Can anyone explain Man City's mteroic rise to me?

  1. To answer this just watch Newcastle over the next few years. Man City used be on par with Newcastle, mediocre with always the chance of being relegated. Chelsea were at least in the running for the FA Cup before their bucket load of cash came flowing from the oil well.

  2. They took Barcelona's CEO (Serrano) and Technical Director (Begiristain) in order to improve their recruitment. They then broke FFP to buy any and all players they wanted to fit their (Pep's) mold. If a player doesn't work, they just buy another one, which is why their bench is better than most Premier League clubs. FFP is a way to make sure that rich owners cant just come in and use their wealth, as this would bury smaller clubs (as we are already seeing).

  3. From a structural point of view Man City was very smart in how they built the hierarchy. They hired Barcelona’s then chief of revenue on the board of directors Sorriano, as CEO for Man City, and he brought with him Barcelona’s director of football at the time, Txiki Begiristain. Txiki what is responsible for building the Champions League winning teams under Frank Rijkaard and Pep Guardiola, i’m pretty sure he was the guy that hired him at Barcelona. And he went to Man City he wanted to build a team that epitomised the type of teams he had built at Barca from 2003-2010. In essence they had been building a team fit for Pep Guardiola since 2012, so by the time Pep arrived he had most of the players he’d have wanted. I’m pretty sure KDB was signed for Pep as well before he came from Bayern. On top of that they made sure that the academy players were playing the same style of football so when they grew up they could integrate into the first team easier as well. Couple that with smart recruitment, a good eye for talent, and a hefty bank account, and it’s a good recipe for success

  4. People have rightfully pointed out that spending money is no guarantee of success - Man U being a great example. But it's worth looking at exactly how much more City have spent than anyone else since Sheikh Mansour took over. Transfermarkt show that city have spent

  5. A common misconception was that it was all only money. The owners were smart and the people who they appointed signed the right players to accommodate the manager. Obviously the money was essential to convince the players to come, but let Everton be an example, when we’ve spent 500 million in the past few years, but we signed the wrong people and we’re still exactly where we were. It’s the same reason that it annoys me how people think Newcastle will instantly be incredible and win everything, because they still need to bring in the right staff for the job and it still remains to be seen whether their owners are stupid or not

  6. The point is they’re able to make mistakes and go again without much of a downside. Spend 60m on Mangala, 50m on Otamendi, eventually one sticks in Dias.

  7. "Little Brother" is a bit Patronizing. You could ask how did Man Utd go from Manchester's second club (which they very much were until the Busby Babes) to being the first nation-spanning (and global-spanning) fan club which happened to be based near Manchester.

  8. Not patronising at all mate. Robinho went to Manchester not knowing they exist. Just like the rest of the world.

  9. City is one of the best run football clubs in the world and had sucess like no other teams the past 10 years both on and off the pitch due to excellent mangement and executions of long term plans of the club.

  10. As others have said it's basically money. But it's money spent well. Thaksin Shinawatra spent plenty of money, but in haphazard way and things didn't go anywhere. When Abu Dhabi took over they had a clear plan and direction. They spent wisely and appointed good football people to important positions at the club.

  11. They won the league under Mancini when Fergie-led United were the dominant team in the league. City's success isn't all down to Pep.

  12. There have been plenty of very expensive transfer flops in recent years, unlike other clubs who have to balance the books City just buy more players. Defence has been a revolving door until recently.

  13. Same like any big club: money. "Historic" clubs like Real, Man U, Juve or others have also been built thanks to their owners money, it was just done a long time ago and so now they appear as established institution. Give it 20 years and Man City will be in the same position.

  14. They injected a lot of money into the club and had a long term plan. They went and got one of the most talented managers of all time in Pep Guardiola and he has been implementing his vision for the past few years. It took them a while, but they built up a squad of some of the best players in the world and they play a tactically astute system. They have some of the best strength in depth of any team in the world :)

  15. It’s not “salt”. It’s true. Loads of money injected so they could put the best people in every position. Lack of ffp at the start meant they could do what they wanted.

  16. Dodgy sponsorship money during the early Sheik years. I don’t doubt that everything is above board and legal now. But their rise was certainly helped by shenanigans early on. Why in the world would someone like Aguero accept a contract at City back in the day? Beyond the mere wage that others could match. Mancini already admitted to off book payments. Aguero most certainly made way more than what his contact was worth. And don’t give me any bullshit about Aguero “really liking the project”.

  17. Both Chelsea and City were much better when they got taken over than what Newcastle are now. Chelsea was already a Champions league team and City were a pretty comfortable midtable team then

  18. Do you really think so? Both Chelski and €ity were financially taken over before financial fairplay. It looks like newcastle will have a harder time

  19. We have shit owners who have no interest in the football side. At least their cunts do it well. Our cunts are just cunts.

  20. That’s because Glazers only care about mooching off of the brand and legacy of Manchester United. They only care about the money.

  21. When a rich Emirati Sheik has too much money and wants to buy a football club, they look to invest in a mediocre team with a fan base that could fit into a tiny village. And that's how it happened

  22. I mean to be fair man city has one league titles before the premier league when it was called league one and during the 70’s and and 80’s Liverpool dominated England so Manchester United never one that many league titles

  23. Don’t entirely agree with this one. Yes they definitely spent money…but not to the extent of the money in short periods of time that won Chelsea and City titles. Look at the 99 team. “You can’t win anything with kids”…

  24. Simple answer: Money. Billionaire owners. Same happened with Chelsea before. PSG is another example. The most recent one is Newcastle, they might be the richest team now, we’ll see how that goes. And Yes, Manchester United did buy most good players before but the money they made took a lot of years of hard work. Richard Dunne was City’s captain not too long ago … 😅 Anyway, it is what it is. 🤮

  25. United have spent a lot too but nowhere near as much. City have spent 1.3 billion on transfers alone, without even taking into account wages and the huge investment into infrastructure.

  26. Nobody seems to be elaborating on when the money came. So they got taken over in about 2007 by a mega rich company from Abu Dhabi and over a 4 or 5 year period they grew from a bang average lower mid table side to league winners

  27. Baffles me that people can’t see this. The money is relative to the value within the league at that point. United bought the best players so they had the best team. They can whine about city all day long, about plastic fans, there’s a generation of Utd fans from all across the uk simply because they were the best team with the star players.

  28. Smart decisions in managers. They started with Mark Hughes, who wasn't great, but then Mancini, Pellegrini, Guardiola... All excellent managers who knew how to work with expensive teams.

  29. Everyone is saying money but the fact is that money doesn’t just make a great team. Fulham spent over 100m and got relegated, same with QPR. City had a lot of money and some dodgy things (stadium name and sponsors overpaying 3x) but they hired advisors to help then start to turn into a superpower. Instead of mindless spending they brought in big names like Toure and Robinho who brought fans to make spending more sustainable. Money certainly helped but you cant understate their brilliant management.

  30. The over inflated self sponsor myth is hilarious. Go and look at all the sponsors from that time and you’ll see the etihad deal was well below anyone else.

  31. Brilliant management my ass. They bought the best managers and the best players. £100m for one window didn't help Fulham but £400m every season for 10 years would

  32. It is money though…every failed £40m-£50m transfer had no negative impact on their budget, they just kept buying in that position until they got it right. Other teams can’t do that, a failed transfer in that range keeps them from splashing that kind of cash for a couple of seasons. So maybe not “mindless spending” it’s focused on needs, but they couldn’t care less if they get the first, second, third, etc. recruit wrong bc they’ll just keep buying until they get it right.

  33. City spend billions in transferfees, wages and the academy. And of course it’s the oil money. You can have the best runned club in the world, without money it won’t lead to this kind of success. City entered a cheatcode and at the time nobody wanted to stop them. We’ll see if Newcastle will be allowed to do the same.

  34. IIRC Robinho was the last day of the transfer window, the day the takeover by the Sheikh was confirmed.

  35. Not exactly. No doubt he developed them A LOT but they won a few PLs before his arrival...thanks to money.

  36. People say “money” as if they just came in, poured pounds onto the stadium and a team sprang up from it. The truth is more nuanced than that.

  37. Exactly this. A very nice summary of how City has sustained success with initially an investment by Sheikh Mansour to how they are self sustainable by virtue of successful investments throughout the world.

  38. Correct they never needed the money. It didn’t even help. I would go as far as to say it hindered them. Without all the money Man City would be the songle greatest club in the universe. Damn this oil money! It ruined everything for City.

  39. "Sustainable player purchases" since 15/16 city have bought 19 players for over £25m and have sold 3 players for over £25m in that time. That is not sustainable. That is the fact that they have endless wealth at their disposal and little to no risk if a transfer doesn't work out as they'll just replace the failure next transfer window. The other things you have pointed out are relevant points in making City strong for a long period of time and not just temporary success but none of those things would have been possible without the attraction of the enormous amounts of money they have. There wouldn't have been any investment in their infrastructure and training and youth facilities. They wouldn't have attracted Txiki et al without the money they have to spend. They wouldn't attract the managers they have had. I wouldn't agree that they've "aimed" for domestic dominance first as they would kindly swap every trophy they've won bar the PL for 1 Champions League trophy. And the point about not overpaying was irrelevant in the last transfer window as they paid £100m for Grealish when they already had Foden and Sterling available in his position. And finally squad depth is because of money. They can buy more players than anyone else. They can pay those players more than most clubs would. Those players know they can play 10-15 games across all competitions and win 2 or 3 medals a year.

  40. It's not that much more nuanced. It was a boat load of money, and owners who understood the need for a strategy and the right people. But...all of that was enabled by having the kind of money where you can get all of the very best people and pay whatever you need to to get whatever you need.

  41. its not nuanced, its money. 50-60m are not "sustainable" player prices. Money doesnt mean the absence of good work or the guarantee of success, but the process of their success is enabled by sovereign wealth. Its not that complicated of a story, they can afford world class from the facilities to the manager and wouldnt you know it theyve ended up world class.

  42. I hate to say it as a Utd fan, but I just wish our structure behind the playing 11 was set up the city way, hopefully we have the man in Ralf that can start this work, Ole was great at getting the team and fans morale back up after Mourhino but his lack of tactical awareness and not having the bottle to confront the board cost him dearly.

  43. This is a great answer. I just want to point out that missed something in point no. 2, where I believe hiring Txiki was a considered part of the plan in bringing Pep over. Txiki was brought over first, which shows foresight in City's thinking. I would not be surprised if Ten Hag comes next to replace Pep when he finally calls it a day at City, since both have just signed contracts that ends in 2023 (coincidence?) and they have worked together at Bayern before.

  44. I find it quite funny (or it’s a wind-up) that anyone older than 13 needs to ask a stupid question like this…

  45. They were simply given billions of pounds. It honestly as as simple as that. They were like the equivalent size of Bournemouth or so beforehand.

  46. In terms of support, they were closer to the likes of West Ham, Everton or Derby than Bournemouth. Bournemouth are a very small club who themselves are overachieving just by being in the top half of the Championship.

  47. Well, to be fair and honest with the incredible work the people in the club has put down the last decade, it's still just a matter of theft, slavery, murder and bribes.

  48. I need to see Pep manage a club that doesn't have practically unlimited funds for a change, until he makes a success of that he will always be the bald fraud in my eyes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin