Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
CosbehFox

The "do they mean us?" thread pt 2

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Very true and I'd agree, but they only lost game last year and still didn't win the title, they basically draw to many games, Man City lost 4 and still won the title.

 

Football is a funny game, that has a habit of throwing up amazing stories, Rodgers stopping Liverpool would be such a quirk of fate. 

 

I don't think it will happen, and I think we should all focus on enjoying the ride.

Kinda like all the good will Chelsea gave us and Claudio in 2016. Only this time we'd be preventing them from winning something.

 

It has to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sylofox said:

Possible boxing night we could be just 2pts behind them. Yes they will have a game in hand. 

 

But who will the pressure be on.

Just to extend your "dream scenario" a step further we play West Ham on 28th Dec so we could be a point ahead at the top by the time they play Wolves on 29th.

 

I've put this at the very top of my wish list for Santa! :celebrate: 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Corky said:

It will sink eventually that the reason we enjoyed that so much, and our current performance, is because we don't think we are something special or entitled and are proud we're working very hard to achieve something against supposed special clubs.

 

The last thing I'd want to be is part of a snobbish elite who think we have a divine right to be somewhere.

Our fans are basically becoming like spurs  fans in 2016 already 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

1368642995_Screenshot2019-12-11at12_40_14.thumb.png.395341cd6998ef55f4f5ac89a4d495b2.png

 

Fun fact: More players have gone from Manchester United to Leicester rather than the other way round in the last 7 years, and 2 of them have Premier League winners medals which they would not have won at Old Trafford.

He does have a point somewhat. That and a shit load of money they can offer. If we can offer someone like Madison 85k a week but man u can offer him 150k a week then it's not easy to keep your talent. 

 

I think the balance in power is shifting but those clubs do have a prestige to a lot of footballers and it's silly to deny. Of course everything changes and it could just as likely happen that Man u keep making enough bad investments until they're nobodies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

1368642995_Screenshot2019-12-11at12_40_14.thumb.png.395341cd6998ef55f4f5ac89a4d495b2.png

 

Fun fact: More players have gone from Manchester United to Leicester rather than the other way round in the last 7 years, and 2 of them have Premier League winners medals which they would not have won at Old Trafford.

There’s about 20 clubs in the country bigger than Man City historically though, the fact they are seen as “big” now disproves his argument as they were able to break into the “big” clubs that supposedly no one can compete with

Edited by OadbyBlue
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry - he is correct. :dunno:

 

it could change, but it would take a decades, and it is highly unlikely that it is Manchester United that surrender their top 6 place in the longer term.

Pretty much any of the others except Liverpool (and *yuk* maybe Arsenal) could lose their cast iron top 6 status within 5-10 years I think if they remain/become cack for such a period of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Sorry - he is correct. :dunno:

 

it could change, but it would take a decades, and it is highly unlikely that it is Manchester United that surrender their top 6 place in the longer term.

Pretty much any of the others except Liverpool (and *yuk* maybe Arsenal) could lose their cast iron top 6 status within 5-10 years I think if they remain/become cack for such a period of time.

It took Man City 3 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, OadbyBlue said:

It took Man City 3 years

This is clearly not a model we are interested in/capable of following (££££££££££££££££££££££££).

 

Edited by Dahnsouff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest An Sionnach

Only one player of high value moved domestically in the summer transfer window Harry. Now we know why we let him go, Rodgers was pretty sure Caglar would step straight in. If you couple that with Utd. paying 30 million over the odds that was understandable. I don't think Zaha will move to another premiership club either . He signed his contract so he has got to stay and earn his money. The worst club for selling major players has been Southampton and its teaching them a hard lesson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Only one player of high value moved domestically in the summer transfer window Harry. Now we know why we let him go, Rodgers was pretty sure Caglar would step straight in. If you couple that with Utd. paying 30 million over the odds that was understandable. I don't think Zaha will move to another premiership club either . He signed his contract so he has got to stay and earn his money. The worst club for selling major players has been Southampton and its teaching them a hard lesson.

Widely reported that they werent convinced in Caglar in August.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2019 at 07:41, Finnegan said:

Michael Owen once said Jamie Vardy isn't a natural finisher. 

 

Let that sink in. 

 

Man shouldn't ever have gotten on TV. 

"He just keeps his head down and smashes it" I believe the quote was

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, OadbyBlue said:

There’s about 20 clubs in the country bigger than Man City historically though, the fact they are seen as “big” now disproves his argument as they were able to break into the “big” clubs that supposedly no one can compete with

Man City were one of the 10 biggest clubs in the country before the take over 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Christoph said:

 

He does have a point somewhat. That and a shit load of money they can offer. If we can offer someone like Madison 85k a week but man u can offer him 150k a week then it's not easy to keep your talent. 

 

I think the balance in power is shifting but those clubs do have a prestige to a lot of footballers and it's silly to deny. Of course everything changes and it could just as likely happen that Man u keep making enough bad investments until they're nobodies. 

 

27 minutes ago, OadbyBlue said:

There’s about 20 clubs in the country bigger than Man City historically though, the fact they are seen as “big” now disproves his argument as they were able to break into the “big” clubs that supposedly no one can compete with

 

27 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Sorry - he is correct. :dunno:

 

it could change, but it would take a decades, and it is highly unlikely that it is Manchester United that surrender their top 6 place in the longer term.

Pretty much any of the others except Liverpool (and *yuk* maybe Arsenal) could lose their cast iron top 6 status within 5-10 years I think if they remain/become cack for such a period of time.

 

24 minutes ago, OadbyBlue said:

It took Man City 3 years

Just to point out a fallacy in his own argument - he’s right that some clubs are bigger than others. But he also states that players chose Man Utd over Liverpool for 30 years while they were in the shadow of Utd. Which is also true. They were in their shadow, and now they’re having a resurgence.
 

Football is fluid - dominance doesn’t last forever; so called big clubs slip up and lose their divine right to their spot. 
 

Leeds are 3 times champions of England and they’ve been out of the Premier League for 20 years. Everton are 9 times winners but have been mid table for 30 years. Spurs are shit and always have been. Manchester City and Chelsea have both bought their way in. 
 

The future is ours. **** Man Utd. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When people start discussing size, I'm reminded of people making the metaphor of their relationship with the club being like a marriage. 

 

In that context, I don't care how rich or beautiful other peoples' spouses are, I couldn't love mine more. What a club we support. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Abrasive fox said:

Widely reported that they werent convinced in Caglar in August.

Indeed ……. we were definitely in for a replacement after harry went …..

 

5 minutes ago, Stadt said:

Man City were one of the 10 biggest clubs in the country before the take over 

also true although before takshin got involved they were a bit less high profile - a mid table prem side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

 

 

Just to point out a fallacy in his own argument - he’s right that some clubs are bigger than others. But he also states that players chose Man Utd over Liverpool for 30 years while they were in the shadow of Utd. Which is also true. They were in their shadow, and now they’re having a resurgence.
 

Football is fluid - dominance doesn’t last forever; so called big clubs slip up and lose their divine right to their spot. 
 

Leeds are 3 times champions of England and they’ve been out of the Premier League for 20 years. Everton are 9 times winners but have been mid table for 30 years. Spurs are shit and always have been. Manchester City and Chelsea have both bought their way in. 
 

The future is ours. **** Man Utd. 

I wish you were right. The clubs you mention, Leeds, Everton were significant clubs for sure. They just happened to be significant before the Premier League era.

How did Liverpool get away with it then I hear you cry! 

**** knows I respond. Corruption, bribery, probably

 

Sky Sports (And presumably any other incumbent) would never let such clubs fade away as Leeds have done, they are too beneficial globally for their profits

Edited by Dahnsouff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...