Who do you want to see win the EPL? (neutrals only)

willmunny1990

Not sure myself TBH. I probably would prefer to see City win it for a change but I worry about it giving them a platform to truly dominate the coming years so i'm undecided.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Don't care

City, if only for a change...

KingdomYid

City

United for me. I have nothing against City fans at all but just don't want to see another billionaire club win it.

gnfnrhead

Don't care

City.

I dont really have anything against them (yet) whereas I hate United. Thats my reasoning.

amacachi

United, if City don't win it this year or next and FFP makes an actual difference then they'll slip back.

To Alcohol

City

United. It'd sicken me to the core if Balotelli won a medal. Himself and Diouff would be some pair up front.

kryogen

City

Are there any real "neutrals" among fans of other clubs when it comes to United?

Iang87

Don't care

KingdomYid wrote: »

United for me. I have nothing against City fans at all but just don't want to see another billionaire club win it.

so instead of chelsea then ya and they've won so many recently

Sasquatch76

kryogen wrote: »

Are there any real "neutrals" among fans of other clubs when it comes to United?

According to the poll results so far, yes.

GLaDOS

Don't care

kryogen wrote: »

Are there any real "neutrals" among fans of other clubs when it comes to United?

That's what I was thinking, I don't even support a EPL team and I still have an anti-united bias

willmunny1990

City

kryogen wrote: »

Are there any real "neutrals" among fans of other clubs when it comes to United?

Alot of people hate City aswell.

niallo27

kryogen wrote: »

Are there any real "neutrals" among fans of other clubs when it comes to United?

Well a third of the people so far have picked utd so yes I would say there are quiet a few neutrals.

cson

City

There was a post on this in the Arsenal thread and someone said United as there was a grudging respect for the way they've gone on about their business as opposed to City and their real life infinite money cheat Football Manager shenanigans.

The same way Scholes and Giggs have been one club men all their lives versus the throw £200k a week at whomever takes your fancy at City. Devoid of class tbh.

So for that reason United.

To Alcohol

City

niallo27 wrote: »

Well a third of the people so far have picked utd so yes I would say there are quiet a few neutrals.

I'd hazzard a guess anyone that picked Utd is a Utd fan and 90% that picked City are Liverpool fans. Failed poll.

cson

City

KingdomYid wrote: »

Well put it this way. I would rather see United win anything ahead of Arsenal Chelsea City and Liverpool, oh and Stoke too

Spurs do their best to help United out as often as possible to be fair.

3 points here, 3 points there. Banker 6 points for them every season.

KingdomYid

City

cson wrote: »

Spurs do their best to help United out as often as possible to be fair.

3 points here, 3 points there. Banker 6 points for them every season.

Fair enough, but they did the double on you lot aswell this season.

niallo27

cson wrote: »

There was a post on this in the Arsenal thread and someone said United as there was a grudging respect for the way they've gone on about their business as opposed to City and their real life infinite money cheat Football Manager shenanigans.

The same way Scholes and Giggs have been one club men all their lives versus the throw £200k a week at whomever takes your fancy at City. Devoid of class tbh.

So for that reason United.

They were also one clubs men because they were paid top whack by utd during the years. Who knows would they have left for big money years ago, look at how the club bent over for rooneys demands.

kryogen

City

niallo27 wrote: »

Well a third of the people so far have picked utd so yes I would say there are quiet a few neutrals.

Are they neutrals or do they just not like City? The bias can be against United or City, but lets face it, neither Manchester club are very popular outside their own fan base

kryogen

City

niallo27 wrote: »

They were also one clubs men because they were paid top whack by utd during the years. Who knows would they have left for big money years ago, look at how the club bent over for rooneys demands.

Couldn't disagree with you more if I tried, Scholes has never been motivated by money, whatever people think about Giggs he had plenty of opportunity to leave if he wanted, more money on offer from Italy but he stayed also.

Scholes didn't even use an agent to negotiate his contract!

You are barking up the wrong tree picking these two players as examples buddy

cson

City

niallo27 wrote: »

They were also one clubs men because they were paid top whack by utd during the years. Who knows would they have left for big money years ago, look at how the club bent over for rooneys demands.

You can't compare to Rooney for two reasons;

[a] They were products of the youth system, grew into a successful team and kept it that way.

Both were top class and deserved to be paid the going rate for that claibre of player by United.

And as well as this by and large the reason that Rooney demanded what he did is because City and Chelsea can blow whatever he wanted at him.

What both City and Chelsea have done is financial doping tbh and that is why I'd like to see United win it if I had to choose; at least they've by and large organically turned themselves into a successful commercial operation.

niallo27

kryogen wrote: »

Couldn't disagree with you more if I tried, Scholes has never been motivated by money, whatever people think about Giggs he had plenty of opportunity to leave if he wanted, more money on offer from Italy but he stayed also.

Scholes didn't even use an agent to negotiate his contract!

You are barking up the wrong tree picking these two players as examples buddy

I don't think they wanted to leave the country though, if they had been offered big money to stay in england then who knows. My point is more that people don't like city paying top wages when utd had been doing it for years.

Xavi6

Good day to you all.

I am of the opinion that, for change's sake, Manchester City are most deserving of a Premier League title and hope that they can ascend once more to the top of the table.

Best,

6ivax

niallo27

cson wrote: »

You can't compare to Rooney for two reasons;

[a] They were products of the youth system, grew into a successful team and kept it that way.

Both were top class and deserved to be paid the going rate for that claibre of player by United.

And as well as this by and large the reason that Rooney demanded what he did is because City and Chelsea can blow whatever he wanted at him.

What both City and Chelsea have done is financial doping tbh and that is why I'd like to see United win it if I had to choose; at least they've by and large organically turned themselves into a successful commercial operation.

Competition is good though for the league, teams are never going to compete with utd without spending big money, arsenal are trying to do it the right way as people say and they are miles away from winning a league, they have been left behind.

kryogen

City

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't think they wanted to leave the country though, if they had been offered big money to stay in england then who knows. My point is more that people don't like city paying top wages when utd had been doing it for years.

United had been paying good wages for a long time now yes, but I think you will find your wrong if you think it was much more then the rest of the title contenders, and considering the extra revenue generated by United why should they not pay the players well for their efforts as long as it is in line with the wage structure?

Uniteds wage bill still comes in at one of if not the best in the league in terms of wages to % of turnover.

KingdomYid

City

niallo27 wrote: »

Competition is good though for the league, teams are never going to compete with utd without spending big money, arsenal are trying to do it the right way as people say and they are miles away from winning a league, they have been left behind.

Good for the league in what way though? Is good for the team taken over by a billionaire but ultimately bad for the rest as these new billionaires take all the best players from the rest by offering massive contracts. To be fair to Arsenal they did it in the late 90's and early 2000's when United were at their best.

CongoPowers

Don't care

City.

kryogen

City

niallo27 wrote: »

Competition is good though for the league, teams are never going to compete with utd without spending big money, arsenal are trying to do it the right way as people say and they are miles away from winning a league, they have been left behind.

Arsenals problem is not being able to keep their best players, they have been losing about 2 stars a season since 05 now That is the main problem at the club, he does actually spend money, Walcott was young, but not cheap, Oxo, not cheap, Ramsey etc, these players did cost money you know, and quite a bit for kids

d22ontour

To Alcohol wrote: »

I'd hazzard a guess anyone that picked Utd is a Utd fan and 90% that picked City are Liverpool fans. Failed poll.

Bad guess so, most in this poll are neutrals except for Niallo27 'who is donning his Everton are his only rivals cap in this thread i suppose' and that 6ivax chap looks familiar too.

niallo27

kryogen wrote: »

Arsenals problem is not being able to keep their best players, they have been losing about 2 stars a season since 05 now That is the main problem at the club, he does actually spend money, Walcott was young, but not cheap, Oxo, not cheap, Ramsey etc, these players did cost money you know, and quite a bit for kids

Would Nasri have stayed if they offered him big wages. Would fabregas have stayed for Rooney sort wages.

Liam O

niallo27 wrote: »

Would Nasri have stayed if they offered him big wages. Would fabregas have stayed for Rooney sort wages.

No, they wouldn't have.

kryogen

City

niallo27 wrote: »

Would Nasri have stayed if they offered him big wages. Would fabregas have stayed for Rooney sort wages.

Dunno, why did Arsenal let his contract get so low? Could they actually afford to match citys offer? They have massive loan repayments from the stadium don't they? Im sure the wage budget is affected as a result of that. That was where they spent their money, they will reap benefits long term but there was going to be short-medium term negative impacts

Fabregas would have went to Barca one way or the other i think, he had been pining for the move for a long time and didn't actually seem motivated by money, from memory he is paying a certain amount of his transfer with his wages now is he not?

niallo27

KingdomYid wrote: »

Good for the league in what way though? Is good for the team taken over by a billionaire but ultimately bad for the rest as these new billionaires take all the best players from the rest by offering massive contracts. To be fair to Arsenal they did it in the late 90's and early 2000's when United were at their best.

Well I think it's good for the league as one of the billionaire clubs is making the league a bit exciting, the other is in 5th place so these clubs taking all these so called best players has actually evened up the league a lot.

major bill

Tough one, Would hate to see United win it as im a Liverpool supporter and id hate to see city win it as they only got where they are by pumping ridiculous amounts of money into the club. if i had a choice of the two id rather see City win it but if i had an outside choice then id like to see Arsenal or Spurs do it.

killwill

City

niallo27 wrote: »

Would Nasri have stayed if they offered him big wages. Would fabregas have stayed for Rooney sort wages.

We all know Fabregas wanted to go "home".
Nasri, I believe, left due to the lack of ambition at the football club. It was nothing to do with money.

niallo27

Liam O wrote: »

No, they wouldn't have.

Maybe not fabregas but Nasri went for the money, if he was offered the same money at Arsenal I'm sure he would have stayed.

Dolph Starbeam

City

United. I am a real neutral and I have hated United for 10 odd years but I just really don't want to see City winning it, not this year anyways. Uhh I actually voted that I want United to win the PL, I hate myself!

pistolpetes11

City

Chelsea Man here and for me without a doubt its United , even with a supposedly "bad United Team" there always in the hunt ,

Its a type of class thats magical to watch and follow as a fan of football.

Helix

city to shake it up

killwill

City

Mark! wrote: »

United. I am a real neutral and I have hated United for 10 odd years but I just really don't want to see City winning it, not this year anyways. Uhh I actually voted that I want United to win the PL, I hate myself!

If you hate Utd, that really does not make you a neutral does it?

srfc19

To Alcohol wrote: »

United. It'd sicken me to the core if Balotelli won a medal. Himself and Diouff would be some pair up front.

:rolleyes:

Honestly don't understand how anyone except Utd. fans could dislike Super Mario. Great player and seems like a laugh of the pitch. Comparing him to Diouf is ludicrous.
Going to have to call shenanigans on your supposed neutral status.

POSSY

City

major bill wrote: »

Tough one, Would hate to see United win it as im a Liverpool supporter and id hate to see city win it as they only got where they are by pumping ridiculous amounts of money into the club. if i had a choice of the two id rather see City win it but if i had an outside choice then id like to see Arsenal or Spurs do it.

Would you not prefer that Liverpool won it?! :pac: