anyway guys back on topic please

I think there is a difference between How and How much .

What do you mean how!?? For the record, when we bought MvB for 15m euro, it was a world record...

once again please back on topic!?!?!

Silvio would splash out +40 million pound for Ronaldinho anytime!! and everybody thinks that'd be a huge mistake...

If you want to compare, you should compare Silvio of 20 years ago with Roman of now, you know...

am i talking to myself....back on topic!!

Oooh temper temper!

sorry but it was the 3rd time of asking

There was good debate going on, made for interesting reading. I think we ought to carry on, after all there are only a few of us who want Jose anyway

start a new thread then

Are you going to be like this everytime a thread goes off topic from now on then?

dst is going to have a melt down over this

of course!
i felt it was just straying a little to far off topic thats all

But the discussion was regarding the spending Jose did compared to the spending Don Silvio did when he took us over, on topic if you ask me

almost true the discussion was comparing Don Silvio and Abramovich's spending but if you feel strongly enough about it carry on (and i'm not taking the piss)

Exactly

No difference whatsoever, in fact the Don was probably more devious. I heard a story about how we signed Donadoni, apparently he was all set for Juve(only the signature was needed), anyway the Don organised one of his famous 'parties' and invited Donadoni...the rest is history

I'll add only one thing: if you don't see the differences between Silvio Berlusconi and Roman Abramovich, then you don't get the Milan concept.

Silvio is much more then money. He revolutionized football in general. He did many many things beside bringing star players and paying out summs of cash. You don't have to take historical examples, just think about Milan now. And think about Chelsea...are they on their way to secure a status similar to Milan's (that refers not only to titles and championships won)? I don't think so,..

I must say, I'm a bit surprised of the way we look at things,..

awesome

This is the meaning of How

I want a former Rossoneri to replace Carlo (the one from my avatar to be exact).

I'd like to know what you do mean then.

Money is money no matter which way you look at things. I'm not saying it's right and I'm not saying it's wrong, but I can't believe that some of you slate Abra for what he has done yet when Don Silvio does the same it's ok? A rather ignorant view of things IMO.

I'm with Fillipo on this one. If you guys don't see the difference in class between Abramovich's Chelsea and Berlusconi's Milan then there's no real use in continuing the disucssion.

I'll point out that this whole long discussion is all because of a couple of articles in French media sources. I've not seen much discussion of it at all in the Italian press. So for now, I'd put the Mourinho discussion in the realm of (rather distant) speculation.

This is the Jose thread, if you don't like it then don't bother posting in it

Class? You're deflecting the duscussion to something irrelivant. What does class of your owner have to do with winning football matches and trophies?

Fact is that Silvio and Roman took over good teams, they spent alot of money on players, they became instantly succesful. There is no difference in that. They've both done the same thing - one may be seen as a 'classier' person, but they've done the same thing - anyone that doesn't see this is just being completely ignorant and terribly biased, in my opinion.

You know, you're right. I won't bother posting in this thread again, because it's pointless to argue. If you guys want to extol the virtues of an EPL club and a Portuguese manager with no reliable and legitimate connection to the Milan coaching job, then by all means have at it.

Thanks for that

BTW what will you do if Jose is appointed manager?

I think that what Filip was saying is that Berlusconi also brought in Milan other qualities apart from money. Everyone admires Milan's class, even their greatest rivals. I can't see Chelsea sharing the same status Milan has now in 20 years. I think that's what he was saying and I agree with him.

But money is money and Berlusconi would not have achieved what he has achieved with Milan without it. The fact that he ameliorated this club in other aspects too is a separate thing. What I'm saying is, Berlusconi did not spend "classier money"...

Tennie is right, this get's us into a nonsense. So this is my last post here also:

De gustibus non est disputandum

If you look at Roman Abramovich you'll see money, probably even more then Silvio Berlusconi. But I repeat, it's not all about money. And no, fact is that Silvio took over a destroyed team, a team on the verge of their existance and full of financial problems.

Berlusconi brought in money, but he also created a Milan-system. He used his knowledge as businessman and experience with media groups. He created a Milan world, he used (for ex.) Ruud Gullit not only on the field, he used him to promote Milan and other articles with help of the medias. At this time, it was a revolution. There are hundreds of other examples,...but my point is that you can't compare Silvio and Roman, it does not come to the thing "when Roman cashes out it's classles, but if Silvio does the same it's fine". I'm surprised that we started even to compare those guys,..


I mean that Roman's a child who does not get into the concept of modern football and he'll soon leave his toy called Chelsea for new adventures. He did not create any solid ground for the club. You really think Chelsea is on their way to challenge Milan? No way, I'll give the Blues 3, max. 4 years.

Right then this is how I see it. Both men bought football clubs and spent heavily on them buying the best players that were available to them because they had the same dreams - to make the best teams in their respective countries/world. Now I cannot see any particular difference there. I'm not saying either were right or wrong in what they did but it seems certain people think it's ok for one but not the other. I agree that Milan has class, but they also have the benefit of 20 years experience, while you can only judge chelsea after Roman has been there 20 years. I really cannot fathom out why this is so hard to understand? I think some people ought to remove their rose tinted spectacles every now and again because their judgement seems clouded.


And let's not forget another thing, and that is Don Silvio used Milan to help further his political career, when Milan did well in Europe he got more votes, whereas to Roman it is just a project. Now whether Roman is there next week/month/year or even decade is irrelevant IMO.

This is also the same with Chelsea, Roman took over Chelsea, before they were about to go bust, he paid off all of their debts and poured £440m into the club, with new training facilities, players, etc.



I don't think it even matters. Roman took over a club and with the way he's spent his own money, it doesn't look like he's there for a profit. Have you ever seen him at a Chelsea game? he's a real fan, he gets frustrated just like a real fan, he gets happy like a real fan, he heads every ball with the team up in the stands. Silvio's been at Milan for over 20 years, Roman hasn't had that same chance, but he's made a great start.

why are some praising Roman and even comparing him to Silvio ? I tought Silvio was the one who created the team thats now Milan , roman did what ? spend money ? what does Chelsea stand for or represent ? nothing, just another football club like many others

Besides , this topic is about the best coach in the world not about Silvio Versus Roman.

at last someone who realizes what a topic means!!

Er.. Silvio's been at Milan for 21 years, while Roman's only been at Chelsea for 4..

In Silvio's 4th year, it's exactly the same as where Chelsea are now. He bought a club going nowhere, spent a load of money. Simple as that. Some people are so incredibley biased.

And to keep on topic.. Glad you realise he's the best in the World, Nova.

In 4/5 years Silvio & his Milan achieved a status wich is still recognized as probably one of the best team in the world , ever ! if not THE best. He did not only bought a club , he made a whole new world around it. And even before berlusconi Milan was allready a legendary club with players like Gre-no-li , Rivera , Maldini , ... None of Chelsea's player will be remembered , none !

Comparing Silvio with an idiot like Roman I wish you said that between the Ultras of Milan

I promise , ill stay on topid now

Yes.. through spending alot of money, he broke the World transfer record, how do you not understand that?

In my opinion, anybody that can't see the similarities of Berlusconi's Milan and Abramovich's Chelsea is just being ignorant, and quite arrogant with the whole "We're better than you" attitude.

Well , if you cant see the difference between Milan & chelsea , Silvio & Roman ... Its not only money you know ... but ok , I'm braking my promise now. sorry mishie

Lets stay on topic. Offcourse feel free to reply if you like.

you are f****g joking aren't you!!

I'm not sure what you mean, so I'll clarify.

1) No, I'm not joking, there are huge similarities between Milan in the late 80s and Chelsea in the past 5 years.

OR

2) Are you talking about me going off-topic? If so, I think you'll find Nova and pretty much everyone else in this thread did it. Funny how you tell myself and I_Ross to stay on topic, just because we disagree with you on this matter.

In my opinion anyone that compares a team whose players mostly are foreign imports who have won NOTHING in Europe to a team with a majority of players who are nationals of that country who have won 1/4 of the European cups of the last 20 years...are quite arrogant too. You're assuming that people think the English league is the best in the world because it has the best marketing. For crying out loud, look at the technical quality of the play in England -- the best players are ALL foreign. So are the best coaches. It's not 1850 guys. The sun has long since set on the British Empire. Wake up and smell the coffee. Just because something is successful in England (with foreign owners, foreign coaches, and foreign players) does not mean it's automatically successful everywhere else, or that everyone else thinks it's the bestest ever.

EDIT: And I respectfully suggest that those who consistently bash the quality of Milan's coaches, players, management, etc, try following the team for more than the couple of years since Kaka has been here. Learn a little of the history and you might understand why the old timers (me, Mishie, Nova, Fillipo, etc) disagree so passionately with your opinions, which to me at least seem dreadfully misinformed.

You just dont know when to shut up do you ? He told everyone to stay on topic, including me .

Thats not fair from you Kurt to judge mishie like that.

I'll excuse your pathetic "out to get me" complex because the message was to everyone not just you and I_Ross

Again, the anti-England bandwagon rolls on. OHHHHH my bad, I fogot Jose and Porto were both English, oh, and Roman's English, too. Obviously I was defneding them because of that.

Chelsea are an English team, they have as many English starters as Milan have Italian starters. Plenty of the EPLs top players are English, and I think you'll find it's only at the top end of the league that more players are foreign, but some people are typically media drawn and only care about the big 4.

But silly me, I forgot the most dominant team in Italy at the moment is all Italian. Afterall Julio Cesar, Maicon, Maxwell, Chivu, Dacourt, Vieira, Stankovic, Zlatan, Suazo, Crespo and Cruz all won the World Cup with italy didn't they?

As for Milans best players Kaka' and Seedorf are hardly Italian, neither is the massive Brazillian contingent they have. But this doesn't matter, obviously.

Well done Kurt...this topic is now closed