[cite]Posted By: falconwood_1[/cite]Davie Moyes will moan all he likes in the media but behind closed doors must be wetting himself
That is taking the pish
yep - probably buy Stephen Taylor and Senderos for a combined £10m and be laughing all the way to the bank...Lescott is nothing special, certainly not £24m worth!
[quote][cite]Posted By: Telnotinoz[/cite]The money in the prem is just a joke.....some clubs will be getting a reality check sooner or later....[/quote]
You mean like Mike Ashley did last season?
Lescott is a good player, not worth £24m, but he'll do a job.
Silly silly money. Equally stupid thing is, that he'll take a place in their back four and probably help them to a Champions League spot sometime in the next 2 years. Once they do that, they'll be able to attract the kind of players who were on their 'A' list (John Terry and the like) and as soon as that happens he'll be warming the bench because, decent player that he is, he's not in the top bracket. £24M is a hell a lot of a lot to pay for a stop gap player.
[cite]Posted By: Telnotinoz[/cite]The money in the prem is just a joke.....some clubs will be getting a reality check sooner or later....
Agreed. But the ones most likely to get a reality check are the ones who are trying to compete in the PL but don't have a billionaire owner.
If you have huge, almost unlimited amounts of money to spend, why not pay over the odds if he's the best available player? For supporters, since when has football been about getting value for money? It's about winning things. For the owners, they're hugley wealthy and probably know what they're doing in terms of raising profile and getting a return on their investment if that's what they want.
[cite]Posted By: BBClaus[/cite]If you have huge, almost unlimited amounts of money to spend, why not pay over the odds if he's the best available player?
Does it not strike you, though, that there are so many thing in the world that money could be better spent on? I know that has always been true to an extent - when viewed next to famine and disease etc, spending large sums of money on football has always been a bit obscene, but the current sums are getting beyond a joke - just think of the good you could do in the world with £24M in you pocket.
Okay - you wouldn't be able to solve all the world's problems but you could make a massive difference to a large number of people.
[cite]Posted By: BBClaus[/cite]If you have huge, almost unlimited amounts of money to spend, why not pay over the odds if he's the best available player?
Does it not strike you, though, that there are so many thing in the world that money could be better spent on? I know that has always been true to an extent - when viewed next to famine and disease etc, spending large sums of money on football has always been a bit obscene, but the current sums are getting beyond a joke - just think of the good you could do in the world with £24M in you pocket.
Okay - you wouldn't be able to solve all the world's problems but you could make a massive difference to a large number of people.
So are you saying Mark Hughes shouldn't buy Lescott and go out and find a cure for AIDS instead?
I'm saying it's about time Humanity got it's priorities straight, and that goes for a lot of things - not just football, merely that football is becoming a particularly bad example of masses of money being thrown around for something extremely frivilous.
It's all a bit hypocritical I guess, because I'm not out doing voluntary work in Africa either, guess I'm just feeling particularly miserable this morning.
lol, chris. Exiled i'm not saying it's morally right in the wider context, i was only talking in football terms. You could make the same accusation that the money could be better spent, even if the highest ever transfer fee was £1m.
[cite]Posted By: News Shopper[/cite]It is sometimes worth holding out for what you are after.
You mean Everton or City holding out? If you mean city should have held out longer, then i'd say they've tried every trick they could to lower the price by shamelessly unsettling the player all summer. If you mean Everton then they've played this one pretty nicely by holding out for a good fee, but leaving themselves enough time to find a replacement (unlike spurs with berbatov last year).
Comments
That is taking the pish
That's not a forehead, it's a fivehead!
yep - probably buy Stephen Taylor and Senderos for a combined £10m and be laughing all the way to the bank...Lescott is nothing special, certainly not £24m worth!
You mean like Mike Ashley did last season?
Lescott is a good player, not worth £24m, but he'll do a job.
Well probably, yeah...
Well, he's a much better goalscorer than Gray.
Agreed. But the ones most likely to get a reality check are the ones who are trying to compete in the PL but don't have a billionaire owner.
If you have huge, almost unlimited amounts of money to spend, why not pay over the odds if he's the best available player? For supporters, since when has football been about getting value for money? It's about winning things. For the owners, they're hugley wealthy and probably know what they're doing in terms of raising profile and getting a return on their investment if that's what they want.
Does it not strike you, though, that there are so many thing in the world that money could be better spent on? I know that has always been true to an extent - when viewed next to famine and disease etc, spending large sums of money on football has always been a bit obscene, but the current sums are getting beyond a joke - just think of the good you could do in the world with £24M in you pocket.
Okay - you wouldn't be able to solve all the world's problems but you could make a massive difference to a large number of people.
So are you saying Mark Hughes shouldn't buy Lescott and go out and find a cure for AIDS instead?
It's all a bit hypocritical I guess, because I'm not out doing voluntary work in Africa either, guess I'm just feeling particularly miserable this morning.
You mean Everton or City holding out? If you mean city should have held out longer, then i'd say they've tried every trick they could to lower the price by shamelessly unsettling the player all summer. If you mean Everton then they've played this one pretty nicely by holding out for a good fee, but leaving themselves enough time to find a replacement (unlike spurs with berbatov last year).
That fair enough Claus, I guess that's the answer to your question though - because it's not morally right.
Fat chance of that ever stopping people when there's reddies to be earnt, though.