Essien And Gerrard Motivated By Money?
We’ve all heard the reports about who Man City plan to bring in during the January transfer window right? Within five minutes of buying the club, Dr Sulaiman Al-Fahim, head of the Abu Dhabi United Group was telling the world he’s already got 18 players names on his most-wanted list, including Lionel Messi, Fernando Torres, Cesc Fabregas and Cristiano Ronaldo.
Quite how they expect to persuade Europe’s top players to sign for a club which, at the present time, has only money on its side, we’ve yet to see. You see, despite this Al-Fahim bloke telling Hughes he can play at outbidding everyone else for players like Kaka, what he needs to think about is what else he has to offer because, as Kaka’s personal assistant, Diogo Kotscho has already pointed out “Kaka would prefer a club like Chelsea, Real Madrid or Milan.”
Kotscho says “This season Manchester City don’t have a team that could win the Champions League.” Not such a big deal considering they’re not even in it but like the man says, this is something they’d do well to concentrate on before bragging about all the players they plan to sign, because as he quite rightly points out, “It’s not just Kaka, they will only get the very best players if they attain this level.”
However, it would seem Al-Fahim and Man City regard this as a mere formality, since the shopping list is reported to be growing by the day, with the latest names added being Steven Gerrard and Michael Essien.
Now that City have come into money they appear to have inherited the good old ‘sources’ as well and according to one of theirs, “Mark (Hughes) knows money is no object but he also wants to bring in the kind of players who will fit in with his plans, not just spend massive money for the sake of it. Gerrard and Essien in the same midfield would be incredible.” Maybe they would but that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.
For a start, are any of the ‘big four’ really likely to hand over their top players just because City are waving money around? I hardly think so. Besides, whilst I’m less sure about Gerrard, who, let’s face it came close to being persuaded to move to Chelsea before he saw the smoke coming off the Liverpool shirts, Essien could be a different kettle of fish altogether. After all, when Mourinho came calling earlier this summer, our powerhouse midfielder responded by signing a contract extension keeping him at Chelsea until 2013. Not only that, but he made it pretty easy for the club, readily committing himself without any apparent need for lengthy negotiations to squeeze every possible penny out of them.
So is there anything Man City have got right now that might persuade these players to desert their clubs? Answers on the back of a stamp please.
Filed under: Current Players, Rants, Rivals
Priceless comment in the article which says “Quite how they expect to persuade Europe’s top players to sign for a club which, at the present time, has only money on its side” - now turn back the clock 5 years and isn’t that EXACTLY where Chelsea were? No title for 50 years (and only one of them at that) and not much else in between but along came Roman and shed loads of cash……
As with Chelsea, City can go and buy success and good luck to them if that’s what they do.
I’d have no problems leaving a club that has only won 3 League Titles and has never been Champions of Europe. Manchester City isnt exactly a step down from Chelsea. Theyre exactly the same, small clubs with no history and a lot of cash.
No Paul, thats where youre wrong because five years ago Chelsea were qualifying for, and playing in the Champions League. And thats exactly the point everyone is making - before City can make statements about which players they’ll buy, they need to get themselves in a position with a little more appeal than just money alone - Chelsea were in that position before Roman’s money came along btw.
Trader - so if the clubs are exactly the same, the question is still ‘why would Essien want to leave Chelsea for City’? If money was his god he couldve got a much better deal off Chelsea than the one he agreed this summer, clearly that isnt his motivation. So what else have City got to tempt him? And tbh I fail to see how City wouldnt be a step down right now beause as far as I’m aware, they don’t regularly finish in the top four or play Champions League football.
I find it very funny that Chelski are so worried about losing their Mercenaries to City.
How funny is that….. hahaha
As for “Steve ME”, Why would he move from a childhood dream club he loves? when the rent-boy’s couldn’t convince him after two attempts? Ha Ha ha
Time for Roman to move on and fold Chelski.
I think Chelsea fans need to reexamine the “pre Roman” era. You league and european record was on a par with Leeds and Newcastle before Roman came along. In fact you could argue Leeds were a more attactive club then Chelsea or City..And lets also remember Chelsea would be where Leeds are now if the Russian rubbles hadn’t saved you at the 11th hour..
Looking back I think Chelsea were lucky for two reasons:-
1. The Russian takeover was completed just before the premiership was given the extra champions league place.
2. After the takeover the amount of money received from the champions league increase dramatically. I’m sure if you look it up the amount of money Leeds got from getting to the champions league semi final is no where near the £30m Liverpool, Man Utd and Chelsea have all received for getting to the final.
Both of these points have resulted in the top 4 as we know it today…
So, looking at the City situation, english football is very different to when the Chelsea takeover completed, however I think City are in a stronger position now then when Chelsea were after their takeover for the following reasons:-
1. The premiership is much more attractive to foreign players now than it was a few years ago.
2. The signing of Robinho is a bigger coup than anything managed by Chelsea in the first year after their take over.
3. City are a bigger club, with a bigger and more loyal fan base - They were getting 30,000 a week in division 1 and 2 a few years back.
4. City can more easily (and for less money) expand their stadium - this is already being discussed.
5. They already have a midfield that in my opinion is better than the weakest midfield in the top 4 (Arsenals).
6. City can learn from the mistakes made by the Chelsea board over the past few years.
So in conclusion:-
1. In 5 years time City could be a much bigger club than Chelsea.
2. Roman should have bought Leeds if he didn’t care about being in London.
Abramovich arrived after Chelsea beat Liverpool to the final CL place - Chelsea’s 7th consecutive Euro qualification from 7 top 6 finishes, including a ECWC win, Super Cup win, 2 FA Cups, League Cup, Community Shield and another FA Cup final appearance.
Chelsea won the same number of cups in the 7 years before Abramovich arrived as we have in the 5 years since his arrival. That’s just a fact.
Fans - what makes you think we’re worried about players going to City? Surely the point I was making was that Essien WON’T want a move to City? As for Gerrard, the reason his move to Chelsea failed (thankfully) was because the supporters ‘loved’ him so much they were burning his shirt and making threats he didnt have the balls to stand up to.
Andrew - the PL might be more attractive now but ‘top’ players still want the same thing, top place finishes and CL football - two things City have yet to show theyre capable of. Chelsea didnt make a signing like Robinho immediately after Roman took over for 2 reasons. Firstly, Ranieri was concentrating on putting a proper team together, not just indiscriminately picking the biggest names in football and assuming that’ll be enough, and secondly, because top players arent usually quite as desperate to get away from clubs as Robinho was. Lets be honest, he’d have signed for just about any club in the end, its not as if he’d set his heart on playing for the weaker side of Manchester.
Also, if City really could look at Chelsea’s mistakes over the past five years, they’d already know that having money does not equal the sort of sustained success needed to challenge (never mind overtake as theyre predicting) the top clubs - oh and they’d stop making ridiculous predictions that we’ve already proved come back and bite you on the arse.
Just for the record, I’m not a City fan!
Squiddy - Does that mean the quantity of trophies won is more important than the quality? Does that mean you would prefer to win the FA cup and league cup (2 trophies) than the premiership (1 trophy)???
Don’t get me wrong, Chelsea had a good few years in the late 90’s but winning a european trophy that no longer exists and a couple of FA cups and League cups doesn’t put you in the top tier of clubs..However it was all financed through loans and you would have gone backrupt like Leeds did if Roman hadn’t arrived.
Chelseea D - I agree City have not proven they are capable of competing with the top teams but apart from a champions league quarter final neither had Chelsea.
Fair point about Robinho, he probabaly would have joined any decent sized club willing to pay, BUT i disagree that city were being indiscriminate about the bids they were making. They had 12 hours to bring players in, they made bids for; Torres, Villa, Berbatov, Robinho, De Guzman and RVN from reading the papers. Thats 4 strikers, a winger and a central midfielder…now I doubt they really thought they would sign all 4 strikers, it looks like they made a list of targets and made bids to see who would do business in the small amount of time they had, in that situation I think they had a good strategy.
From reading the papers in the past few days I think they have learned from Chelsea mistakes for two reasons:-
1. The guy who’s being coming out with all the coments (Dr somebody..can’t remember his name) about making them the biggest club in the world etc won’t be involved with City for much longer, he’ll be going back to his day job (He’s like the Alan Sugar of the middle east) and the leader of Abu Dhuabi are putting someone else in charge - someone who is less of a character by all accounts.
2. The comments about still developing youth players, this tells me Hughes has some control of the situation and is looking to build a balanced squad of youth player, with a few superstars mixed in there to.
Gerrard thought about moving to Chelski because he wanted to win trophies (in particular the PL title) and doubted whether he could do that with Liverpool, nothing to do with money, read his autobiography.
One shirt was burnt by some idiot (every club has them) and you all picked up on it.
Trust me, most of the mercenaries are with Chelski, we can all name them! Fat Frank being the latest example!
How are your hits going??
Chelsea D - There is one other point i’d like to make..I don’t think Chelsea are that far off pushing for 4th stop as they are now.
I think Chelsea and Man Utd are to strong, they will both be in the top 4 unless a disaster happens. I’m a Liverpool fan and i’m still in the “this is our year” stage every Liverpool fan goes through at the start of the season! But seriously, I think we will be in the top 4. In my opinion Arsenal are the ones in trouble. I said to friends back in June that if Spurs and/or City bought well this summer and Arsenal failed to strengthen their midfield, then there could be an upset this year. Now in my opinion Arsenal look alot weaker than last year and I think Citys midfield is already stronger than Arsenals (who do they have left if Fabragas gets injured?). City have a good keeper, a decent defence (they have bought a great replacement for Corluka) and their strikers are good. If bojinov finally gets fit and lives upto his potential he could be a major boost for the 2nd half of the season. My prediction for the league then is….
Top 3 - Liverpool, Chelsea, Utd (not sure what order)
4th - City
5th/6th - Arsenal, Spurs - this will depend on how quickly Ramos can get to grips with what tactics he wants to play and what injuries Arsenal get.
****That meant to say City not Chelsea aren’t far off pushing the top 4….****
DD - I totally agree Lampard’s a mercenary, not sure where you’d have got any other impression bearing in mind the article was about Essien and Gerrard anyway. And my hits are going very well thankyou.
Man city can do just what Chelsea did but they won’t be hated like Chelsea….funny that.
Andrew: I’ve said nothing about the status of trophies won, although I’m quite sure we’d like a Super Cup again. You said Roman arrived before the extra 2 places were given for the CL. You were totally wrong. You indicated Chelsea were nothing before Roman. You were totally wrong. You said CL money ramped up massively after Chelsea got through - so did everything. I believe Derby got more money for finishing bottom than Chelsea got for winning the PL 3 years before. Chelsea were 7th richest club in the world in terms of income according to Deloitte for the year BEFORE Abramovich arrived. Being bankrupt if not for Roman ignores the fact that Ecclestone and Briatore were also in negotiation to buy at the time.
In short, there’s nothing you said that was true. Your subsequent comment about status of trophies changing (even though the number didn’t) only indicates that Man City might get into the Intertoto by right rather than through the fair play league or, heavens above, might manage Uefa Cup qualification. Nothing changed since the last game apart from you buying SWP for £9m, an outright failure at his previous big club, and Real Madrid’s 3rd choice winger for £32.4m. Good for you. We had a close shave.
YE SO SHUT YOUR MOUTHS THEY HAVE ROBINHO,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,……………………….