Jude Bellingham

WilliamMunny said:
Bayern aren’t loaded? They are easily one of the wealthiest clubs in Europe and have a turnover similar to that of the top PL clubs, which makes it possible for them to spend 100m on Kane.
Click to expand...
They're loaded compared to the vast majority of clubs, but not compared to elite or loaded prem, Spanish or Italian clubs and the likes of PSG etc. Although saying that Spanish clubs do it with mass debt, which doesn't seem to get paid off. The last list I seen last year had Bayern about 13th in Europe on net spend over 5 years, they were behind West Ham, and only a bit more than Palace and Leicester.

They chase value (good for them), rather than trying to fully buy success, which is why they spent 100m on Kane as he's an absolute bargain and little risk. They paid that because it's massive value and little risk as they get probably one of the best all-round forwards for ~5 years. They only got him for that price as Levy would not sell him to the Prem, other wise he would have been more in previous seasons to the likes of man utd etc.
 
Andy_W said:
They're loaded compared to the vast majority of clubs, but not compared to elite or loaded prem, Spanish or Italian clubs and the likes of PSG etc. Although saying that Spanish clubs do it with mass debt, which doesn't seem to get paid off. The last list I seen last year had Bayern about 13th in Europe on net spend over 5 years, they were behind West Ham, and only a bit more than Palace and Leicester.

They chase value (good for them), rather than trying to fully buy success, which is why they spent 100m on Kane as he's an absolute bargain and little risk. They paid that because it's massive value and little risk as they get probably one of the best all-round forwards for ~5 years. They only got him for that price as Levy would not sell him to the Prem, other wise he would have been more in previous seasons to the likes of man utd etc.
Click to expand...
https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pag.../articles/deloitte-football-money-league.html

Bayern's revenue is the same as PSG, more than all but 3 Premier League clubs and more than 90% of the top 2 (Man City and Real Madrid). Just because they choose to operate at a profit rather than rack up huge debts doesn't mean they are not loaded. In many respects, they are in the best position financially of any team in the world given that they do not rely on wealthy owners nor have they built up a huge mountain of debt.

Any which way you want to spin it, there is no way you can say Bayern Munich are not loaded.

Edit - as for the Italian clubs, Bayern's revenue is more than the two Milan clubs put together and will be more than double Juventus now they are out of the Champions League.
 
Last edited:
WilliamMunny said:
https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pag.../articles/deloitte-football-money-league.html

Bayern's revenue is the same as PSG, more than all but 3 Premier League clubs and more than 90% of the top 2 (Man City and Real Madrid). Just because they choose to operate at a profit rather than rack up huge debts doesn't mean they are not loaded. In many respects, they are in the best position financially of any team in the world given that they do not rely on wealthy owners nor have they built up a huge mountain of debt.

Any which way you want to spin it, there is no way you can say Bayern Munich are not loaded.

Edit - as for the Italian clubs, Bayern's revenue is more than the two Milan clubs put together and will be more than double Juventus now they are out of the Champions League.
Click to expand...
Yeah PSG is a bad example as their league is muck as well, and even Italy is well behind what it was, but at least their top teams change around a bit as competition is better. For Bayern, revenue will also be boosted by what players they sell also.

23/24 - 47m net spend (which includes the 100m on Kane)
22/23 - 42m net spend
21/22 - 55m net spend
20/21 - 44m net spend

They might just be tight, or it might just be they don't spend a fortune as they literally can't as the only players who could make their team better would blow their budget out the water?

I'm not saying their model is wrong, far from it, I prefer things to be sustainable. There's a reason big investors come to the prem and blow massive wads of cash though, becuase it's the best/ toughest league in the world, and that's also why the best players are open to coming here if clubs want to cough up the cash. There's no room for them all though.

I'm saying they either don't have or don't spend the money on the top talent, as often as other leagues can, like prem, spain, italy etc. This is either because they don't want to spend it, or because most players (especially top foreign players) don't want to play in that league when they reach the top level? Do you think Kane would have picked Bayern, the team which often walks the german league and does well in CL, or would he have picked Man Utd who have won 1 trophy the lowest value one in 6 years (the EFL cup)? He'd have chose spurs over bayern if it wasn't the club he'd been at for 10 years and the one which wouldn't let him go to where he should be, years ago.

Spurs have spent about double what Bayern do in a season (4x last year), and that's even selling kane to them for 100m.
Have a look what they've spent other years and got nowhere with it, as the competition is so much tougher.

There's no let-up for big clubs in the prem, it's harder for them to rest players to concentrate on the CL, as otherwise they get punished, even by mid-table teams. So, to cope with this they buy more/ spend more, as if they don't they get left behind by the ones that will.
 
With Bayern, I also think they don’t need to spend big, they have the best team in the land and nobody can afford to catch them.

In the Prem, look at what Chelsea are spending to get back in top 4, then Man U and Saudi on the tyne to try and catch Man City. Liverpool despite what they say also spend to try and keep the pace.

If you don’t spend big then at best you stand still but more likely go backwards, then you have the likes of Brighton and Brentford in the moneyball system doing brilliant, then spurs, West Ham, Villa and others all trying to crack the top 6 and sneak in to champions league. Then look what Everton have spent in recent years.. Bayern don’t need to compete like.
 
Andy_W said:
Yeah PSG is a bad example as their league is muck as well, and even Italy is well behind what it was, but at least their top teams change around a bit as competition is better. For Bayern, revenue will also be boosted by what players they sell also.

23/24 - 47m net spend (which includes the 100m on Kane)
22/23 - 42m net spend
21/22 - 55m net spend
20/21 - 44m net spend

They might just be tight, or it might just be they don't spend a fortune as they literally can't as the only players who could make their team better would blow their budget out the water?

I'm not saying their model is wrong, far from it, I prefer things to be sustainable. There's a reason big investors come to the prem and blow massive wads of cash though, becuase it's the best/ toughest league in the world, and that's also why the best players are open to coming here if clubs want to cough up the cash. There's no room for them all though.

I'm saying they either don't have or don't spend the money on the top talent, as often as other leagues can, like prem, spain, italy etc. This is either because they don't want to spend it, or because most players (especially top foreign players) don't want to play in that league when they reach the top level? Do you think Kane would have picked Bayern, the team which often walks the german league and does well in CL, or would he have picked Man Utd who have won 1 trophy the lowest value one in 6 years (the EFL cup)? He'd have chose spurs over bayern if it wasn't the club he'd been at for 10 years and the one which wouldn't let him go to where he should be, years ago.

Spurs have spent about double what Bayern do in a season (4x last year), and that's even selling kane to them for 100m.
Have a look what they've spent other years and got nowhere with it, as the competition is so much tougher.

There's no let-up for big clubs in the prem, it's harder for them to rest players to concentrate on the CL, as otherwise they get punished, even by mid-table teams. So, to cope with this they buy more/ spend more, as if they don't they get left behind by the ones that will.
Click to expand...
You're going an awful long way around the houses to justify your claim that Bayern aren't loaded. But the facts are there to see. They have the 6th largest income in world football and are less than 10% behind Man City in revenue. They choose to operate at a profit, but it's not like they are hoarding hundreds of millions like some miser.

Just because PL teams spunk gazillions on transfer fees doesn't mean they are loaded and Bayern isn't. The latter simply chooses to live within its considerable means, whereas many PL teams and Barcelona spend future revenue to keep pace today, or rely on petrostate owners to fund operating losses.

I'll say it one last time, only 5 clubs in the world enjoy higher annual income than Bayern. That does not include Spurs, PSG, Barcelona or any Italian team.
 
Andy_W said:
The Germans forget how bad their own league is, Dortmund and Bayern should top that as much as Rangers and Celtic top the scottish prem.

Sancho had to go to a side where he played every week, regardless of form. At Man U, they have so many options that when you go out of form you're screwed and can't even play yourself back into form, so the hole just gets deeper and deeper. Same thing happened with Van Der Beek, and many others.

Doing alright in Germany is fine, but the prem opposition is far better, as is the quality of the squads for the big teams.

Sancho should have went to a team expected to finish maybe 5th-10th, where they had little other options, and this is where he's going to end up, except with a few lost years of development.

Similar to the Spanish league two-horse race, or it should be every year for what those two spend. How anyone else there gets a look in is laughable.

Even if Bellingham came here I still think he could do with a couple of seasons for a team not in the CL, where his place would have zero threat. Foden's as good as both, if not better, and he barely starts the big games and only started maybe half the prem games for City last year. Didn't start semi or final of CL, didn't start FA Cup final. He's gonna start a lot more this year though, and he was incredible on Saturday.

The boys just need to play every week.
Click to expand...
That is some utter tosh right there.

Sancho wouldn’t leave Dortmund not to play champions league football. Just because they are playing in Germany doesn’t mean they don’t have quality.

Dortmund and Munich attract some of the best players in Europe. Scotland doesn’t.

Bellingham, a world class talent should consider playing for villa or Brighton if he came to England is basically what you are saying. That’s topped if for me, he signed for one of the biggest clubs in the world and is excelling.

Edit - Just been reflecting, are you saying Haaland should have gone to a side not in the champs league too, because he is in the same world class bracket as Bellingham
 
Last edited:
ForssAwakens said:
That is some utter tosh right there.

Sancho wouldn’t leave Dortmund not to play champions league football. Just because they are playing in Germany doesn’t mean they don’t have quality.

Dortmund and Munich attract some of the best players in Europe. Scotland doesn’t.

Bellingham, a world class talent should consider playing for villa or Brighton if he came to England is basically what you are saying. That’s topped if for me, he signed for one of the biggest clubs in the world and is excelling.

Edit - Just been reflecting, are you saying Haaland should have gone to a side not in the champs league too, because he is in the same world class bracket as Bellingham
Click to expand...
Tosh? You're in the minority if you think the German league is as good as standard as the prem, and to a lesser extent Spain and Italy. This is why they've been referred to as the three big leagues for about 50 years. Nobody is saying Bayern and Dortmund aren't good sides, they are, who they regularly play isn't and a few CL games don't bring this average up much.

I'm not saying the German league is not quality (it is for professional football), it's just not as good overall quality as the Premiership, Spain, Italy etc, which is why Sancho moved here, why Bellingham went to Real, Haaland went to City. Nearly all big players leave when in their prime, or heading for it. Some young players go there so they can play in good sides that get in the Champions League easily/ freely, and because they will get more minutes etc. Germany gets 4 Champions leage slots, the average 4th team in Germany wouldn't finish mid-table in the prem.

Scotland was an example of a locked in league, nobody said it was similar level (straw man argument), it's not, it's worse than the championship. The top two teams in it probably wouldn't get out of the championship until the money rolled through and they could develop the sqaud, which would take years. They ahve a big fan base though, so would likely end up around mid-table prem eventually. They wouldn't go any higher as the best players won't want to live in Scotland, a bit like how a lot of players don't want to live in the North East, they want to be near London or Manchester etc.

Villa and Brighton are good sides, they're better than whoever finishes 3rd or 4th in Germany, and probably even 2nd. Dortmund came second last year, and got knocked out by Chelsea in the CL, in the first knockout stage, Chelsea finished 12th, in the prem, behind both Villa and Brighton (by 15 points). Of the 8 games Dortmund had in the CL, 4 were against English sides and they won one. Chelsea at home of course. The other 4 games were group games against sevilla and Copenhagen, hardly massive games.
All I'm saying is if Bellingham was playing for a team outside the top 4 he would literally start as many games as he was fit for, and end up playing about 25 games against top sides, wich is how players improve quickest. 2 games against Bayern and 4 games against prem teams is not playing at the same level, it's less. He is probably good enough to start most big games for whoever is 3rd onwards in the prem, but that's far more games at a higher level than you get in Germany, it's a step up.

Haaland is the best all-round Striker in the world, probably the most valuable player in the world. He's a different level to the likes of Bellingham, Sancho, Foden etc. Not saying they won't get there, but they're not the same now or last year, far from it.

For me, to be "world-class" you need to be good enough to start all the big games for every team in the world, or even a second world XI, Haaland is World XI first team, the young English developing players are not there yet.
 
Andy_W said:
Tosh? You're in the minority if you think the German league is as good as standard as the prem, and to a lesser extent Spain and Italy. This is why they've been referred to as the three big leagues for about 50 years. Nobody is saying Bayern and Dortmund aren't good sides, they are, who they regularly play isn't and a few CL games don't bring this average up much.

I'm not saying the German league is not quality (it is for professional football), it's just not as good overall quality as the Premiership, Spain, Italy etc, which is why Sancho moved here, why Bellingham went to Real, Haaland went to City. Nearly all big players leave when in their prime, or heading for it. Some young players go there so they can play in good sides that get in the Champions League easily/ freely, and because they will get more minutes etc. Germany gets 4 Champions leage slots, the average 4th team in Germany wouldn't finish mid-table in the prem.

Scotland was an example of a locked in league, nobody said it was similar level (straw man argument), it's not, it's worse than the championship. The top two teams in it probably wouldn't get out of the championship until the money rolled through and they could develop the sqaud, which would take years. They ahve a big fan base though, so would likely end up around mid-table prem eventually. They wouldn't go any higher as the best players won't want to live in Scotland, a bit like how a lot of players don't want to live in the North East, they want to be near London or Manchester etc.

Villa and Brighton are good sides, they're better than whoever finishes 3rd or 4th in Germany, and probably even 2nd. Dortmund came second last year, and got knocked out by Chelsea in the CL, in the first knockout stage, Chelsea finished 12th, in the prem, behind both Villa and Brighton (by 15 points). Of the 8 games Dortmund had in the CL, 4 were against English sides and they won one. Chelsea at home of course. The other 4 games were group games against sevilla and Copenhagen, hardly massive games.
All I'm saying is if Bellingham was playing for a team outside the top 4 he would literally start as many games as he was fit for, and end up playing about 25 games against top sides, wich is how players improve quickest. 2 games against Bayern and 4 games against prem teams is not playing at the same level, it's less. He is probably good enough to start most big games for whoever is 3rd onwards in the prem, but that's far more games at a higher level than you get in Germany, it's a step up.

Haaland is the best all-round Striker in the world, probably the most valuable player in the world. He's a different level to the likes of Bellingham, Sancho, Foden etc. Not saying they won't get there, but they're not the same now or last year, far from it.

For me, to be "world-class" you need to be good enough to start all the big games for every team in the world, or even a second world XI, Haaland is World XI first team, the young English developing players are not there yet.
Click to expand...
Waffle
 
Bayern don't keep splashing the cash because they have no room to grow. They are guaranteed to win the league most seasons and at worst come second which gets them Champions League football. They always make the knock-outs so they get guaranteed income from that. The Bundesliga is not worth as much internationally so they don't get as much TV money as they like. They need the rest of the Bundesliga to be better to increase the TV money and if their position at the top was challenged they'd spend more. As a minimum they'd need a few more teams other than Dortmund to regularly challenge at the top to make it seem competitive. Bayern could spend more money but it is only in pursuit of the Champions League and they already do well enough winning it fairly regularly and making the latter stages of the competition most years in between that it isn't worth it.

Compare that to England and there are far more competitive teams which means the top teams have to keep spending. In Spain Madrid and Barcelona each have a super club to compete with and they can't fall behind. PSG are the team most like Bayern but they are spending far less sustainably to be taken seriously because they have never had the success Bayern have had in Europe.
 
I suppose regardless of the apparent strength of each league, Germany must be doing more right than England historically.

World Cup: Germany 4 - 1 England

European Championships: Germany 3 - 0 England
 
Nero said:
I suppose regardless of the apparent strength of each league, Germany must be doing more right than England historically.

World Cup: Germany 4 - 1 England

European Championships: Germany 3 - 0 England
Click to expand...
Yeah, sure, totally agree on that. As they have less of the top-drawer players/ world talent it leaves spaces for their young lads to play a good level and develop quickly.

It's inversely proportional, the more high-quality players come in, the more your young talent gets blocked out. The less talent in, the more your young lads van develop, which really helps Germany.

We could limit foreign players and bring the young lads through more, the England side would get slightly better (at being the type of players they are), but the standard of the league would be worse. Then there's also the technical changes to consider on the flip side. If we had less talent and the prem was less technical, the national side would struggle even more against technical sides than it does now.
 
Redlips said:
It is a shame.

Two English lads are ripping it up in Italy.
Click to expand...
You say that but tomori was the worst player on the pitch every time I saw him last year. Still think he will be in the squad regularly though this year

Who’s the other Smalling? he isnt the answer either.
 
ForssAwakens said:
Bellingham is world class, he shouldn’t be going to a team who is outside the top 4
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Real Madrid do not sign players unless their potential is huge, or they are already the best in their position. Bellingham made the best choice going there too. The biggest club in world football.
 
Andy_W said:
Yeah, sure, totally agree on that. As they have less of the top-drawer players/ world talent it leaves spaces for their young lads to play a good level and develop quickly.

It's inversely proportional, the more high-quality players come in, the more your young talent gets blocked out. The less talent in, the more your young lads van develop, which really helps Germany.

We could limit foreign players and bring the young lads through more, the England side would get slightly better (at being the type of players they are), but the standard of the league would be worse. Then there's also the technical changes to consider on the flip side. If we had less talent and the prem was less technical, the national side would struggle even more against technical sides than it does now.
Click to expand...
Not sure that thinking is correct.

In that latter days of Division 1 and the early days of the PL there weren't many non British or Irish players in England's top league. The National team had good players but were awful mainly at international tournaments except 90 and 96. More playing time for English players didn't equate to a better national team.
 
MVBoro said:
Wouldn't write Sterling off yet in an England shirt. If he gets his form back and plays well for Chelsea, he can still contribute a lot for England. He must still only be late 20s.
Don't think Sancho will make it for England or United though. Another expensive mistake from United. Mount could be the next one. They should have bought Raphina from Leeds after his good season with them. They continually make bad decisions in the transfer market.
As for Bellingham, he's a star and will continue to be a key player for England. Lucky to have him.
Click to expand...
Mount is a terrible decision for united agree

He’ll be benched before long because they need a proper midfielder
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top