blonde poker forum

been meaning to write this for weeks


Manchester city spend fortunes and are already 1/3 shots to win the title

Arsenal are inconsistent, and have real issues spending money to strengthen what they have from who is available

Man U rebuilding

Liverpool permanently rebuilding..sell suarez, spend  sell sterling, spend. spend badly, it might be said

Chelsea trouble behind the scenes?

that leaves space for the likes of Palace, Swansea etc to fill into the top 6 perhaps temporarily

at the other end there are bad teams

sunderland, newcastle, villa, west brom, three promoted teams grappling to adapt..jury out on stoke


performance in europe has been bad for 3 years, and the co-efficient that gets us 4 teams in the champions league must be in trouble


is this cyclical, an accident of so many teams with issues in the short term only?

or is it structural? overpaying average talent, a transfer of wealth from tv deals to players that means they have little incentive to perform?

Surely it is cyclical.  The money available surely means they can't fail to assemble the best talent in the medium term.  I think last season was just as poor apart from Man City were in Chelsea's spot.  Personally I think Watford/Bournemouth/Norwich will add more than Hull/QPR/Burnley did.

What is embarrassing is the continual failure in Europe.   To be honest though, I'm not really fussed if we go from 4 to 3 teams in Champ League and one of the big boys has to miss out.

I think this will be good for English football.

Too much complacency at some clubs.

It was only one game (sample size etc) and Aguero wasn't playing, but FML City were poor last night. And Juve should be significantly weaker this season than last.

It's telling that many of the best players in this country are cast offs from Real and Barca.

City are stronger now than than at any point in the last 5 years including their 2 title winning years. Despite last night, I'd would say it is an inevitability that they will bridge the gap in the next few years to the Big 3 of Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern.

Arsenal likewise IMO are stronger than they were 5 years ago.

Chelsea were the real deal just over a month ago before  the season started.

United  post Ferguson have not been great. I'd say it is inevitable they will become a major force again when the rebuild is complete. The problem now of course is they have been so dull - before the Liverpool game at the weekend they had only scored 6 times in their last 10 league games. That is unheard of for United and whilst personally I'm enjoying their struggles it is not what we are used to or good for the Premier League.

Liverpool/Spurs. Hmmm.

Looking at the teams City have played this year, we have had big battles with Everton and Palace, both very imprssive  and, to a lesser extent,  Watford.  Comfortable wins only against WBA (very poor) and Chelsea. Of the games I've seen on TV not involving City  I've also been very impressed with Swansea and, just for you, Leicester!


Sure, recent performance in Europe has not been the best. I don't think this is due to a lack of quality and it strikes me we play a completely different game. Using a poker analogy, the Premier  League 90 minutes is like a "super turbo" and many European games are "slow structures".

The risk of losing the 4th spot to Italy is real. Ironically, this is due more to poor performance by English teams in the Europa League than the Champions League.

Arsenal hitting a new low for the English clubs this week.  Total lack of application so far and poor discipline against the group minnow.  Wenger will deflect by blaming the ref I imagine.

The Prem is missing the big name players that it once had as well imo. Namely, Suarez, Bale and Ronaldo of recent times. The types of players that you would watch a game just because you knew they were not too far away from doing something special. Not sure I can name one with a similar feel now, maybe Silva? It is a shame Hazard has started slowly.

Aguero?

Normally i'd say yes, but he's looked awful the start of this season. When i say awful, i mean not match fit.

Not so bothered about individuals - just hard to find a team playing at anything like the tempo and cohesion of the best European sides. City on their day, Arsenal sporadically

Think Premier League teams are about 4 times behind the rest of Europe. A winning style now seems to be defend really well and be shit hot on the counter attack. Bayern Munich began this trend when they were dominating Europe, Robben and Ribery with blistering pace on the attack. Real Madrid then carried this on with Ronaldo being the main man, bags of pace and an engine that can go for days.

Barcelona had to change their tactics. The whole "Tika taka" was no longer working. So this went with a top 3 with blistering pace and lightening movement in Saurez Neymar and Messi. And they're back to winning everything.

Now it seems the premier league big boys are all trying to play their on version of "tika taka" which works in the premier league because the defences arn't as good as other European sides. When they come up against the big boys of Europe they have no chance.

Even teams in the premier league who are having success play this counter attacking football. Namely Leicester and West Ham.

4 times behind? I'd say either 3 or 4 mate.

Do you not think that the new Tv deal for next season has got anything to do with it? Perhaps the top teams are focusing on next season and the the reality in rebuilding during this season in terms of compeiting in the CL, then have a more valid attempt next season with the more money?

But is it really worst PL ever? Away from the top 6, the league looks really competitive.

Not sure about that.  Man City have spent £100 million on two players.  Man Utd have spent absolute fortunes under Van Gaal and barely improved.  Ditto Liverpool who have gone backwards.

I don't think they are biding their time. (apart from old Arsene of course and possibly Spurs due to the new stadium)

I think people forget this 'record' EPL tv deal is equally balanced between all 20 clubs (barring additional payments for each game shown - these are marginal compared to the flat fee lump all 20 teams get).  This is what is making the middle 10 clubs so much more competitive as they have real buying power to attract champions league players wages wise who they would never have been able to attract in the past.  Palace/Stoke/Newcastle signings this summer are all evidence of this.

In turn this doesn't make the top teams relatively more competitive against the Spanish giants.  The big two in Spain mop up virtually all the tv money under their tv deal.

I think there is a new La Liga deal next season which attempts to remedy this Arb.  The question is - what is better?  All the teams to get a slice of the pie and we're a bit less competitive in Europe.  Or our top 5 clubs get all of it and win in Europe while handing out 6-0 spankings all over the shop at home.  I know what I think is better.

At the end of the day the English top clubs can outbid nearly everyone in Europe even as it stands.

I think our system is great.  It also makes the championship a much better league as well with the parachute payments nearly a third of that league receive which means they can attract players of a certain level who wouldn't have considered that league previously.  All in all football is a great export product for England.  It brings a shit load of foreign money into the country.

What is the highest fee paid for a player by any team which isn't Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs or Liverpool?

I'd guess Lukaku, but don't really know.

The knock on effect also of the premiership getting flatter in terms of ability is the "tough game" factor. To win the english treble now is going to be nearly impossible to battle all fronts week in week out.

Also means you can't rest before every champs league week like barca and madrid can because they are 1/10 at home to any one of 10 teams.  Lolapool are resting tonight in the europa league just to try to keep pace in the EPL in their attempt to finish 4th.  Add in the lack of winter break etc and there are a lot of competitive disadvantages associated with EPL champions league teams compared to other countries.

A completely unrelated question to the thread, but how much parachute money would Blackpool FC have received when they fell out of the EPL after a brief dalliance? A separate question would be where did it go, but that's another story.

for blackpool it was £8-16m a year for 4 years

now parachute payments are over three years

Oyston paid himself £10.5m in the single premier league season

Ha, that's awesome.

It's becoming quite a rich businessman's income stream, the EPL, now, a few of the mid-ranking teams making a good few bob. Think Mr Ashley works the system well, too, perhaps the Coates at Stoke, too?

And presumably, Mr Oyston paid himself most of the parachute money, too.

I'd buy a used car from him. Probably.

(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/80691000/jpg/_80691796_owen_oyston_getty.jpg)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-34268761

I think the Lativan minority share holder is keen to know where all the wonga went as well.

Be surprised if the Coates family take money out of Stoke City.

They put quite a lot back into the local economy and charities.

Well yes - presumably he is - or was, as I think his boy took over, deemed to be a "fit & proper person to be a Director of a Football Club". 

The point being, it's a profitable venture for them, whether they take the money out is another matter. It still adds to the value of the Club. I admire the family greatly, on many levels. 

Talking of which, did the case against QPR operating outside of the financial limits ever get resolved? There was talk of huge fines at one time.

Think football league bottled it and gave them a mid level fine.

Think squad rotation here is due to the stockpiling of good but not great players. Not sure barca or madrid rest players that much. People like messi Ronaldo Neymar seem to play pretty much every game

£8 million fine.

I have no idea why a rich man can't spend what he likes on a football club he owns.

As long as the money isn't borrowed and he is forced to put up the value of future contracts in escrow. He should be allowed to spend what he wants.

Agree.  FFP should be about safeguarding clubs not limiting ambitious owners.  Platini idiocy as usual.

wage restriction as part of the FFP really is the pits

Unsurprisingly I'm dead against FFP. We (City) were so lucky to get the investment when we did, before UEFA tried to slam the door shut. They just want to protect the 'big' teams, and ensure that every season its the same names qualifying for the CL.

I can understand they don't want to see another Leeds or Portsmouth, but if a guy can pass the 'right and proper' test thing, and can prove he has the funds to match his ambitions, then let him plough his money into whatever club desired.

It's such a shame that so many clubs essentially have a glass ceiling above them, all thanks to FFP. Nothing fair about it whatsoever IMO. I also thought it was fucking laughable that when City got fined the other season, along with PSG, for breaching the rules, the fine money was distributed amongst the other teams in the CL. Put it towards grass roots football? Invest it in technology? Plough it into training more refs and match day officials? Nah, lets just make the wealthiest clubs in the world that little bit wealthier. Idiots.

I also enjoy the irony that City only got taken over by someone eye watering rich because before that we had the worlds poorest billionaire in charge. He didn't have a pot to piss in. Typical City!

i meant 4 years

I reckon 5 years buzz m8

Thought I'd bump this thread in the event of English teams performing poorly in the Champions league this week and the inevitable comments that the Premier league wasn't what it once was.

Since my post above, about 6 weeks ago, City have a mixed bag of success but I'll stick to my guns that the PL is as good and competitive as ever. Literally, I have been impressed with every team City have played since for reasonable chunks of a game even if they have ended up with a battering.

Just read this from Pedro on his experience so far: 'It’s hard. It’s very different to what I’m used to at Barcelona. Everything is different, very different to the football I'm used to. I think there are a lot of differences, very physical football, very strong. A lot of players attack and it's always complicated. All the games are competitive and very balanced.'

Yep, best league in the world...

i think the middle of the league is getting stronger

west ham can get payet, palace, cabaye, leicester kante and inler, stoke shaqiri etc etc

all for fees in excess of £8m plus wages more than competitive with continental leagues, which is why they come. this is the impact of burgeoning TV deals


i don't think the top of the league is stronger, and i certainly don't think the league helps the national team, but thats another debate

it is in the european games that the style of football is really shown up imo. hopefully better this week though!