Who are more Pl@stic ? Man city or Chelsea?

I think it's Man city, spent GBP 700 mill on transfers on a team who were in relegation zone when they were bought

it's the 6th season & they have only won 1 EPL & 1 FA cup, didn't made the beyond UCL group stage (1st champions to do so). this tells a lot about the structure & academy of the club which has 0 players in the first 11

Also with all this expenditure they don't have any major star of football, think of united, RVP & rooney, even kagawa are the highest shirts sellers, all the other pl@s like psg, monaco have bought bigger

names like ibra, falcao, cavani in just 2-3 years

Chelsea are slightly less of a plas becos they had lamp-terry etc when they were bought & still made it to the top 4 without roman

so it should be Man city

5 Answers

Relevance
  • Ryze
    Lv 5
    7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Oh definitely Man City. I mean Chelsea have built their team on the foundation of oil money and spent ridiculous amounts of money buying in the best of the best players and outpricing just about anybody in the league. But, all that being said, they still have a great academy, they've used their money to invest in the future of the club with players like Courtois and De Bruyne and Kalas and Van Ginkel and Lukaku and so on. They are a team who could quite happily stop spending ridiculous amounts on transfer fees and not offer over inflated wages to new players, and still be in the position that they are in for the next 10-15 years at least.

    Man City on the other hand are a team who have never gotten over the compulsion to just buy in anybody. Just buy in whoever they need, no matter the cost, no matter their age, no matter how many of their youth team players could fill those spots given the chance. They invest in short term glory, building a dynasty on older players and completely ridding themselves of just about all their English players and their roots as a team. City have truly sold their soul, and if they were to stop the money going in, if they suddenly didn't have the cash to throw about willy-nilly, I reckon within 5 years they would back to being a midtable side, because so far they've done nothing to actually invest in the future of the club.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Chelski - most of the fans pre 2004 were Fulham fans

    but Man city have spent 700m like you said and have won the prem 1 time, give wenger or fergi 700mil and they would of got triples every year...

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Chelsea

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Obviously Man city,spent a lot of money with little trophy to show for it

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    you put so much effort in typing these questions lol get a liffe

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Chelski.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.