Manchester United v Chelsea: The transfer dealings that say it all

This bloke makes a habit of trying to bolster himself, writes the same article every second day. All sounds a little desperate to me. Truth is fergie's brought a lot of players for big money exactly what he's always done. Long before Roman A came along fergie was buying the league. Lot of dodgy buys there to. Few other little things MR. desperate mac supporter forgets to mention. chelsea lost less games than Man U last year, what lost 'em the title was the goals they conceeded after taking the lead at the bridge, something which directly stems from Terry's absence - bolton, fulham and reading just to name 3 Second point fergie's ain't no great tactician as the FA final proved and his record against Jose is pathetic - third, Man U ain't got cover at the back and these new players will need to bed down in england -This ain't arsenal you know Jose's a whole lot smarter than that dope wenger. Ronaldo pulled you out of a lot of holes last year - really think he's going to do it twice - you had everything g

You were spending ridiculous amounts of money 6 or 7 years ago. Remember £29m for Rio (I forgot to give a sample) Ferdinand and £28.1m for J S Veron. You've conveniently left them out. What a waste of money.

Didn't read the article. Saw at the top who had written it and have gone straight to the foot of the page to say that this guy is becoming soooooo boring.

Blinkered kak yet again, by just looking at the last 3 yrs distorts figures to suit your needs go back a little a bit more and you would need to include Veron and Ferdinand into you equation that would change the balance sheet a bit. or just look at this years spending and you will see Chelsea have done well picking up 2 proven premiership players on Bosman's. Having said all that all teams seem to be spending large at the moment in an effort to survive the drop at the end of the season, will more clubs go into financial meltdown? I predict a tough season ahead.

could not agree mo, intresting that the below three come on to have a go at your article but wont show there colours of the teams they support.. any way your arguements are very trued and very fair, and yres you could go back even further as some of them said but lets face it, if you are going to go onabout abromavich it would be only fair to talk about our spending when he was thre, lets face it veron and ferdinand are our two biggest gignings but you dont here kakatk go on about keane for 1 million or neville, giggs, scholes, oshea fletcher richardson wes browne or phil neville butt etc etc who all have added value to our team at some point or our still doing so, lets face it show us your home grown hey chelsea. or who can forget cantona, some great pieces of business, its easy to point out soe big spends in a career that has spanned 20 years (which is incredible in todays footballing world) and was responcible for the decline of the scouse empire. what republic is trying to say is look at recent history i

in the last three years, when abromavich has had his chq book open..... and one last thing lets face it, if liverpool fet mancine from roma for 15 mil and do prize heinze away from us for 7 million that will take there spending to 70 million which is morte then ours as we are only going to pay an intial 6 million for tevez for a 2 year loan, so does that mean they will win the premiership next season, think not....

Gud article...could've expected nothing else from a United supporter...CSKA London supporters, and Liverpool supporters who have been going on about us spending a lot of money long before RM toucjhed down in london...they are right, we did...we spent the money we earned, not picked it from a Russian billion're's pocket. We paid record sums for Captain Marvel and Keano, because we are a rich club, not stupid pensioners. I have a lot of respect for liverpool, even though i hate them, they have earned their success unlike CSKA London and have a gr8 history....I cant stand Chelski scum...

what happened to rio £30 million just missed that out by chance yeah

Shouldn't you lot stop pretending to be neutral and start flagging with your TRUE colours. The proof of the pudding will not be known for some time yet (the pudding being the transfer dealings of man u and Chelsea). In the mean time how come you don't the scum of buying the league.

Boasting one of the very best teams in Europe? Em, can you please point me towards what evidence backs this up or did United win something in Europe recently we are not privvy to? There's a good lad. Other than that, I think the Oxford English dictionary can stop their search for the one word to describe bias, blinkered vision and hypocrisy all in one - it's republicofmancunia

dude...if u gotta take the whole transfer spendin into the scenario then firstly add ruud...and also the fact that chelsea had been maing a team in the last few seasons....that explains the huge spending...and tell me wisea#s if you were to open a new business and with an aim to become the numero uno in your field, would you nt have to spend a whole lot more to challenge the top businesses...and slowly you would cut down on your spendin and make a profit and also become the numero UNO...so stop being bitter and jst feckin recognise the fact that chelsea are on for a very promisin future and also appreciate the hard work put in by the chelsea squad and the manager and the owner....and damn change the title to the wailing of a feckin wisea*s jealous hypocite

i meant rio in the first line.....

ok people look at the signings and see when tey wer made!! all in d last 3/4 previous seasons wen ambramovich took over chelsea!!

Its only a game lads, dont you lot have wives and girlfriends to tend to?

Sorry guys, yet again, editting has taken away part of the message of my article. Jose's average spending is 78 million per season, not just 50 million. In my original article, I did make this quite clear. And for the person who asked about Rio, he signed for United in 2002. I was showing the comparisons between what Fergie had spent since we last won the title in 2003 up until what had been spent in the summer before we just won the league, with what Jose has spent at Chelsea. This might not have been very clear with the inaccurate edits which have been made.

You all misin the point yes we spent 30 mil on ferdinand but the difference is we did not off a sugar daddy to buy him did we? Chelsea r a small club .u never won the euro cup.2 titles and needed a rich billionaire to help them. Chelsea fans make me sick.almost as much as the crap long ball football they play .

Chelsea fans are dum.spending is not spending .manu bought players without a sugar daddy simple

This article has so many holes i dont know where to start, what about the 24 million pounds chelsea got for robben, is that suddenly not counted. Why does it matter about this deficit of just £20m, or an average of £6m to £7m a season for the last three seasons. Yes the only frickin reason he was able to do this is because he had spent unbelievable money compared to anybody, way before 2004. So Manchester United had many valuable players in their squad to offload before this ridiculous three season period, to appear to balance their books. The fact that they actually still made a loss of 7 million per season for those three special seasons just shows that their spending is cannot be viewed as anything other than crazy mass spending. As they had the fall back sales of all the stars they had hourded from the period before 2004. This must mean that now manchester united's spending in relation to their sales are actually escalating in real terms not just in numerical terms.

This article has so many holes i dont know where to start, what about the 24 million pounds chelsea got for robben, is that suddenly not counted. Why does it matter about Manchester United's deficit of just £20m, or an average of £6m to £7m a season for the last three seasons. Yes the only frickin reason he was able to do this is because he had spent unbelievable money compared to anybody, way before 2004. So Manchester United had many valuable players in their squad to offload before this ridiculous three season period, to appear to balance their books. The fact that they actually still made a loss of 7 million per season for those three special seasons just shows that their spending is cannot be viewed as anything other than crazy mass spending. As they had the fall back sales of all the stars they had hourded from the period before 2004. This must mean that now manchester united's spending in relation to their sales are actually escalating in real terms not just in numerical terms.

Yes this article does have many holes in it. But it doesnt miss the point. Alex Ferguson and MUFC are far from the spending leagues of chelsea. Its a fact that cannot be denied-Manchester United are on more of a budget and are ALOT more selective in the process of buying than CFC. Yes there have been flops in MUFC'S purchases(alot less than chelsea). But this shows in Fergie's current faith in talented youth players and their developement instead of going ahead and spending the BIG bucks on the worlds most renowned. The fact of the matter is, Fergie and his squad won us the double...The proof is in the pie.