|
City would win the Quadraple; According to Kompany
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 17 2014, 12:16 PM (1,176 Views)
|
|
supercollider7
|
Jan 20 2014, 11:03 AM
Post #31
|
|
- Posts:
- 2,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Jul 9, 2013
|
It is pretty cringeworthy how the pundits/media fawn over Chelsea and Man City, like they are some plucky underdogs who are betraying the odds by winning. At the same time Arsenal are derided because they don't have 100m to spend every summer.
But I don't mind the spending. There are ways around it. As Martinez recently said, you can compete with a financial disadvantage, but you need time. Unfortunately our players weren't patient enough in recent years but I think now we will hold onto them and the team we are putting together will be able to compete with anyone.
|
|
|
| |
|
dsch15
|
Jan 20 2014, 11:44 AM
Post #32
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,526
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Jul 5, 2013
|
That's a scary table, but it leaves out part of the story. We were never going to match (or even approach) the amounts thrown around by City and their like. What we might have done better, though, is leverage higher spending to induce the good players we already had to stay. We didn't need multiple super signings, just the occasional one that would demonstrate to Cesc, RvP, etc. that they could win things at Arsenal.
Edited by dsch15, Jan 20 2014, 11:44 AM.
|
|
|
| |
|
santry_gooner
|
Jan 20 2014, 05:11 PM
Post #33
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,772
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jul 4, 2013
|
- phatosas
- Jan 20 2014, 03:44 AM
By the way I find all the praise that City get absolutely disgusting considering how much they have spent to get here. It is almost like an athlete that dopes getting praise for dominating other competitors. I hope financial fair play would stop that type of obscene spending. This is City's spending compared to Arsenal and Chelsea since the sheik took over the club.  Total spent: Arsenal = £215.1M, or $353.2M Chelsea = £445.6M, or $731.7M Man City = £668.6M, or $1.097 billion Net spending: Arsenal = £11.1M, or $18.2M Chelsea = £328.7M, or $539.7M Man City = £509.6M, or $836.8M You must remember the term 'financial doping' that used to get discussed when people here didn't hide in little shells of 'winner take all'.
|
|
|
| |
|
santry_gooner
|
Jan 20 2014, 05:13 PM
Post #34
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,772
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jul 4, 2013
|
- Joe Bobs Fine Foods
- Jan 19 2014, 11:55 PM
- dsch15
- Jan 19 2014, 11:39 PM
- dream_team
- Jan 19 2014, 09:04 AM
- Gooner0893
- Jan 19 2014, 08:52 AM
- phatosas
- Jan 19 2014, 05:24 AM
- santry_gooner
- Jan 19 2014, 03:59 AM
City have a run of difficult games coming up. I seem to recall Kompany running his mouth 18 months ago about City easily retaining the title...... What disturbs me is that City has one decent centre half and it's him. All the other also rans who rotate in and out of the side should surely be something he's aware of.
I don't see Barca as the threat to them as billed here. I actually think Pellegrini knows Barca so well that he knows how to shore up the holes that they will find in City's midfield of 4-4-2.
I was looking at the fixtures and I think if we can beat Southampton away from home on Tuesday and Palace on the weekend, we could open up a small gap. City's corresponding fixtures are Spurs away and Chelsea at home. Surely they have to drop points in those two games. Arsenal also play both games before them and as long as we win our games, it would put them under pressure. I am hoping United do us a favor later today but I am not counting on it. As for the Champions League, I really havent seen Barca play this season and clearly dont know what to expect. However apart from the game against Arsenal in December and the dead rubber against Bayern, they havent really had a difficult game in a while. The amount of pressure winning the CL puts on a team is enormous. When Chelsea and Liverpool won it, they didnt finish in the top 4 and even Arsenal had our best CL run when we almost finished outside the top 4. City are walking into uncharted teritory and I dont think they understand what the demands of going for all 4 competitions would do to the team. As for City's squad depth, from what I have seen so far this season, they have a fantastic right back in Zabaleta but no back up. They have two left backs that are decent but not great. They have one central defender in Kompany that is world class, Nastatic looks decent but Demichelis is a bumbling oaf in my opinion and Lescott has been poor. In central midfield they have Yaya and Fernadinho, Javi Garcia is average in my opinion. However because they play a 4-4-2, they can rotate one or the other with Garcia in the smaller games. As creative players they have Nasri(injured), Navas and Silva playing in the two wide areas. Milner provides an option when they want to go for a bit of solidity. The attack is where they really have their depth and they have maximized their potential by playing two strikers and running up cricket scores. They have really started to believe their hype but when the games start to come thick and fast, this squad would get stretched to breaking point.
Phato, I think that City has the most depth and here is why. Their back right back is Micah Richard who just returned from injury. You forgot to mention him. He is probably the best backup RB in the league. They also have Jovetic who is a winger/striker. I don't think he has played much because of injury but if he is available, that's another option they have on the wings. But these are their vulnerabilities in my opinion. They do not have a sturdy enforcer at DM. It is a good midfield with Yaya, Fernandhino and Garcia but it's not the most physical. I also think that if either Kompany or Yaya gets injured, they will be vulnerable. They have as good a squad if not a better one than Barca right now. Their defense remains a weakness but their strikeforce is so potent, it doesnt matter most of the time. They lost Aguero who is a arguably their best player for more than a month and didn't miss a beat. I think they may drop points to Tots away but I dont see them dropping points against Chelsea at the Etihad. They regularly beat Chelsea at the Etihad and haven't dropped points there this season in the league. I expect Mourhino to set up his team to defend the way he did when Chelsea came to the Emirates but City is a different beast at home. Its not by accident that they average four goals per game at home. They will score goals. Even though I think they can get past Barca, I don't think they can win the CL. In my opinion, Barca's experience in Europe is the only big advantage they have over City. On the home front, they are already in the CC final and have experience winning the premier league after going toe to toe with United. That is something that Arsenal does not have. Chelsea and City have that. That is why I have said from the beginning that Chelsea and City are the fovourites to win the league. They have the most depth and talent, and they are the most experienced teams. That experience is going to be huge down the stretch.
I'm not sure if Phato forgot Jovetic or he's thinking along the line of what I'm thinking. I doubt Jovetic will feature this season, he's got a mixture of 'diabiness' and psychology issues. If you listen closely to what pellegrini says, he's giving a hint that Jovetic's problem is not only injury. I still insist Arsenal has the most depth in the league and we should be at least 6 points clear at the top at this point.
Your continued insistence is not convincing. You've picked a number without substantiation. Please find something objective to back this claim up or find a new refrain.
Well, in fairness to Pizzy: with correct officiating in Chelsea and City matches that is about where we would be. Agreed.
|
|
|
| |
|
supercollider7
|
Jan 20 2014, 08:13 PM
Post #35
|
|
- Posts:
- 2,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Jul 9, 2013
|
Against Chelsea? Perhaps. City? No chance. Maybe Toure's tackle, if spotted, warranted a red but we were completely outplayed in the last 15-20 minutes and that means 11 v 11 we were always going to lose that game.
But yeah, I'm also wondering where pizzy's 6 points come from. And I don't get his logic either. Apparently our players aren't good enough, our manager is crap, but we have the best team with the best depth and we should be running away with the title. Makes sense.
|
|
|
| |
|
santry_gooner
|
Jan 21 2014, 02:05 AM
Post #36
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,772
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jul 4, 2013
|
- supercollider7
- Jan 20 2014, 08:13 PM
Against Chelsea? Perhaps. City? No chance. Maybe Toure's tackle, if spotted, warranted a red but we were completely outplayed in the last 15-20 minutes and that means 11 v 11 we were always going to lose that game.
But yeah, I'm also wondering where pizzy's 6 points come from. And I don't get his logic either. Apparently our players aren't good enough, our manager is crap, but we have the best team with the best depth and we should be running away with the title. Makes sense. Like we said in the game thread, ultimately City went on to win handsomely and we fell apart for two 10 minute stretches. But, I would like to see what would happen if we got the handball decision or if either of the poor offside shouts were made correctly. The game had a few turning points and by no means was 6-3 a reflection of the teams.
This is Pizzy. You know fully well that the six points he refers to are ones where he thinks Wenger made poor selections. He's blinkered to everything else.
|
|
|
| |
|
Joe Bobs Fine Foods
|
Jan 21 2014, 03:02 AM
Post #37
|
|
- Posts:
- 4,007
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #10
- Joined:
- Jul 4, 2013
|
- supercollider7
- Jan 20 2014, 08:13 PM
Against Chelsea? Perhaps. City? No chance. Maybe Toure's tackle, if spotted, warranted a red but we were completely outplayed in the last 15-20 minutes and that means 11 v 11 we were always going to lose that game.
But yeah, I'm also wondering where pizzy's 6 points come from. And I don't get his logic either. Apparently our players aren't good enough, our manager is crap, but we have the best team with the best depth and we should be running away with the title. Makes sense. I wasn't referring to our matches.
|
|
|
| |
|
dream_team
|
Jan 21 2014, 06:25 AM
Post #38
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,001
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #53
- Joined:
- Dec 4, 2013
|
- santry_gooner
- Jan 21 2014, 02:05 AM
- supercollider7
- Jan 20 2014, 08:13 PM
Against Chelsea? Perhaps. City? No chance. Maybe Toure's tackle, if spotted, warranted a red but we were completely outplayed in the last 15-20 minutes and that means 11 v 11 we were always going to lose that game.
But yeah, I'm also wondering where pizzy's 6 points come from. And I don't get his logic either. Apparently our players aren't good enough, our manager is crap, but we have the best team with the best depth and we should be running away with the title. Makes sense.
Like we said in the game thread, ultimately City went on to win handsomely and we fell apart for two 10 minute stretches. But, I would like to see what would happen if we got the handball decision or if either of the poor offside shouts were made correctly. The game had a few turning points and by no means was 6-3 a reflection of the teams. This is Pizzy. You know fully well that the six points he refers to are ones where he thinks Wenger made poor selections. He's blinkered to everything else. dude 6-3 was a fair reflection, theo's goal was a GK blunder and city could have scored 10.
|
|
|
| |
|
dream_team
|
Jan 21 2014, 06:28 AM
Post #39
|
|
- Posts:
- 9,001
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #53
- Joined:
- Dec 4, 2013
|
- phatosas
- Jan 20 2014, 03:44 AM
By the way I find all the praise that City get absolutely disgusting considering how much they have spent to get here. It is almost like an athlete that dopes getting praise for dominating other competitors. I hope financial fair play would stop that type of obscene spending. This is City's spending compared to Arsenal and Chelsea since the sheik took over the club.  Total spent: Arsenal = £215.1M, or $353.2M Chelsea = £445.6M, or $731.7M Man City = £668.6M, or $1.097 billion Net spending: Arsenal = £11.1M, or $18.2M Chelsea = £328.7M, or $539.7M Man City = £509.6M, or $836.8M Phato when the sheiks took over, city were a midtable team how do you expect them to win the title ahead of the likes of United and Chelsea without spending big? how do you expect them to attract big names to the club? The fact that Arsenal net spending was so low tells you only one thing, Arsenal had assets to sell, city had no assets to sell, guess why? because they had midtable players.
|
|
|
| |
|
supercollider7
|
Jan 21 2014, 10:08 AM
Post #40
|
|
- Posts:
- 2,262
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Jul 9, 2013
|
- dream_team
- Jan 21 2014, 06:25 AM
- santry_gooner
- Jan 21 2014, 02:05 AM
- supercollider7
- Jan 20 2014, 08:13 PM
Against Chelsea? Perhaps. City? No chance. Maybe Toure's tackle, if spotted, warranted a red but we were completely outplayed in the last 15-20 minutes and that means 11 v 11 we were always going to lose that game.
But yeah, I'm also wondering where pizzy's 6 points come from. And I don't get his logic either. Apparently our players aren't good enough, our manager is crap, but we have the best team with the best depth and we should be running away with the title. Makes sense.
Like we said in the game thread, ultimately City went on to win handsomely and we fell apart for two 10 minute stretches. But, I would like to see what would happen if we got the handball decision or if either of the poor offside shouts were made correctly. The game had a few turning points and by no means was 6-3 a reflection of the teams. This is Pizzy. You know fully well that the six points he refers to are ones where he thinks Wenger made poor selections. He's blinkered to everything else.
dude 6-3 was a fair reflection, theo's goal was a GK blunder and city could have scored 10. LOLLLLLLLLLLLL
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|