewhere in same time.

When was the mid 00s golden era for EPL?

So? Spain has bigger clubs. They aren't going to fall off like Chelsea and play Conferrence League.