@Fulham is the one I'm really looking at. Everyone suspects Spurs, but Fulham have been good this year
General EPL Discussion/Housery Thread
150,698 Views |
2438 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by Mathguy64
Dre_00 said:
It just takes one fluky game. One. And they don't even have to lose. They just have to not win. I mean if Saudi Arabia can beat Argentina in the group stage of the World Cup that Argentina would go on to win, then City can get tripped up in a fluky game somewhere in the next 5 games. @Spurs and @Fulham are likely the most realistic places where it could happen.
As a wise man once said, "Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies."
I have to say, it's sort of cruel for a United fan to be propping up the hopes of rival clubs at this point. We're all over here trying to cope with the reality confronting us and you're like "hey! it's all going to turn out okay! Pep is going to send your old dog to a nice retirement ranch upstate where he'll be happy all the time!"
That's the thing. Man Dhabi under Pep doesn't have fluky games at the end of the season.
That's because being the richest team ever with unlimited funds, they have the deepest team ever. They are 22 deep. That doesn't help in one off games like CL quarters but it does make all the difference in the world in a 38 game league.
Yup. Tom Rennie can be a bit annoying with his often over the top railing against countries owning clubs. But he's dead on when he says City are the only club in the premier league that can spend $100mm on a guy to sit on the bench and see if he might fit in the squad at some point in the future.
Listen, the last 10+ years have gone so badly for me that the idea of ******* Arsenal winning the league is not only tolerable, it would actually be the one of the best things that has happened in the last 10+ years…except for when Leicester won.
That's where I'm at now Jeff. I'm a broken man. Let me have this semblance of hope to sustain me for the next 10+ years of misery.
That's where I'm at now Jeff. I'm a broken man. Let me have this semblance of hope to sustain me for the next 10+ years of misery.
So just to recap, in this magical scenario, all we need is Spurs to draw or beat City?
We are doomed.
We are doomed.
When you think of Tottenham…
How many times did we, as Liverpool fans, say this in the last 5-6 years, @jeffk ? Only to lose the title by a point...
Welcome to a title race with Man ****ty.
Welcome to a title race with Man ****ty.
-FTA c/o 2013
Yeah… so many *almost* perfect run-ins.
jeffk said:
Yeah… so many *almost* perfect run-ins.
Hell, wasn't one of them actually perfect (for a long stretch anyways?) and City was just longer and perfecter? Just kept waiting and waiting for them to slip and they just never slipped from January on? I must be thinking of the 97 point season in 18-19?
ChipFTAC01 said:jeffk said:
Yeah… so many *almost* perfect run-ins.
Hell, wasn't one of them actually perfect (for a long stretch anyways?) and City was just longer and perfecter? Just kept waiting and waiting for them to slip and they just never slipped from January on? I must be thinking of the 97 point season in 18-19?
Yeah, in 18-19 our only loss of thr season was 1/3 to City. Won every game from March 3 on. And still wasn't enough.
Its ridiculous that the margin for error is that you basically cannot drop points for the final 20 games of the season, but when you allow a team to rack up 115 FFP charges and not do anything about it its not surprising. City's depth allows them the ability to rotate and handle the fixture congestion so much better than everyone else. Its been that way for 7-8 years now. Add in some luck as well (Forest missed 3 tap ins yesterday) and its near impossible to stop it
You want to talk about frustration?
Just think, City hasn't lost a match in their last 31 matches with a few draws. YET, in that timeframe they were knocked out of the CL because of a rule change this year.
Just think, City hasn't lost a match in their last 31 matches with a few draws. YET, in that timeframe they were knocked out of the CL because of a rule change this year.
7nine
boo-****ing-hoo
If you're looking for sympathy for City, I don't think you're going to find it here.
-FTA c/o 2013
Not surprising your upset. We know how much City hate rules
Premier League clubs have agreed on a spending cap that would come into effect at the start of the 2025/26 season, as per reports. 💰 pic.twitter.com/luvirELcKR
— Football on TNT Sports (@footballontnt) April 29, 2024
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Premier League clubs have agreed on a spending cap that would come into effect at the start of the 2025/26 season, as per reports. 💰 pic.twitter.com/luvirELcKR
— Football on TNT Sports (@footballontnt) April 29, 2024
of note:
Quote:
Manchester United, Manchester City and Aston Villa voted against the possible introduction of a spending cap on Monday, while Chelsea abstained.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cpegd3dy8j7o
Man you would think that United and Chelsea's American owners would be all about a cap as it protects them from themselves and a runaway market. Basically makes it a sounder financial investment like US franchises.
I can't remember who owns Villa now. The Browns guy sold it a while back.
I can't remember who owns Villa now. The Browns guy sold it a while back.
Ironically, this American CBS article breaks it down better IMO:
https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/premier-league-clubs-agree-in-principle-to-spending-cap-ahead-of-junes-annual-general-meeting/
For the TLDR crowd, it's important to note that this doesn't affect transfer spend directly, but rather the amortized version (i.e. a club could spend 100M on a player, but on a 5 year deal, that's only 20M per year). Also, it only counts the "first team" - so teams could skirt this by loaning guys out or putting them on reserve teams.
https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/premier-league-clubs-agree-in-principle-to-spending-cap-ahead-of-junes-annual-general-meeting/
For the TLDR crowd, it's important to note that this doesn't affect transfer spend directly, but rather the amortized version (i.e. a club could spend 100M on a player, but on a 5 year deal, that's only 20M per year). Also, it only counts the "first team" - so teams could skirt this by loaning guys out or putting them on reserve teams.
So if these rules go in to effect what happens in the event that a club is discovered to have cheated the rules under an old system? Will they be disciplined in accordance with the new system?
I saw a chart yesterday of what the league looks like under the proposed rules. Chelsea were the only team that was over the cutoff number (by like 15-20m). City were just under it. Nobody else was really close to it.
Regardless of who gets caught, Everton will have points deducted.KCup17 said:
So if these rules go in to effect what happens in the event that a club is discovered to have cheated the rules under an old system? Will they be disciplined in accordance with the new system?
Featured Stories
See All
13:22
23h ago
6.7k
REGISTER NOW: Preseason Kickoff 2024 with Coach Mike Elko
by Brandon Jones
9:28
9h ago
1.5k
33:05
8h ago
1.3k
Hittag1492
Condon 30 HRs: fastest pace in the history of college baseball
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
74
tw2006s
Condon 30 HRs: fastest pace in the history of college baseball
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
66