• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Naughty Emirates Marketing Project - Spot of Compo??

Yeh, I have weirdly and boringly been thinking about it alot this afternoon and its just madness when you think of it.

When you think and look at the transfer market now, the fees and the wages, that level in reality is where it is because Chelsea and City bringing so much money into the game which inflated the market so not only was this about what they took out the game with trophies, the pure money thats gone out and into players and agents pockets is insane. They have also priced sensibly run clubs out the market, so people have been championing a sport which rewards people who break the rules. Its also the reason that every transfer window fans are like a baying mob of mouth frothers about money and spending, they created a monster.

Its just insane really and I had a laugh on here looking back at old posts, the amount of people who were called paranoid or that all this stuff was in their head about Chelsea and City is funny @Raziel in fairness called all this a long time ago about the corruption in the game
I’m thinking of the lesser teams like man united who had to make serious cuts in their operations … swapped meals out for fruit, no Xmas gifts and getting rid of staff etc. if you then focus on the other clubs out there, you don’t want to imagine …
 
It says on BBC website that they understand "there is little appetite from in the Premier League" to strip City of the past titles.
I find that strange, have they got skeletons in the cupboard or recieved some inducement?
 
This is the top 10 for a system I use to rank English clubs historical success.

1. Liverpool - 963.5
2. Manchester United - 925
3. Arsenal - 627
4. Manchester.City - 546.25
5. Chelsea - 543
6. Tottenham Hotspur - 446.5
7. Everton - 393
8. Aston Villa - 375
9. New.castle United - 264
10. Nottingham Forest - 219

Emirates Marketing Project would lose 140 points if Trophies and achievements between 2009-2018 at removed and drop to 6th place with 406.25.

If you include the period since 2018 it would be another 118pts off to 288.25 and 9th place.
 
It says on BBC website that they understand "there is little appetite from in the Premier League" to strip City of the past titles.
I find that strange, have they got skeletons in the cupboard or recieved some inducement?

Probably not wanting to comment at the moment and interpreted into no appetite.

Who, when BBC calls, would be stupid enough to say they want titles taken off them at this stage?

It's also funny to see them, and fans of Saudi Sportswashing Machine and villa, trying to justify the need to break rules to compete on x
 
This is the top 10 for a system I use to rank English clubs historical success.

1. Liverpool - 963.5
2. Manchester United - 925
3. Arsenal - 627
4. Manchester.City - 546.25
5. Chelsea - 543
6. Tottenham Hotspur - 446.5
7. Everton - 393
8. Aston Villa - 375
9. New.castle United - 264
10. Nottingham Forest - 219

Emirates Marketing Project would lose 140 points if Trophies and achievements between 2009-2018 at removed and drop to 6th place with 406.25.

If you include the period since 2018 it would be another 118pts off to 288.25 and 9th place.
How is this system made up?
 
How is this system made up?

Winning
UEFA Champions League/European Cup - 25pts
Premiership - 18pts
First Division - 14pts
UEFA Cup/Cup Winners Cup - 12pts
Pre 1992 FA Cup - 10pts
1960-1992 League Cup - 8pts
UEFA Europa League - 6pts
Post 1992 FA Cup - 5pts
Post 1992 League Cup - 4pts
Other International Trophy - 2pts
Other Domestic Trophy - 1pt

Competing In
UEFA European Cup/Champions League - 5pts
UEFA Cup - 4pts
UEFA Cup Winners Cup - 3pts
UEFA Europa League - 2pts
UEFA Conference League/Fairs Cup - 1pt
Season in top flight 1pt

Bonus
1st England Cap while at club - 1pt

Gradient
Anything prior to 1945 is 50% Points
Anything prior to 1900 is 25% Points
 
This is the top 10 for a system I use to rank English clubs historical success.

1. Liverpool - 963.5
2. Manchester United - 925
3. Arsenal - 627
4. Manchester.City - 546.25
5. Chelsea - 543
6. Tottenham Hotspur - 446.5
7. Everton - 393
8. Aston Villa - 375
9. New.castle United - 264
10. Nottingham Forest - 219

Emirates Marketing Project would lose 140 points if Trophies and achievements between 2009-2018 at removed and drop to 6th place with 406.25.

If you include the period since 2018 it would be another 118pts off to 288.25 and 9th place.

Is that life time historical success?? How would Everton with 9 titles be below City who would drop from 10 titles to 2?
 
Is that life time historical success?? How would Everton with 9 titles be below City who would drop from 10 titles to 2?

They are above Everton if the titles from 2018 onwards still count. If they are removed they would fall to 9th.

5 of Everton’s league titles were won prior to WW2 so they count less.
 

When I’ve put this together the feedback has always been done trophies won in the 1890s/1900s by clubs like Villa and Arsenal should not count the same so the the points are different.

However in the same way, as tournements like the domestic cups have become less meaningful they are weighted the other way. UEFA Cup gets more than Europa Leaue as an example as it was harder to win when it was the UEFA Cup.
 
I think there is a fan culture thing at play here, in that I mean many would have to reel back their arguments for years, because many claimed City and Chelsea is what ambition looked like, when in fact it was cheating, which would have meant clubs, like Spurs, having to spend even more to maintain with something that was ultimately fabricated. The reality being that how we were run was likely closer to the correct way than what was claimed, something many won't ever admit. And that goes for football in general, fans want money spent and signings at any cost, thats why Arsenal didn't care about Partey, thats why some on here claimed they would accept Greenwood, thats why Terry still gets a platform, people don't care enough about the optics, its success at all costs

Tbf, having ambition and cheating aren't mutually exclusive
 
Less competition.
It's like when Norway won wc gold for women in 1995. If they did it now, it would be a hell of an achievement. Back in 95, not so much, as there was virtually no competition. Women hardly played football anywhere else back then.

No. There was plenty of competition. Loads of people in the contry played the game.
They just had probably the best player in the world at the time in Dixie Dean.
 
If they did get relegated or end up somewhere in the EFL, then wouldnt they then be screwed again with the football league financial rules?? I mean... Don't the EFL also have some wage cap or structure that would mean City would instantly need to offload all their high earning squad to comply? I assume even their youth team budget is massive and exceeds whatever the limit is in the EFL.
 
Back