Premier League 22/23

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

What a save from Sanchez

Cafc43v3r said:

Rothko said:

In the space of 10 years the gap between United and City is about 50, the two clubs aren’t even close on the pitch anymore 

If you put over a billion into one club and take over a billion out of another that's what happens.

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

Rothko said:

In the space of 10 years the gap between United and City is about 50, the two clubs aren’t even close on the pitch anymore 

If you put over a billion into one club and take over a billion out of another that's what happens.

Man Utd have spent 1.4 billion in the past 11 years, the most in Europe

Surprised by that, would've thought City had spent more. How much have they spent?

Cafc43v3r said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

Rothko said:

In the space of 10 years the gap between United and City is about 50, the two clubs aren’t even close on the pitch anymore 

If you put over a billion into one club and take over a billion out of another that's what happens.

Man Utd have spent 1.4 billion in the past 11 years, the most in Europe
Edit - meant highest net spend, a few teams have spent more but generated much higher in player sales 

But one of the reasons Man United (well anyone actually) were so successful for so long was they generate much more income than almost anyone else.  I bet their budget is relatively (compared to everyone else) smaller than it was 15 years ago.

On the net spend they have been awful at selling players, as bad as they have been at buying them.

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

Rothko said:

In the space of 10 years the gap between United and City is about 50, the two clubs aren’t even close on the pitch anymore 

If you put over a billion into one club and take over a billion out of another that's what happens.

Man Utd have spent 1.4 billion in the past 11 years, the most in Europe
Edit - meant highest net spend, a few teams have spent more but generated much higher in player sales 

But one of the reasons Man United (well anyone actually) were so successful for so long was they generate much more income than almost anyone else.  I bet their budget is relatively (compared to everyone else) smaller than it was 15 years ago.

On the net spend they have been awful at selling players, as bad as they have been at buying them.

Of course but whilst the owners are clearly quite controversial and not liked, they still spend over 100 million every summer. City are miles ahead of the likes of Utd purely because they’ve spent it much better

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

ricky_otto said:

ForeverAddickted said:

Wow Man Utd look utter shit

Notice that Sarmiento is on the bench for Brighton 

I think you are being kind there. Their midfield is embarrassing. The right back is absolutely dreadful. They can change as many managers as they like, but if you persist with those 2 jokers in midfield, there is no hope. 

I know they've been laughably persisting in chasing de Jong for about 3 months but they really should've moved on and signed someone else weeks ago.

Could've got Bissouma for 30m, make a bid for Ruben Neves? 

Rothko said:

Potter to replace Southgate, when the time comes? 

North Lower Neil said:

Fortune 82nd Minute said:

ValleyGary said:

Rashford is nicking a living at this point. Body language is atrocious.

Yup. He needs to decide whether he wants a career in politics or football.

Also clear to a blind man Ronaldo wants out. Why keep him -and pay him £500k a week - when it would be better all round to move him on.

They'd be happy to get rid but no one else wants him!

se9addick said:

North Lower Neil said:

Ten Hag won't be able to fix things overnight but they badly need a proper defensive midfielder and a striker.

Right back too but the other 2 need to be their priority.

But you, I and anyone who watches Premier League football could have told you in May that United need to strengthen those areas as a priority. Why have we got to August and they still haven’t sorted themselves out despite some big salaries moving off of their wage bill this summer?

SELR_addicks said:

https://twitter.com/FabrizioRomano/status/1556298814855823360

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

cafcfan1990 said:

Cafc43v3r said:

Rothko said:

In the space of 10 years the gap between United and City is about 50, the two clubs aren’t even close on the pitch anymore 

If you put over a billion into one club and take over a billion out of another that's what happens.

Man Utd have spent 1.4 billion in the past 11 years, the most in Europe
Edit - meant highest net spend, a few teams have spent more but generated much higher in player sales 

But one of the reasons Man United (well anyone actually) were so successful for so long was they generate much more income than almost anyone else.  I bet their budget is relatively (compared to everyone else) smaller than it was 15 years ago.

On the net spend they have been awful at selling players, as bad as they have been at buying them.

Of course but whilst the owners are clearly quite controversial and not liked, they still spend over 100 million every summer. City are miles ahead of the likes of Utd purely because they’ve spent it much better

It's a world away from the likes of us, but in todays market spending 100m every summer isn't that out of the ordinary and certainly not for a club of United's size with their revenue. For the level they want to be at, that's one world class player these days. Players they could really do with, like Kane or Declan Rice would cost even more.

As you say though their issue isn't really how much they spend, it's how badly they spend it. City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Spurs and now probably Arsenal too have spent far better in recent seasons.