This window Manchester City under Pep the G has bought in the following big players:

Ederson
Bernardo Silva
Douglas Luiz
Kyle Walker
Benjamin Mendy
Danilo

Average age of all arrivals to the club is 25 years.
The amount of money for these players in total is around £217mil
The money Man City gained by selling players this window so far is around £35mil.

Moving on to Manchester United where José Mourinho aka Daisy has got new boys to walk with:

Romelu Lukaku
Victor Lindelöf
Nemanja Matic

Average age of all arrivals is around 24 years old.
The amount of money spent was around £140mil.
The amount of money received from departures has been around £7mil

When it comes to Chelsea Antonio the Don Conte has got these new bling blings:

Álvaro Morata
Tiemoué Bakayoko
Antonio Rüdiger

Average age of all arrivals is around 23 years of age.
The amount of money spent was around £119.00mil.
The cash from departures so far has been around £66mil.

Everton is the next in line with their own Tintin captain Ronald Koeman that got more fancy these days:

Jordan Pickford
Michael Keane
Davy Klaassen
Henry Onyekuru
Sandro Ramírez
Cuco Martina
Wayne Rooney

Average age of all new signings is around 24 years.
The amount of money spent was around £83mil not counting Wayne Rooney.
The amount of money gained from departures has been more than £90mil.

All other big teams have spent less than or around £50 mil so far.

Golazo you are making too much sense with factual evidence. In here mostly things are spoken with pure opinion backed by bias and prejudice which is normal but not normal when still continuing to argue even after facts were presented.

http://dailycannon.com/2018/02/371m-guardiola-spends-21-months-wenger-21-years/

LOL

surprise City is good with that amount of money...

@Golazo Tbf, this doesn't even suprised me. :P

Genius Pep!

Tbh it's not really fair to compare because you have to take in inflation too for Wenger's buys. But I agree, Pep spends ridiculous money.

Pep needed specific players and dealed with aging City, showed Zabaleta, Hart, Kolarov the exit, Toure, Stones and Kompany are still there but unwanted by the coach.
He dealt with transfer market genuinely, YES deal with it.
With this season inflation Mou while joining Chelsea would have bought Deco for 80 mil, Ballack for 100mil, Drogba for 80mil, Torres for 140 mil.....and the list is long.
What you consider as factual facts, nobody denies it, they spent the most, but they were in rebuilding its normal for an ambitious club and coach to do so.

He signed well, rebuilded well, gave City consistence, identity and winning mentality.

Why so much hate ? You both were saying Pep will be recognized only if he delivers in PL, he isn’t destroying it, now you are looking for excuses. PSG spent that amount in one player and still unbalanced, if hen manages to win PL it’s 100 mil in City poket, advancing in CL = 50 mil in the poket, getting champs + visibility = explosion of shirts sales + increasing fanbase + more’ money made on social media + sponsors....

He took risk by spending what he spent on the player he wanted, he changed GK while all England w s against. What is factual is that he did a great job in all eras of what could be a coach job.
He may repeat SAF legacy I’m not sure you will give him credit anyway, objectivity is not on your side guys.

Pep needed specific players and dealed with aging City, showed Zabaleta, Hart, Kolarov the exit, Toure, Stones and Kompany are still there but unwanted by the coach.

Poor him...I swear only some Messi fans for some odd reason always back up Pep even though he for no reason left Messi's club. Is it too hard to see that winning with money is not a big achievement but only expected?

He may repeat SAF legacy I’m not sure you will give him credit anyway, objectivity is not on your side guys.

He is a long way from that, Conte won the title in his first season even with minimal spending.

He may repeat SAF legacy I’m not sure you will give him credit anyway, objectivity is not on your side guys.

hahaha!

NO.

Is it too hard to see that winning with money is not a big achievement but only expected?

I disagree with how it is expected, sure team who spent more tend to win more but if it was all there were to it, how you explain Leicester winning the league 2 season ago? How about Chelsea last season? Even back then, City and United had spent more than them, yet United ended out of top four and City weren't even in second position. Money doesn't win you the EPL even if its help quite a bit, consistency is what win you the PL imo. Winning PL is never easy nor is it completely expected, no matter how much money you spent, it is alway a challenge.

@Emo Money doesn't win you but when it does, it does. Like Conte said, 1+1 is always 2 :)

tiki_taka

Pep did a very good job, but nothing less was expected. A PL title should be his bare minimum target, considering he has spent over 200 million this summer. You have to back up your reason to spend so much with trophies, otherwise he will only get shown the door.

@tiki:

What is factual is that he did a great job in all eras of what could be a coach job.

I agree entirely.

Yes, City have spent more than anyone else, but it's also true that he's used what they've bought him brilliantly. Also, let's consider that aside from KdB, he didn't actually purchase anyone who was an established superstar. Let's look again at who was brought in this season, and perhaps just as importantly, who he bought them from:

Aymeric Laporte: a 23 y.o. CB from Athletic Bilbao
Benjamin Mendy: a 23 y.o. CB from Monaco.
Danilo Luiz: a 26 y.o. FB from Real Madrid who could barely get into the side.
Kyle Walker: the best RB in the PL, but it was only Tottenham fans who knew that (or would admit it).
Ederson Moraes: a 24 y.o. GK from Benfica.
Bernado Silva: a 22 y.o. midfielder from Monaco.

Now, Monaco may have been French champions, and Benfica are heavyweights in Portugal, but those are not actually superstar names. They are fantastically talented players, but most of them are also young players with their whole careers ahead of them, and the others are entering their prime. These are not blockbuster signings in any sense other than they were for a surprising amount lot of money.

And how much would blockbuster signings have cost, anyway? Coutinho went for 140m in the end.

Where's the glitz and glamour of buying Lewandowski? What about Cavani, or even M'bappe? Why didn't we see Manchester City break the bank to pry Bale away from Madrid, or Suarez from Barcelona, the way that PSG did with Neymar?

Yes, Manchester City spent 260m this year, but Chelsea have also spent 250m, and PSG spent 220m on one player alone. While Chelsea have gone backwards, and PSG still struggling in Europe (like City did), Guardiola has build one of the best defenses in Europe from scratch, and did so with players who had rising reputations but were by no means the type of superstar deal which saw Coutinho switch to the Camp Nou, or Alvaro Morata to Stamford Bridge.

Instead, he asked Mansour to buy the players that wanted, which fit his system of football. That's absolutely magnificent coaching, and proof that when Guardiola gets his way, and forces the whole team to play within hi tactics, he can turn promising young stars into superstars of the game.

Just ask Gerard Pique.

I say "Bravo!" to Pep, and feel grateful to be watching this record-breaking side. Football is the winner here, no matter how much it cost for City to do it.

Yes, Manchester City spent 260m this year, but Chelsea have also spent 250m, and PSG spent 220m on one player alone. While Chelsea have gone backwards, and PSG still struggling in Europe (like City did), Guardiola has build one of the best defenses in Europe from scratch

Can this be more false? I hardly doubt it, good job for making me laugh :D

10/10 on that reply Golazo. I really loved the way you debated Lodatz points.

Being serious I gotta agree with you Lodatz. Pep has been near unstoppable. People will throw the amount of money spent to try and finish or discredit his work but I don't see Mou get similar results with a similar budget.

People has been set on his idea and evolved his tactics for the betterment of the team. I don't think any manager would have taken his original squad to win anything impressive. I'm sure people are just dying to see City knocked out the CL so they can come and talk about how had a manager Pep is and all that nonsense.

@Raimondo90 Oh I remember you! You were the guy that was saying that City was an average team before Pep came and that their players from last season were not good for any of the top 3 teams and stuff like that...OBVIOUSLY for you what Lodatz said makes sense, but the reality is a bit different.

The amount of money spent is the biggest factor of why Man City is so doing so good in the league.

Here is my post from a previous topic:

Since Pep came to Man City -
Man City:
2017 bought players for £224m and sold for £85m, they spent overall £139m
2016 bought players for £191m and sold for £31m, they spent overall £160m
Average age for both seasons in arrivals - 23 years
In total: £299m invested
Chelsea
2017 bought players for £179m and sold for £177m, they spent overall £2m
2016 bought players for £119m and sold for £97m, they spent overall £22m
Average age for both seasons in arrivals - 23 years
In total: £24m invested

This was before the last transfer I think, fact is Conte just as much reforms as Pep but with less money, Pep can put up 2 sets of defenders capable of winning the title at any given time, he can bench Aguero and rest him as well, he just has a much bigger depth, he didn't do anything from scratch in fact in the last games it was Aguero,Silva and even Kompany that scored goals, all of which have been in the team since 2013.

Man City was already a contender for the title even before the huge investments made when/by Pep's arrival. You have Valencia as your team but you sound 100% of the time as a typical Barcelona fan defending Pep wherever you see the chance, you must be a fan in cover xD

Has anyone here denied money being important? Not at all. It's how you spend your money. Otherwise you make stupid overpriced transfers. If you really read Lodatz post, he says it's not a question about how much he spent but about how well he spent. Comparing to other teams.

Saying I need to be a Barca fan to defend or enjoy the good football Pep provided is ignorant as all hell. It's not even worth stopping to that level.

Saying City with that aged squad from two years ago could compete against the current Chelsea, Utd and Liverpool is just plain stupidity. That squad at their prime did indeed win the EPL but they were way past their best. No one even dares dispute that.

Also, your comparison between what Chelsea and City spent is not exactly what Lodatz refers to. You are talking about net profit/loss. Which is important if these clubs were just in it for money. City and Chelsea had had to pay about the same amount in hopes to improve in the football department. Looks like City succeeded way more than Chelsea did. If you focus on business perspective only you'll end up turning into a version of Arsenal.

Lodatz is a master of pulling fictional facts from spurs forums to enlighten us.

Saying City with that aged squad from two years ago could compete against the current Chelsea, Utd and Liverpool is just plain stupidity.

Their current squad from last season almost won the title, Pep put a standard left back Kolarov at the spot of a central back and lost to Monaco in CL because of his own bad mistakes not because of the squad, you're making excuses saying that Man City was an average team when all what has been happening prove you otherwise, their senior players are carrying the team still to this day.

You think that everyon can spend equally as much as Man City and that only Pep somehow outsmarted them all by spending smart, you making up stories that's what you're doing, he didn't spend money smarter than others he spent THE MOST MONEY he OUTSPENT them all, that's a big difference.

Again, this same Man City has been fighting for titles before and during Pep as well, he just bought more players and let out some that he didn't care about but he has the biggest squad depth out of all top teams in the league he didn't need to compensate at any point since his arrival.

City and Chelsea had had to pay about the same amount in hopes to improve in the football department.

No they didn't have to pay the same amount stop inventing stuff, you're basing your whole talk on your own pre-made opinion of how YOU would like things to be and not how the reality is. If you by any chance refer to the past of Chelsea then by all means, without the massive spending the club wouldn't be winning, but the same goes for Man City anyway.

Just as Chelsea broke half of the PL records with multiple managers and what not, the same is happening now to Man City and the main factor is once again, MONEY.

Their current squad from last season almost won the title, Pep put a standard left back Kolarov at the spot of a central back and lost to Monaco in CL because of his own bad mistakes not because of the squad, you're making excuses saying that Man City was an average team when all what has been happening prove you otherwise, their senior players are carrying the team still to this day.

Last season City were 3rd place 15 points behind Chelsea. So they were nowhere close to that title. In UCL they got knocked out at R16 to Monaco in a two thrilling legged tie only loosing to away goals. Using Kolarov was a mistake since they didnt win and I wont defend that having Otamendi on the bench. Have to remind you that Monaco from that season was deadly, they werent crowned Ligue 1 champs for nothing as well as reaching semi finals in UCL.

Did you by any chance mean the season prior? (2015/16) because City ended up 4th 15 points behinf Leicester. And they did indeed reach UCL semi finals, losing to eventual champions Real Madrid.

I say those teams were far from spectacular. especially looking at their line ups now and how theyve aged.

You think that everyon can spend equally as much as Man City and that only Pep somehow outsmarted them all by spending smart, you making up stories that's what you're doing, he didn't spend money smarter than others he spent THE MOST MONEY he OUTSPENT them all, that's a big difference

Has nothing to do with outspending. Its all about wether the amount spent translated into improvement to the squad. You can spend 200mil and regress when the tactics are wrong and players dont get along. Look at PSG, theyve spent so much to conquer CL and Neymar has brought more trouble than trophies. Chelsea also spent money to get better difference is they made profits on players sold (The constant stream of buying and selling youth players is great business) and that they regress doing worse than last season.

No they didn't have to pay the same amount stop inventing stuff, you're basing your whole talk on your own pre-made opinion of how YOU would like things to be and not how the reality is. If you by any chance refer to the past of Chelsea then by all means, without the massive spending the club wouldn't be winning, but the same goes for Man City anyway.

this is irrelevant as my opinion is that teams should be forced to field a set amount of players that come from academy thus reducing transfers and also limiting how much can be spent. And you said it yourself; City is doing what Chelsea did a few years ago. Scrapping dead weight and bringing in fresh talent. Now days its gotten more expensive but teams like Chelsea and City have the funds to invest.

accept that City is doing incredible thanks to Pep and the investments hes made.