Premier League 2012-13

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Prem 2012-13

I genuinely wonder if geography has anything to do with it?

Chelsea: £595-£1,250
Fulham: £399-£909
QPR: £499-£949
West Ham: £600-£850

Spurs: £730‑£1,845
Arsenal: £985-£1955

Nope.
 
Re: Premie League 2012-13

Seeing as only four clubs will ever challenge for the top title everyone else should be cheap.

Why? Success means different things to different clubs.

Success for us at the moment would be coming 17th in the PL for the next 2 seasons.
 
Re: Premie League 2012-13

Why? Success means different things to different clubs.

Success for us at the moment would be coming 17th in the PL for the next 2 seasons.

We obviously use different definitions of success.
 
Re: Prem 2012-13

Chelsea: £595-£1,250
Fulham: £399-£909
QPR: £499-£949
West Ham: £600-£850

Spurs: £730‑£1,845
Arsenal: £985-£1955

Nope.

Well club size would play a role too. Of course a QPR ticket is less than an Arsenal ticket.

Chelsea are a bit of an outlier, but then they are run by an independent billionaire.
 
Clint Dempsey to sign for Liverpool tomorrow apparently. Good signing I think.

I think Rodgers will build a good team by the start of the season.
 
Shame. Dempsey is one of my favourite PL players, I absolutely cannot stand Liverpool. I hope he'll do a Robbie Keane.
 
Disagree with the praise of the way Arsenal are run tbh. Their approach at snatching "lesser" teams' talented players at a knock down price when they are 16 or 17 before they get good enough to go for huge money rather than bringing through their own players so they don't have to give much money to the team who develops these players has always seemed a bit lowly to me.

I certainly don't see it as a model of how clubs should be run, it's no wonder teams with great youth teams like Southampton who are producing their own players aren't doing as well as they should when there's ultimate youth sniffers like Arsenal around who wait for other teams to produce players before paying little to those teams. Can't say I have any sympathy when I see their own players like Van Perise and Fabregas go for cut down prices.

Is this is the same Southampton as the one that just enjoyed back-to-back promotions?

And what about the Southampton who recently sold two teenage players to Arsenal for a combined £17 million, rising to £27 million?

You're right about a lot of things Prof, but you have a real blind spot over the Arse.
 
Re: Premie League 2012-13

Success for us at the moment would be coming 17th in the PL for the next 2 seasons.

Success? That would be miraculous seeing as we aren't even in the PL for next season!
 
Re: Premie League 2012-13

Success? That would be miraculous seeing as we aren't even in the PL for next season!

Are we not?! ****s!

Or maybe we're in the current season, so the next two seasons would be 13/14 and 14/15.

But then you knew that, you cheeky rascal.
 
Re: Premie League 2012-13

We obviously use different definitions of success.

So you wouldn't class that as having a successful three years from now? I'd definitely say that that was short term success.

If I exaggerate my example, and we come 5th in the PL in 2013/14 and 14/15, would that count as success? Or is it just challenging for the title?
 
Re: Premie League 2012-13

Or maybe we're in the current season, so the next two seasons would be 13/14 and 14/15.


He's right, you know.
 
Is this is the same Southampton as the one that just enjoyed back-to-back promotions?

And what about the Southampton who recently sold two teenage players to Arsenal for a combined £17 million, rising to £27 million?

You're right about a lot of things Prof, but you have a real blind spot over the Arse.

While I agree that I certainly hold resentment against them due to Arsenal fans I know babbling on about how they play amazin football when I haven't seen them play any for about 3 seasons now (no doubt they did a few years back though) and wearing t-shirts that say things like "Arsenal - redefining football" my point is Southampton would've been doing much better a few years back if they were allowed to let their academy prducts come through before having them poached.

And £17mil really isn't that much at all for 2 English players for Premier League teams in this day and age at all.
 
I completely know where you're coming from about the fans, although it's not really any worse than the sense of entitlement fans of any of the 'big' clubs have. While Arsenal hasn't redefined football in the way that Barce have, the way that they have stayed in the black and sustainably built a magnificent stadium (whilst also regenerating a big chunk of north London) is considerably different from the debt and/or sugar daddy model of virtually every other club in modern football.

Southampton may well have been able to avoid relegation to League 1 if they'd kept hold of Walcott and I'm sure they'd like to be able to field Oxlade-Chamberlain in the coming season, but the massive debts they built up (and to their credit, did not avoid through administration) gave them even less choice than when a bigger club comes a calling - perhaps if they hadn't built up so much debt they would have been in a better place?

£17 million may not be much for two established stars, but it's daft not to say that eyebrows weren't raised at the sums involved in these transfers, as neither player was really much more than a bag of potential at the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

Championship

P Pld Pts
1Leicester4697
2Ipswich4696
3Leeds Utd4690
4Southampton4687
5West Brom4675
6Norwich City4673
7Hull City4670
8Middlesbro4669
9Coventry City4664
10Preston 4663
11Bristol City4662
12Cardiff City4662
13Millwall4659
14Swansea City4657
15Watford4656
16Sunderland4656
17Stoke City4656
18QPR4656
19Blackburn 4653
20Sheffield W4653
21Plymouth 4651
22Birmingham4650
23Huddersfield4645
24Rotherham Utd4627

Latest posts

Top