Why Your Club SHOULD Or SHOULDN'T Buy From Manchester City

Right then, here's a question for you. If your team was buying a player from Manchester City

would you be excited that someone with such a successful club on their CV was joining

or worried that City didn't see them as good enough to keep and now you're actually getting some dead wood? Well, unlike most hypothetical questions on the internet today, I'm actually

going to be exploring both sides of the argument and tell you why your team should, or shouldn't

be buying from Manchester City this summer. Now, this idea hasn't just come out of the blue, by the way, pun intended

but mainly because it seems like a lot of clubs do their shopping in Manchester

In fact, in the last decade, the club have made around £750 million from player sales

second only to Chelsea in England. So, back to the question at hand, and let's go with the positive angle to begin with

and why you should be buying players from Man City. As a baseline expectation, the chances are you'll be getting a technically very, very proficient footballer

Honestly, everyone from the best academy prospect to the best player on the team is going to be a serious baller

They'll possess good ball control, technique and an immensely high level of tactical understanding

because they've spent more than 20 minutes having their ear chewed off by Pep Guardiola

Sit down! Nobody talk! Sit down! Of course, some players are better than others, but as a group they'll have a much higher

level than the majority of the league. On top of this, the club has cultivated a winning mentality

Regardless of how much money has been spent on new players over the years, that doesn't

always guarantee success. So the club have obviously worked on building and maintaining a level of performance that

ensures they will win. Swiss international Manuel Akanji even said so himself upon joining the club, stating

you feel it in the changing room and from the whole club that the goal is to win as

many titles as possible. You know what, having read that out loud on the list of generic new signing statements

that has to be right up there. Anyway, I'm sure you'll be ready to point out that Manuel and the boys didn't quite

manage to win a trophy this season, but these players have seen more silverware in the last

two years than most professional players could only dream of The long and short of this is that being technically tactically and mentally proficient pretty much goes for every player across the board because they either been brought in and taught this at a young age from the academy or they been brought into the first team because they exhibited these traits at the highest level already at other clubs

But it's actually the younger players I want to look at in the transfer shop window

because I think they are the best and most realistic signings a team could make and here's why

So, number one, City sell some really good players way before their prime

And this isn't a case of a club not knowing how good players X, Y and Z were going to be

It's just a case of a player being really good but not getting opportunities, being really good but needing to be sold for PSR reasons

or being really good and not quite as good as a big money signing

I mean, look at Cole Palmer, Douglas Luiz, Liam De Lapp, Jadon Sancho

well, the Borussia Dortmund version of Jadon Sancho. All of them have gone on to be key players in their side success

or even earned big transfers to top clubs that can rival City in the Champions League

These are the players that attacks can be built around. Heck, even the whole team can be built around them

When I watch Karl Palmer, it seems like leaving City actually was the best move

because although he could have stayed and been a squad player winning loads of trophies

he's now the main man at Chelsea and playing with more freedom than any other City player

In fact, if you're a City fan, right now a snap decision is on the table

would you rather have Foden or Palmer in your starting XI? Maybe you could even leave your answer to this down in the comments section

But honestly, there seems to be a point where players decide to leave City early-ish on in their career

when they still haven't had this sense of freedom and creativity restrained to a point where it can't be recovered

and it actually works out. Basically, you need to get your Cole Palmers out of City before they turn into a Phil Foden or Jack Grealish

Don't get me wrong, Phil Foden's unbelievable, but could we be seeing him being even better elsewhere

potentially. But the second reason to buy from City is that the prices are usually good for what you get

in two ways, both in the ability like we've discussed, but also for sell on value

something that many clubs are now factoring into their transfer discussions For example we spoke about Palmer being very good and 40 million pounds worth but it the ones who leave under the radar that can then be worth big money to clubs in the Premier League and even the Championship Look at Morgan Rodgers He cost Middlesbrough million in 2023

and one year later, they sold him to Villa for up to £16 million. And he'd probably go for triple

that now. The same goes for Romeo Olavia, who had played just twice for City in cup competitions

went to Southampton for around £10 million in 2022. And then one year later, he moves on to Chelsea for £53 million

That's a huge profit. I mean, the only reason Ipswich couldn't have arguably got way more than their £30 million for Liam De Lappe

is that that amount was in the relegation release clause in his contract. But the rest of the list is endless in terms of turning a profit

Pedro Porro bought big money in for Sporting. James Trafford, the same for Burnley, it looks like

And I'd stretch this out to Jadon Sancho, too, who signed for Dortmund for £8 million

and then was sold for 73. I mean, the caveat here is that Dortmund also helped to develop him

over a period of four years. It's still great profit, it's just not as quick of a turnaround

as with the other players. My point is that there are first-team quality players

ready to come straight in and make a difference both on the pitch and on the balance sheet

But the final reason for buying City players is that Pep wants a small squad next season

They signed a few already, so there's plenty to offload. I mean, look at the squad

You'd say that Jack Grealish is definitely on the way out. So is Karl Walker, potentially Bernardo Silva, Edison, Gundogan, even Stones and Ake could be axed if their injury worries persist

Having said all that though, this is the flip side of this argument. As all of those players I've just named as potentially leaving City in the summer, you'll notice, are the experienced first-teamers

And that comes with a big question for me. Why are they being sold? There's the obvious argument that some of them are the wrong side of 30, 31, 32, and I get that, but not all of them are

I mean, in previous years, the likes of João Cancelo, Calvin Phillips, I'm Rick Laporte, Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus

Oleksandr Zinchenko, these guys all left in their 20s and haven't returned to the same level

Could it be a case of playing City's way absolutely knackers them out

and they see a steeper drop in their physical attributes Maybe Or maybe the reason is they were either not quite good enough for City or just not quite good enough in general Otherwise City wouldn have let them go

Of course, it's not an exact science, but I can only think of a handful of indisputable first

teamers that have gone on to better things after Manchester City. Those being Llorosane, Ferran

Torres and Julien Alvarez, the latter two definitely benefiting from a little more freedom

and consistency in their play. It almost leads to this. Would you rather sign an unproven youngster

or a well-known experienced player, assuming they are in the same position with the same profile

I feel like the answer is the experienced player, apart from if you're signing from City

By experienced, by the way, I mean first-teamer, not ridiculously old. So maybe shouldn't is too strong of a word

when it comes to City's older players. But my takeaway from this would be that caution

may be the best policy, as even though on the surface, signing a big-name player from them seems like a good idea, there's more to it than meets the eye

Kind of like a transformer. Anyway, if Grealish and Phillips were returned to Villa and Leeds

respectively, would they be the same players that left? Both are 29 years old, by the way

so it's not some retirement homecoming party. They've still got a considerable chunk of their

careers left. As it turns out, I actually think both of these players would still be brilliant

in their boyhood clubs, but that's just a hunch. Basically, all of this is to say that as soon as

someone shows enough to get into the first team, but not enough, they won't be replaced by a big new expensive signing, that is the one to go and get. At the minute, it seems like Nico O'Reilly

is that guy, James McAtee too, but by this time next year, it could be someone else altogether

Those two are getting to that crossroads I mentioned earlier that seems to appear at pretty

much the feet of every talented youngster that comes through the door at City. You either stay

and get minutes where you can, or you leave and try to make a good go of it elsewhere. I've no

doubt those two will be good, but they've literally just watched Kevin De Bruyne leave

Gundogan could be leaving. There's an opportunity to fill both of their boots and then through the door walk not one

but two brand new midfielders in the shape of riders and Cherki. These levels are absolutely insane

Well, that's it from me and my thoughts for today. Subscribe for more and I'll see you next time