Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
sylofox

Premier League Thread 2018/19 stuff it in here.

By sylofox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

CosbehFox

CosbehFox

Posted
Posted

Wolves arrogance to aside of some their fans, you can’t knock em. 

 

They pretty much used the same leg up as us. They have an investor who signed wisely in their players and they got promoted. 

 

They come up and attacked the Premier League. They haven’t tried to sneak games or play time wasting or dive about or go underhand. There has been some teams come and they are so niggly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jammie82uk

jammie82uk

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, The Bear said:

Yeah we bought the Championship in the season that Birmingham spent more money than us...

 

We just spent it better than everyone else. 

Did they? I doubt that very much, you also had loan players that you would eventually pay £37 million for 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Finnegan

Finnegan

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Wolves arrogance to aside of some their fans, you can’t knock em. 

 

They pretty much used the same leg up as us. They have an investor who signed wisely in their players and they got promoted. 

 

They come up and attacked the Premier League. They haven’t tried to sneak games or play time wasting or dive about or go underhand. There has been some teams come and they are so niggly. 

 

We went scouting around for players nobody had heard of from the second division of French football, the English conference, rejects from United's youth academy and free transfers like David Nugent. 

 

Wolves used a relationship with a super agent to get players with Champions League and decent international experience playing football in England's second tier. 

 

All above board and all within the rules, whatever, fair play, but to compare their situation to ours just because our owners are affluent would be a huge insult to what Pearson, Walsh especially and Shakespeare achieved in putting our 13/14 team together. 

 

We threw money at it and still only managed to attract a record signing of Matt Mills. That's not because we were clueless, it's because nobody would come to Leicester just like nobody would come to Wolves without Mendes shooing them along. 

 

I'm not bitter or envious, they're just the facts and what's tragic is that Bear's so fragile about admitting it that he'll just keep fending off with his fingers in his ears instead of just saying "you know what, fair play, yeah, we are incredibly lucky and yeah we bought the league, but that's not our fault as fans, we're just enjoying the ride." If he did that, fair play really. 

 

It's like being a Man City fan, crap for a hundred years then all of a sudden the best club in the country. Isn't their fault they're owned by billionaires, they didn't ask for it, but now they have it they're just enjoying it. Can't fault them. Just remember where you came from and why you're there. 

 

We obviously owe a lot to the Thais and would probably be a mid table championship outfit without them, no doubt. But that doesn't mean we're "just the same as them."

Edited by Finnegan
  • Like 17
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark_w

Mark_w

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

We threw money at it and still only managed to attract a record signing of Matt Mills. That's not because we were clueless,

Yes it is. In terns of transfers we were clueless until Nige/Walsh/Shakespeare came back. We hit lucky with a couple of them but there was no policy or plan for how it would all come together, it was let's throw money at people we've heard of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ScouseFox

ScouseFox

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, The Bear said:

Yeah we bought the Championship in the season that Birmingham spent more money than us...

 

We just spent it better than everyone else. 

why do you still deny and get upset when people claim you’re only any good because of things like money and that weirdo agent fella? 

 

you were really rubbish, then really really rubbish, then got rich owners and mendes and now you’re less rubbish, you reckon that’s just a coincidence? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Sounds like some jealousy from some of our fans to Wolves.

 

Get over yourselves.

 

No team is equal as no player is equal.

 

Persoanlly I'm enjoying Wolves football and I'm glad they are in the prem. 

 

After us I enjoy Liverpool and Wolves games more than any others. Certainly more than Burnley or Newcastle or Huddersfield etc... who have managers some were fornicating over last season and this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Finnegan

Finnegan

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Mark_w said:

Yes it is. In terns of transfers we were clueless until Nige/Walsh/Shakespeare came back. We hit lucky with a couple of them but there was no policy or plan for how it would all come together, it was let's throw money at people we've heard of.

 

Mills was a flop here sure but he was the captain of his club who had just scored in a losing effort in the play off final. 

 

The point I'm trying to make is that, money or not, he's about the most high profile signing we could have attracted to the club which is clearly not a problem Wolves had. 

 

I might not have worded it pretty elegantly, our transfer business before Wash WAS mostly shit, but we still couldn't have splurged all the cash on signing young Portuguese internationals with bags of potential even when Paulo Sousa rocked up. 

 

The best we got was Miguel Vitor who is now playing is Israel at the peak of his career. 

Edited by Finnegan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosbehFox

CosbehFox

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

We went scouting around for players nobody had heard of from the second division of French football, the English conference, rejects from United's youth academy and free transfers like David Nugent. 

 

We both used investors to have one of the largest budgets in the division at the time - relative to the division on those particular seasons. 

 

Those players still cost money. Pearson’s team was one of the highest spends in the division like or not. Knockaert, James, De Laet, Vardy, Wood, Drinkwater were all £1 million plus signings. We actually broke the rules to achieve that. The rule is total horseshit but broke it regardless. 

 

Wolves had one of the biggest budgets and spent it wisely. Fair ****s. 

 

Now if you are getting at the agent thing I can see your point perfectly 

Edited by Cardiff_Fox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bear

The Bear

Posted
Posted (edited)

I have no problem admitting that without Mendes we wouldn't have gotten the likes of Neves, Jota, Cavaleiro, Costa etc. 

 

I just know that there were plenty of other clubs chucking money at it too, so saying we "bought the league" isn't fair when loads of other clubs were doing the same, just less successfully. Blues, Villa, Leeds, Sheff Wed, Middlesbrough to name a few. We were getting close to the FFP limits if we'd have stayed down for another season or two. We were savvy though and had several on loan knowing that we could easily afford it if we went up. 

Edited by The Bear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fuchsntf

fuchsntf

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, FIF said:

Sounds like some jealousy from some of our fans to Wolves.

 

Get over yourselves.

 

No team is equal as no player is equal.

 

Persoanlly I'm enjoying Wolves football and I'm glad they are in the prem. 

 

After us I enjoy Liverpool and Wolves games more than any others. Certainly more than Burnley or Newcastle or Huddersfield etc... who have managers some were fornicating over last season and this season.

@FIF

your threatening into becoming one of my favourite posters....

Edited by fuchsntf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Finnegan

Finnegan

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

 

We both used investors to have one of the largest budgets in the division at the time - relative to the division on those particular seasons. 

 

Those players still cost money. Pearson’s team was one of the highest spends in the division like or not. Knockaert, James, De Laet, Vardy, Wood, Drinkwater were all £1 million plus signings. We actually broke the rules to achieve that. The rule is total horseshit but broke it regardless. 

 

Wolves had one of the biggest budgets and spent it wisely. Fair ****s. 

 

Now if you are getting at the agent thing I can see your point perfectly 

 

I am 100% getting at "the agent thing" yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. They had opportunities (and still do) to sign players that no other club of their stature (which is pretty small tbf) could or can. 

 

It's not a level playing field. 

 

They have said agent because they have a ludicrously wealthy owner who has a personal relationship with him. 

 

They bought the league, far more than we did or could. They were no doubt far more intelligent about it than anyone else in the history of the second tier ever has been, they circumnavigated ffp by not directly paying huge sums on transfer fees because they didn't need to, because they've got a super agent on the team. 

 

But Bear can argue all the semantics that he wants, it's still buying promotion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

 They had opportunities (and still do) to sign players that no other club of their stature (which is pretty small tbf) could or can. 

 

 

A bigger club than us - historically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bear

The Bear

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I am 100% getting at "the agent thing" yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. They had opportunities (and still do) to sign players that no other club of their stature (which is pretty small tbf) could or can. 

 

It's not a level playing field. 

 

They have said agent because they have a ludicrously wealthy owner who has a personal relationship with him. 

 

They bought the league, far more than we did or could. They were no doubt far more intelligent about it than anyone else in the history of the second tier ever has been, they circumnavigated ffp by not directly paying huge sums on transfer fees because they didn't need to, because they've got a super agent on the team. 

 

But Bear can argue all the semantics that he wants, it's still buying promotion. 

That's all fair enough, but you too can argue semantics all you want, it's still different to just buying the league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Webbo

Webbo

Posted
Posted

This reminds me a bit of our rivalry with Sunderland when we were promoted. People would post posts from their forum calling us arrogant. Leicesterlona was their favourite nickname for us. Last week someone on here called Wolves Wolvalona,just made me smile.

All fans are the same.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted

Generational differences come into it too.

 

I grew up with Risdale's Leeds and understand their history so still consider them a big club but would someone in their teens consider us to be a bigger club now?

 

Sheff Wed were a premier league mainstay when I was a teen but would a 17 year old consider Stoke a bigger club because they grew up only knowing Stoke as a premier league mainstay until last season?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bear

The Bear

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Generational differences come into it too.

 

I grew up with Risdale's Leeds and understand their history so still consider them a big club but would someone in their teens consider us to be a bigger club now?

 

Sheff Wed were a premier league mainstay when I was a teen but would a 17 year old consider Stoke a bigger club because they grew up only knowing Stoke as a premier league mainstay until last season?

I'd much rather see the historically "bigger" clubs like Derby, Forest, Villa, Leeds and Sheff Utd in the Prem than the likes of Huddersfield, Bournemouth, Brighton, Cardiff, Palace, etc. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahnsouff

Dahnsouff

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, The Bear said:

I'd much rather see the historically "bigger" clubs like Derby, Forest, Villa, Leeds and Sheff Utd in the Prem than the likes of Huddersfield, Bournemouth, Brighton, Cardiff, Palace, etc. 

It would be a shock to hear a fan of a historically big club say otherwise wouldn`t it? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vacamion

Vacamion

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, The Bear said:

I'd much rather see the historically "bigger" clubs like Derby, Forest, Villa, Leeds and Sheff Utd in the Prem than the likes of Huddersfield, Bournemouth, Brighton, Cardiff, Palace, etc. 

 

 

How far far do you go back?

 

Huddersfield were once massive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Doctor

The Doctor

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, FIF said:

A bigger club than us - historically.

That history being from when Atlee and then Churchill (second spell) were the PM, Harry Truman was president and the youngest fans able to remember are making their way into care homes - there's a point where historical stature expires.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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