Would EPL Fans Ever Stop Whining About Man City?

Manchester City FC buys a lot of players. 

But which club doesn't? And which club doesn't wish to?

Once upon a time, AC Milan did this; then Inter did it. Then Parma did it. Then Lazio did it. 

Even the Spanish clubs Deportivo LaCoruna, Atletico Madrid and Valencia went on spending sprees when they had a bit more cash in hand than other Spanish clubs.

A lot of my neighbors argue vehemently with me any time I said that Chelsea has had a more *Star-studded team than Man City at least since the season immediately after Roberto DiMatteo won the Champions League!
(If your memory is good, you would remember that that was when they added Edin Hazard, Oscar, Marko Marin to the likes of Juan Mata, Fernando Torres and also David Luiz and Ramirez)

I always insisted (much to the confusion of my co-debaters) that just because one team was recorded to have spent more on a player, doesn't mean the player is a more accomplished footballer than the one another team spent less money on.

The truth is that Man City had (and still has) no choice but to spend much more than more established clubs in order to get most famous players' attentions. This is a logical fact that everyone seems to conveniently ignore.

It is not a new thing for a football club to try to buy its place in history. The old giants (Real Madrid, AC Milan, Barcelona, Juventus, Liverpool and Man Utd) did this long ago and gave themselves an unfair advantage against everyone else today. 

The fact that English is the lingua franca of the world, and that the EPL is lucky to have the backing of the American media giant 21st Century Fox means that the league is much more effectively marketed to the whole world. Therefore foreign investors like Malcolm Glazer, Roman Abramovic, Thaksin Shinawatra and Khaldoon Al Mubarak can expect long term profitability from the clubs within the league.

The Crux Of The Matter

I know that many of you fans of the EPL hate Man City so much, and you enjoy pointing fingers at them in order to create excuses for your own favorite clubs (i.e. the traditional big 4 EPL teams - Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal & Liverpool)

But today I am going to challenge you all again, and I'll even dare you to find any of the EPL's top sports journalists to take me up on my claims. Hahaha!

I have had this debate many many times with my neighbors at home here in Lagos, Nigeria, and even on the Facebook version of my True Football Analysts community. 

1. LEARN TO BE FAIR IN YOUR JUDGMENTS:

In the mid 90s Man City was in the 3rd Division of England. Man Utd was dominating England (about 5 straight titles) with Chelsea and Liverpool usually pushing them to the finish line. 

Then Man Utd could boast of Petr Schmeichel, Eric Cantona, Andrey Kanchelkis, Ole Solksjaer, Edwin Van Der Sar, Ruud Van Nistelroy, Jaap Stam, Fabian Barthez, Robert Lee, Roy Keane, Diego Forlan, etc. They always went after the top English players and mixed in some foreigners. Especially great goal keepers.

While Chelsea had the likes of Ruud Gullit coming in from AC Milan, and helping to bring in a wave of Italian stars like Gianfranco Zola, Casiraghi, Roberto DiMatteo and Gainluca Vialli who also used his influence to buy many other foreigners like Dan Petrescu, Marcel Desailly, Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink, Didier Deschamps, George Weah, Albert Ferrer, Tore Andre Flo, Frank Lebeof, Juan Veron and Hernan Crespo, who wouldn't have come to the Premier League otherwise at the time.

Everyone of those players with a green arrow pointed at them cost quite a lot at the time they were bought. And the buying had started long before this season; And it continued long after.

2. Others Had A Huge Head Start

This is the foundation that the likes of Man Utd and Chelsea (Arsenal also had huge names like Bergkamp, Robert Pirez, Wiltord, Emanuel Petit, etc) already had to build upon when Man City's money came in 2007 or so. 

Despite that, Chelsea still had another mega financial boost with Roman Abramovic which saw another wave of world stars come into the club to further deepen their already rich history (MORE ON THIS LATER)

3. Early Risers Are Always Luckier

While Chelsea had to worry about only 2 big clubs when it started its own first era of big spending (Man Utd and Liverpool), Man City has had to worry about 4 of them (and other pretenders like Tottenham and Newcastle). And yet, while Man City under Roberto Mancini were criticized for only winning an EPL title and FA Cup in 31/2 years of Mancini, Chelsea won nothing under Gullit, and only an FA Cup under Vialli. No complaints then. But I guess that was because the irrational fans of today were still toddlers by then; so they were following the Transformers cartoons and not football. lol

4. About Bargaining Chips

Why Man City players usually cost so much money:

Liverpool and Man Utd have been well known names all over the world since the 70s, thanks to their historical successes. Chelsea also won the Cup Winners Cup and European Super Cups around early year 2000, so by now they are not really new to foreigners.

But who the frack knows Manchester City?

I mean outside of England and its fans!

If you were young Brazilian upstarts like Oscar or Neymar, would you want to play in a club that most of your friends in Brazil had barely even heard about? 

Do you think that at a certain level, money is everything that players think about?

Have you forgotten Ronaldinho's reason for refusing the highest salary offer in football that was offered to him by Manchester United?

Now looking at it the other way, wouldn't you not demand an insanely high salary to be transferred to a club that was never part of your dreams as a footballer?

Manchester City have to spend big in order to BUILD what Chelsea had built in the late 90s, and what Man Utd had since early 90s. 

This is why you all should know that Chelsea would never spend €49m on Rahim Sterling. If the player's agent insists, then Chelsea would simply go after a better player. Unfortunately, Man City does not have that many choices.........YET!

By The Way

Even when you consider this Kevin DeBruyne that is causing this present rancour from the City haters, you have to remember that he was a Chelsea player very recently.

Was it Man City's fault that Chelsea's "Special coach" had him sent away? (The same way he sent Juan Mata away). 

Why is it that Man City's spending habits is the one that keeps making the news when others have displayed equal or even more wasteful habits.

ANYWAY, here are my two strongest points:

5. HISTORY

The fact that legendary players pass through clubs also help their scouts in recruiting young talent or attracting the parents of promising young stars. A father who thinks he is wise would rather enroll his child for the Man Utd juvenile club rather than the City version. This parent doesn't necessarily have to live in the city of Manchester.

Also, because of Man Utd's pedigree and history (don't forget that many parents can remember 1999 and even 1986, even if most of you EPL fans today cannot) parents would wish their sons name would one day be next to George Best, Eric Cantona, Edwin Van Der Sar, Ruud Van Nistelroy, Diego Forlan, Fabian Barthez, Jaap Stam, and David Beckham......they cannot remember any such tradition for City because they had only one notable legend....Peter Reid - whose legend was only told within England.

City is only struggling to build their tradition NOW, so that parents of 2025 can be proud to have their kids play in the club that Carlitos Tevez, Kun Aguero and Yaya Toure played in.

I'll never forget when Peter Reid was player and manager at City. When they got a free kick in the second half, he would take out an out field player and replace him with himself so he can take the freekick, which he scored on a few occassions. :)

6. OTHERS BUY PLAYERS AS WELL

Now, the most important aspect that Man City critics conveniently forget is the fact that other clubs still spend big on players as well.

They don't just willingly: 

- forget the fact that Man City started in 2007 what Chelsea started in 94 and Man Utd started in 89.

- forget the fact that parents of good prospects would rather send their kids to other juvenile teams

- forget the fact that Chelsea and man Utd are in better positions to "bargain" with foreign clubs than Man City.

They also amazingly forget that while poor Man City is buying a so-called super star, Chelsea, Man Utd and Arsenal are usually BUSY doing the exact same thing!

Okay let me help you get this, if Man City were to spend €250m on Asier Illaramendi, Mario Madzukic and Antoine Greizmann today, for goodness sakes WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD IT MAKE, if Chelsea also bought Thomas Muller, Toni Kroos and Javier Pastore; even if they cost only €150m????

.....Think about this seriously okay?

I mean check it out, City were getting Aguero, Dzeko David Silva and others. Chelsea got Hazard, Oscar and Marko Marin (no ones fault that Chelsea couldn't get out of him the magic he was doing at Weder Bremen).

For More Emphasis

So now that Man City bought Raheem Sterling and what not, did Chelsea fold their hands and do nothing?

What about last season that Chelsea got Diego Costa, Cesc Fabregas and Filipe Luiz.....how did Man City's purchases dwarf such an outing? Or what about Man Utd's purchase of Angel DiMaria, Radamel Falcao, Marcos Rojo, Daley Blind, etc?

If you have 50 sheep, 12 cows and 15 rams, and then you added 7 horses and 6 giraffes......does that make you better than the guy who already had 100 sheep, 20 cows, 14 rams and 5 oxen, 

and then added 5 horses and 10 giraffes??? 

Let us try to be a little less bitter and passionate and be more analytical shall we? :) 

Thank you.

Please tell me what you think in the comments below. I would love to hear contrary opinions. :D

See you at my next post....perhaps next year.

Trying to remember all the stars that have played for ChelseaFC was always going to be a daunting task. I didn't even mention Andrey Shevchenko and Claude Makelele. :)