airliebird9 wrote:What does age have to do with it??
How much is David Beckham on @ 33 years old??
How much of a transfer fee are LA Galaxy asking for same 33 year old??
I vaguely remember a figure of 106k/week for Michael Owen when he signed. No idea bout the others though, but far less than the 90k/week quoted though me thinks.....
Yes.. David Beckham, debatably the most marketable and recognisable footballer in the world and.. Nicky Butt. Eh?
Age does have a lot to do with it. I don't understand what David Beckham, a very isolated case in the world of football, has to do with what we're talking about here.
Your last paragraph is about right, Owen coming from Real Madrid at a decent age was always going to come at a price and Newcastle really had to pay a premium to get a player of Owen's pedigree to play for Newcastle. It's not like they knew he'd be injury so much of the time. Unfortunate for them really
Joined: Dec 21 2004 Posts: 23178 Location: Greatness
Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:My main concern is whether we've got someone lined up. If we haven't, it's another dumb move by Chelsea.
Abramovich has got rid of four managers since he bought the club. Getting rid of Mourinho is up there with the most stupid decisions in the history of football. Abramovich deserves to suffer for that.
Getting rid of Ranieri was done in a stupid manner because it hampered our efforts in the CL that season, but replacing him with Mourinho was totally the right thing to do.
Appointing Avram Grant was a ridiculous decision. He didn't have any credentials, any charisma, any record and he was seen as being the person brought in to remove Mourinho. His record while manager though was very good, but it was said to be down to the players themselves rather than him. I wasn't sad to see him gone and I don't regret him being sacked either. The main thing about Grant is why is hell did Chelsea give him a long contract and then sack him anyway.
I was pretty pleased with the appointment of Scolari, but nothing more. We did set out playing some more attractive football, and it obviously worked very early on for a while, but as soon as teams figured out how to play against us Scolari had no answer to that. One of the major things I didn't like with Scolari was his acceptance of duff decisions against us. This season we've been mugged by refs and he's just politely requested that refs apologise. If you are fighting for titles then you want to do everything in your power to get those titles. If that means giving refs stick when they **** up, then you give them stick. Accepting decisions meekly is a sign that you just don't want it enough. And if Scolari doesn't want to fight for honours while he was at Chelsea, but instead was just adding to his retirement fund then he can just **** right off.
I remained non-committal about Scolari so I'm not sure right now how I feel about him being sacked. He clearly hasn't been given enough time, but he didn't really have time on his side when he only signed a 2 year contract.
If we haven't got anyone lined up then it's just another **** up by Chelsea. My wildest dream is that we've got that Inter manager lined up, but that's not going to happen. Apart from him I don't really see who we will get. I don't really want Sven, Zola/Clarke is far too early, Capello would cause too much fuss, I suppose Hiddink would be the favourite but why didn't we go after him when we were appointing Scolari?
Joined: Dec 21 2004 Posts: 23178 Location: Greatness
Thetalentboy wrote:Stupid comment? 90,000 a week for 2 ex England internationals and former Man Utd players, i bet there not on much less than that
They wouldn't have been on anything near that when they were at United, bearing in mind Rooney was supposed to be on around 75k when he signed in 2004, I'd say around 90k combined.
Joined: Oct 15 2003 Posts: 53839 Location: North Yorkshire
I wonder who is next in line for the Chelsea job, I would reckon Hiddink, Rijkaard, Erickson or Mancini.
Either way they will all need money from Roman if they are to succeed, Chelsea need a clear out and could do with some slightly younger players at the club. The question is will Roman be willing to spend?
PAUL M wrote:I wonder who is next in line for the Chelsea job, I would reckon Hiddink, Rijkaard, Erickson or Mancini.
Either way they will all need money from Roman if they are to succeed, Chelsea need a clear out and could do with some slightly younger players at the club. The question is will Roman be willing to spend?
That is the question. His future intentions will be revealed on a) who they appoint and b) how much money he gets in the summer.
In any event, they need a clear out, stating with Kalou and Malouda.
Joined: Oct 15 2003 Posts: 53839 Location: North Yorkshire
Ian [77] wrote:That is the question. His future intentions will be revealed on a) who they appoint and b) how much money he gets in the summer.
In any event, they need a clear out, stating with Kalou and Malouda.
Also Drogba, Deco and Ballack for me. They need to promote some of the young lads they have and bring in a central midfielder, a wide player and a couple of strikers.
I don't know what you said about Scolari. I remember you alluding to me bragging over Scolari's appointment, which didn't happen, so I'm not exactly trusting of your version of events.
What I will say is that the vast majority of Man Utd fans on here were vehement that Mourinho was nothing special and anyone could be successful at Chelsea with the money spent. Ranieri, Grant and Scolari have shown what nonsense that was.
Well done to the SSN presenter this morning when speaking to Guus Hiddink's agent. He must have asked the same questions about 5 different times, im suprised his agent didnt get slightly p*ssed off with him.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 65 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
