BushWickBill:

It's all these ones who started watching History channel overnight and feel they are intelligent this morning.
The hypocrisy in basing an argument on fictional logic and warped conjecture is what I don't get.

Attach a function, equation, any mathematical index to tell us how you arrived at your position. Mba.

Instead they are turning car salesmen and telling us how a 504 will not cost the same today.
Even salesmen will do s better job at explaining how they got to their figured

Just take a look at the bolded below;

Eruditor:


So who will take you seriously when you say Fergie spent only £500M in his 26 years at United when Juxtaposing with today's market? A[b] player of Vidic's calibre would he be bought for £7M today[/b]?

If you want to know what he would cost, then simply find out how much the top defenders cost today. QED.

Who knew vidic here before he joined manU or you want to tell us you scouted him from red star Belgrade to spartak Moscow before he joined man U?

Brother Eruditor........ English and Mathematics are two totally different kettles......you cannot make strong claims like this without any tangibles to justify your claims....it will simply not work sir.

From CIES observatory.

How they arrived at a Kane fee. Erudition how do you arrive at yours?

Eruditor:


!

What you should ask is..the endorsement deals or the prize money for the Olympics etc is it the same today as it was in 1988?

The joke is on you trying to take us back in time to make a point.
Those figures were the going rates for their time.
Till you tell us how they correlate with mathematical logic, you are polluting cyberspace with your talk.

joeace2020:
How they arrived at a Kane fee. Erudition how do you arrive at yours?

He arrived at his by virtue of being unable to defend Peps spending and nothing more.

Just the innate need to defend his Fraud Lord and nothing more

Cruxifizio:


Just take a look at the bolded below;



Who knew vidic here before he joined manU or you want to tell us you scouted him from red star Belgrade to spartak Moscow before he joined man U?

Brother Eruditor........ English and Mathematics are two totally different kettles......you cannot make strong claims like this without any tangibles to justify your claims....it will simply not work sir.

Like...nobody knew him but United paid £7M for him in 2006. Therefore Fergie does not spend.

joeace2020:
How they arrived at a Kane fee. Erudition how do you arrive at yours?

Anyone who is to buy Kane today would pay higher than what Lukaku cost United. That is, a record must be broken.

Now that is similar to what Newcastle needed to do to get Shearer in 1996.

Therefore, Kevin Keegan does not spend money like Pep. He spent £15M on Shearer but Pep the Chequebook manager spent 27M on Gabriel Jesus arguments don't make sense. You see why?

Because what Kevin Keegan did for Shearer, would be what anyone would need to do for Kane.

So if I say Shearer in 1996 is worth £100m+ in today's market. It is logically consistent. QED.

Eruditor:


You are asking redundant questions.

If Ibra was the record fee for a striker in 2008 his valuation is similar to Lukaku's. Dani Alves for Kyle Walker's and so on considering they were the record fees for their positions. Logical reasoning is not hard.

All these questions about mathematical whatever is unfounded I may even say nonsensical because we are not evaluating fiscal inflation but the market today compared to whenever is being discussed.

It will seem redundant to you because your claims are redundant in itself.....

This is so fvcking funny.....

How do you even compare market values between two different periods without mathematics? Smh!!

You obviously don't know what you are talking about...

And how was ibras valuation similar to that of lukaku? What type of rubbish are you trying to sell here Bros?

BushWickBill:

He arrived at his by virtue of being unable to defend Peps spending and nothing more.

Just the innate need to defend his Fraud Lord and nothing more

The logic behind his reasoning on this thing is just absurb. So whatever world record for a player in a position now is is what a player who was also bought for a world record in that position few seasons ago should cost. What logic.

Eruditor:


Anyone who is to buy Kane today would pay higher than what Lukaku cost United. That is, a record must be broken.

Now that is similar to what Newcastle needed to do to get Shearer in 1996.

Therefore, Kevin Keegan does not spend money like Pep. He spent £15M on Shearer but Pep the Chequebook manager spent 27M on Gabriel Jesus arguments don't make sense. You see why?

Because what Kevin Keegan did for Shearer, would be what anyone would need to do for Kane.

So if I say Shearer in 1996 is worth £100m+ in today's market. It is logically consistent. QED.

You now have plus added to your figures. So you are gradually accepting you don't know what people cost so it was dumb to just drop straight figures before rather than give estimates.

As for the rest i can't reply them, i fear my IQ might suffer irreparable damage if i try.

Cruxifizio:


It will seem redundant to you because your claims are redundant in itself.....

This is so fvcking funny.....

How do you even compare market values between two different periods without mathematics? Smh!!

You obviously don't know what you are talking about...

And how was ibras valuation similar to that of lukaku? What type of rubbish are you trying to sell here Bros?

Trust me, I have never known any life in further or regular mathematics outside A1. Don't sweat it.

When comparing market eras those indexes are just rubbish. So no need to bring it up for brownie points.

When Ibra was bought in 2010 he was the most expensive striker I presume. That is what Lukaku is today.

So the man who spent 60M on Ibra in 2010 did not spend less than Mou did for Lukaku in 2017. Because in todays market, the most expensive striker is £100M.

odizeey:
All those questioning the hate speeches in the first half. Sorry to say but you are all mad. E no reach to vex abi? I say thunder fire you again. Cos we win today? League wen don finish? If sterling had scored those two chances how would we have won?

You dey mind them? I repeat, I'll rather die to take back those words I'd typed during the first-half performance. No site was not disgusted by our performance for the first-half. It wasn't as of this is the first time it's been happening. It's been a recurring theme whenever we meet a decent side. At home to City, away to Loserfool, away to Shekpe, Sevilla in the Champions League, yet someone will question my anger at Mourinho's cowardice and lack of self-belief and tactics. We'd have won Sevilla if only Mourinho wasn't being a coward. If not for the fact that Sterling was useless yesterday and that Loserfool made it hard for Pep to use the likes of Walker, KDB, Aguero and Co because he was reserving them for the return leg of UCL, them no for they talk those rubbish. They're the type that praise Mourinho's masterclass after DDG had saved us of Mourinho's cluelessness.

joeace2020:


You now have plus added to your figures. So you are gradually accepting you don't know what people cost so it was dumb to just drop straight figures before rather than give estimates.

How do you maintain SAFs £500M in 26 years argument when Zidane was bought for £56M and Sigurdsson cost Everton only 6M or so shy off that value in todays market.

Would I be remiss to say Zidane's £56M in 2001 is akin to Neymar's £196M today?

What would you now call people who are asking you for a formula to justify saying Zidane could have as well gone for 196M today.?

joeace2020:


As for the rest i can't reply them, i fear my IQ might suffer irreparable damage if i try.

It might actually improve. At least to the point where you would know formulas don't work in Market eras. Just like world record Maradona of £5m in 1984, the Napoli owner felt would double what RM paid for CR7.

Eruditor:

Like...nobody knew him but United paid £7M for him in 2006. Therefore Fergie does not spend.

And according to you 7mil looks like a record signing or spending big for a player like vidics calibre in 2006, right ? Ok!

Goodmorning bros....

Eruditor:


It might actually improve. At least to the point where you would know formulas don't work in Market eras. Just like world record Maradona of £5m in 1984, the Napoli owner felt would double what RM paid for CR7.

I will rather listen to CIES observatory who use scientific methodology to work out transfer figures than Eruditor who once again claims to be the bastion of knowledge when it comes to transfer figures.

Cruxifizio:


And according to you 7mil looks like a record signing or spending big for a player like vidics calibre in 2006, right ? Ok!

Goodmorning bros....

Nobody called it a record signing. But any person who says Fergie spent 7M on Vidic yet Mou spent 30M on unknown Lidellof and does not bring in the market era is waffling.

joeace2020:


I will rather listen to CIES observatory who use scientific methodology to work out transfer figures than Eruditor who once again claims to be the bastion of knowledge when it comes to transfer figures.

Never made any claims. CIES might as well say Kane's balls are insured for $30M each so his value is 196+60M. And people will refer to it. I am agnostic to that type of reasoning.

But Fergie spent X starting from 1980s and Pep spent Y (including 2017s crazy market) type of arguments are mischievous. For lack of a better word.

Eruditor:


How do you maintain SAFs £500M in 26 years argument when Zidane was bought for £56M and Sigurdsson cost Everton only 6M or so shy off that value in todays market.

Would I be remiss to say Zidane's £56M in 2001 is akin to Neymar's £196M today?

What would you now call people who are asking you for a formula to justify saying Zidane could have as well gone for 196M today.?

You keep falling into the slippery ditch you dug for yourself. Zidane and Neymar play in different positions, so now it's no longer a case of Zlatan who you said as a striker should cost what the record for striker is today, but its now anybody on the pitch can cost the price of anybody else today. De Gea can cost 196M based on what you say then. I don't know if you are using a hallucinogen but you need to stop it. Not only is what you saying bereft of intelligence, it also means you who said Shearer should cost £100 mil + has forgotten that and now quoting actual figures again. I was already delivering you from a lifestyle of ignorance but you are so far gone and irredemable.

When you quote figures you might not be sure of, please use estimates. If you tell me Zidane will cost £100+ or £150 mil+ in today's window, i can understand you. It means he could cost anything from 100 or 150 above based on the market rate but we can never know a true figure but for his class, he deserves to cost around that range.

Eruditor:


Never made any claims. CIES might as well say Kane's balls are insured for $30M each so his value is 196+60M. And people will refer to it. I am agnostic to that type of reasoning.

But Fergie spent X starting from 1980s and Pep spent Y (including 2017s crazy market) type of arguments are mischievous. For lack of a better word.

And i will believe them. They will tell me how many goals his balls has, how many interceptions his balls made, how many perfect crosses his balls made, how many trophies his balls has helped his team win. How by a tracable trend in figures they can guage how each achievement boosts his cost and what his final figure will look like. They won't tell me Harry Kane costs £200 mil now go to bed.

Erudite and protean shape-shifting.

See as my people turn this guy to contortionist, even Dayo would be jealous. Isn't our God a wonderful God?

Still trying to understand how we came back to win that match. I missed the game but I have seen the goals. I just wish these our players can put in more energy. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing making City look this good and better than other top teams is their work rate. If we can do same or even better we will be contesting for the league. Our boys should have discovered that by now na

joeace2020:


You keep falling into the slippery ditch you dug for yourself. Zidane and Neymar play in different positions, so now it's no longer a case of Zlatan who you said as a striker should cost what the record for striker is today, but its now anybody on the pitch can cost the price of anybody else today. De Gea can cost 196M based on what you say then. I don't know if you are using a hallucinogen but you need to stop it. Not only is what you saying bereft of intelligence, it also means you who said Shearer should cost £100 mil + has forgotten that and now quoting actual figures again. I was already delivering you from a lifestyle of ignorance but you are so far gone and irredemable.

When you quote figures you might not be sure of, please use estimates. If you tell me Zidane will cost £100+ or £150 mil+ in today's window, i can understand you. It means he could cost anything from 100 or 150 above based on the market rate but we can never know a true figure but for his class, he deserves to cost around that range.

Face palm.

You have reduced the talk to absurdities. Zidane and Neymar comparison only came up as overall worlds most expensive players.

joeace2020:



And i will believe them. They will tell me how many goals his balls has, how many interceptions his balls made, how many perfect crosses his balls made, how many trophies his balls has helped his team win. How by a tracable trend in figures they can guage how each achievement boosts his cost and what his final figure will look like. They won't tell me Harry Kane costs £200 mil now go to bed.

I guess this is why Barca paid 105M for Dembele. Traceable trend indeed.

Eruditor:


Nobody called it a record signing. But any person who says Fergie spent 7M on Vidic yet Mou spent 30M on unknown Lidellof and does not bring in the market era is waffling.

It was Mourinho's choice to spend 30m on unknown Lindeloff. He could have gone for cheaper ones if he wanted.

eph12:

It was Mourinho's choice to spend 30m on unknown Lindeloff. He could have gone for cheaper ones if he wanted.

My statement does not challenge his choice. I am showing how Lindeloff could have cost United £2M in 2001 and Fergie's spending would have been lower than what even Koeman spent before he got the boot.

BushWickBill:


Don't mind them.

They say he gives youth a chance. He has ditched the Zinchenko experiment already. Or maybe his youth policy is based on spending ridiculous amounts on unproven young players and misusing them (e.g £50 million on Sterling to play as striker, £47 million on Stones to sit on bench,£57 million on Laporte to play left back)
So it was Pep that signed Sterling.
None of his starting or bench players who featured yesterday came from the said academy.

Pep is a scam

So Pep signed Sterling

eph12:
Still trying to understand how we came back to win that match. I missed the game but I have seen the goals. I just wish these our players can put in more energy. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing making City look this good and better than other top teams is their work rate. If we can do same or even better we will be contesting for the league. Our boys should have discovered that by now na

My brother they have also had the hand of God this season. Late winners that kept breaking hearts it was unbelievable.

Eruditor:


Trust me, I have never known any life in further or regular mathematics outside A1. Don't sweat it.

^{When comparing market eras those indexes are just rubbish. So no need to bring it up for brownie points}.

When Ibra was bought in 2010 he was the most expensive striker I presume. That is what Lukaku is today.

So the man who spent 60M on Ibra in 2010 did not spend less than Mou did for Lukaku in 2017. Because in todays market, the most expensive striker is £100M.

Bros...not to disrespect you in anyway....pls apply your A1 in further mathematics here and tell us the brownies you have chosen to throwaway because they may probably make more sense than the ewa agoyin you have been trying to sell to us here....


Who is this £100M most expensive striker?

I know united paid 75mil for 24yr old lukaku with 15mil for add-ons totalling 90M while Juventus paid 75mil for a 30yr old higuain......but we should ignore their age since it is only one of the irrelevant brownies and declare lukaku the most expensive striker in the world.

Goodmorning again Bros....

Cruxifizio:


Bros...not to disrespect you in anyway....pls apply your A1 in further mathematics here and tell us the brownies you have chosen to throwaway because they may probably make more sense than the ewa agoyin you have been trying to sell to us here....


Who is this £100M most expensive striker?

I know united paid 75mil for 24yr old lukaku with 15mil for add-ons totalling 90M while Juventus paid 75mil for a 30yr old higuain......but we should ignore their age since it is only one of the irrelevant brownies and declare lukaku the most expensive striker in the world.

Goodmorning again Bros....

I am just using raw figures and my estimation of Lukaku at £100M is his value if you consider Rooney was included in that (£90M) deal. That is by the way.

Eruditor:


I guess this is why Barca paid 105M for Dembele. Traceable trend indeed.

I keep telling you you aren't intelligent.. take it from me. Did Dortmund consult CIES to value their player? Did Barca do that for Neymar? But does that dispute the fact that by actual mathematical analysis current price for a player can be determined. So will Lukaku cost £140 million now even though CIES says that's what he now costs? Is the final valuation not down to the club and not transfer guru Eruditor or CIES. I have told you value a player by estimates because you have used any methodology to work out your figures. Nobody including CIES knows what that player will eventually go for.

joeace2020:


I keep telling you you aren't intelligent.. take it from me. Did Dortmund consult CIES to value their player? Did Barca do that for Neymar? But does that dispute the fact that by actual mathematical analysis current price for a player can be determined. So will Lukaku cost £140 million now even though CIES says that's what he now costs? Is the final valuation not down to the club and not transfer guru Eruditor or CIES. I have told you value a player by estimates because you have used any methodology to work out your figures. Nobody including CIES knows what that player will eventually go for.

So where did anyone categorically say "this is definitely what Player A will go for"?

If these clubs don't use your CIES why are you brandishing it like war booty?