Jump to content

Coefficientwatch


lionel hutz

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, WATTOO said:

Bang on the money, that is how the whole of society now works in this modern era, give the richest the most and cut off the supply to those struggling at the bottom or attempting to aspire.

"It's ma baw and nobody else is gettin it" attitude, now firmly entrenched in the western world............

On a bit of a tangent, but I saw this the other day and it blew my head:

DkE4A1HU8AAUQIH.jpg-large.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, badgerthewitness said:

Scotland have next to no chance of a top 12 twelve ranking, the only scenario that would make it easier for Celtic. Under the current system they simply aren't good enough. Europa League is their level.

Also, I believe £30m+ represents a boost to Celtic's finances, not a "windfall". You seem to be under the impression a £30,000 per week player is 30 times better than those who earn a grand. That is not the case.

Perhaps your undoubted passion for the beautiful game would be better directed to its amateur side, you seem to have real issues with professional football.

That is ever such a silly post.

You're basically saying that because I think that the current imbalance in football finances is unhealthy, I can cope only with the amateur game. It's more of this 'all or nothing' drivel that is the screen for so many posters on here when their arguments break down.

Embarrassing playground logic.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

That is ever such a silly post.

You're basically saying that because I think that the current imbalance in football finances is unhealthy, I can cope only with the amateur game. It's more of this 'all or nothing' drivel that is the screen for so many posters on here when their arguments break down.

Embarrassing playground logic.

 

 

Now you're just shouting at clouds. I didn't consider myself to be involved in an argument when I made the post and have no idea why you're resorting to insults. I'll leave you to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, badgerthewitness said:

Now you're just shouting at clouds. I didn't consider myself to be involved in an argument when I made the post and have no idea why you're resorting to insults. I'll leave you to it.

No, you're talking rubbish.

The insulting part came when you characterised my outlook in an absurd and inaccurate way.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

wastecoatwilly is perhaps the thickest Celtic poster on here, which considering the competition is some achievement.

If he wrote more coherently, I'd think he was at some sort of wind up.  

Given the thoroughly convincing mingling of medium and message that he treats us to however, I fear that you might be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

Seriously man, you need to do some learning.

How many European Cups did Real Madrid win between 1960 and when the Champions League started?

This .

The last 20 years has seen the European Cup won exclusively by teams from the 4 Big Leagues (with France the fail from the Big 5) and the only interloper being Mourinho's Porto in 2004.

During the 20 years before that, teams from 10 different countries won the European Cup.

Also, between them Real & Barca have won 10 of the last 20 but only won 2 of the previous 20.

The last two decades in football is defined by money and the corralling of all the world's best players at a dozen European clubs

Edited by EdTheDuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poor William, taking a bit of a beating here. I'll step in and try help him out a tiny bit.

The power house clubs and leagues that exist today have in the main always been the elite, even before money became such a big thing in football. I believe 49 of the 63 European Cup/ CL winners have come from the big 4 nations, 78% that is. He is technically correct in that money hasn't really changed the fact that these clubs and leagues always were and always will be the elite of football regardless of money.

However, oor Willies theory that money has no impact is extreme to say the least. While the big clubs and leagues mopped up the majority of the trophies back in the day, there was always a decent chance that teams from the second tier nations could put together a team that were capable of challenging and winning the EC. Apart from minor miracles like Porto in 2004, money has made it almost impossible for teams outwith the big 4 to challenge never mind win the CL.

Willy, people don't think a player becomes ten times better when he goes from £10k/wk to £100k/wk, (well maybe apart from MT), the point is that clubs can't keep their good players because they can't pay him which mainly leads to all the good talent ending up in one of the top 4 leagues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tartantony said:


Willy, people don't think a player becomes ten times better when he goes from £10k/wk to £100k/wk, (well maybe apart from MT)

When have I said anything, anything at all that indicates that I might think a player gets ten times better when his wages see a similar increase?

Please provide supporting quotes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...