Your Eden Hazard, who would you choose?

[SeagullBT]

I would choose Chelsea; simply because they are in the South and I'm no lover of anything in the North. If I was him though I would be doing everything I can to get to Real Madrid. Massive Club (biggest in the world?), lovely City with good weather + Jose Mourinho!

 

[matthew]

City for the money, i hear Arsenal are the 4th team after him

 

[acrossthepond]

If Eden Hazard is mine, I'm keeping him.....

 

[Deleted member 18477]

The money men of Chelsea & Man City are really demeaning the amazing history of football. I would join Man Utd out of principle as they are truly a massive and historically world class football club.

This.

 

[Deleted member 18477]

City for the money, i hear Arsenal are the 4th team after him

Id choose arsenal then as long as van Persie stayed. Poldolski - van Persie - hazard, that's a brilliant front 3. Def put arsenal back up there and to win a title with a team who's won nothing in 8 years would be a mega achievement... However money talks and he will go to Chelsea or man city I'm sure.

 

[Butch Willykins]

I had a dilemma very similar to this last week whilst playing the 'New Star Soccer' app, so I can empathise with him.

 

[leigull]

Id choose arsenal then as long as van Persie stayed. Poldolski - van Persie - hazard, that's a brilliant front 3. Def put arsenal back up there and to win a title with a team who's won nothing in 8 years would be a mega achievement... However money talks and he will go to Chelsea or man city I'm sure.

Scoring goals isn't the reason Arsenal haven't won anything for 8 years, it's the other end that is badly in need of sorting and Wenger just doesn't seem capable of solving it

 

[Aristotle]

"you're"

Just thought I'd get that in there.

 

[Postman Pat]

The money men of Chelsea & Man City are really demeaning the amazing history of football. I would join Man Utd out of principle as they are truly a massive and historically world class football club.

Not the poor Man Utd story again....

Who were the first UK club to pay 1.5m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay over 5m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay over 25m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay 30m for a player

In the last 10 times the british record transfer fee paid by a UK club has been broken Man Utd have been responsible 4 times (all before Ronaldo). Why is what City and Chelsea doing any different?

 

[Aadam]

Id choose arsenal then as long as van Persie stayed. Poldolski - van Persie - hazard, that's a brilliant front 3. Def put arsenal back up there and to win a title with a team who's won nothing in 8 years would be a mega achievement... However money talks and he will go to Chelsea or man city I'm sure.

Could you imagine that, Van Persie, Podolski and Hazard. Would be pretty frightening. Doesn't stop them shipping goals in at the other end though.

 

[NickBHAFC18]

Not the poor Man Utd story again....

Who were the first UK club to pay 1.5m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay over 5m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay over 25m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay 30m for a player

In the last 10 times the british record transfer fee paid by a UK club has been broken Man Utd have been responsible 4 times (all before Ronaldo). Why is what City and Chelsea doing any different?

Because United haven't spent over £300 million on players within the last 3 years.

 

[Basil Fawlty]

City for the Money, United for the Success and Chelsea as the European Champions. Tough one, I seriously think he will go to Manure. More chance of playing then at City and Chelsea combined.

 

[HastingsSeagull]

Chelsea to live in London, though if just football reasons would have been United.

 

[MrShaun15]

i see him going to arsenal

 

[leigull]

Not the poor Man Utd story again....

Who were the first UK club to pay 1.5m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay over 5m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay over 25m for a player
Who were the first UK club to pay 30m for a player

In the last 10 times the british record transfer fee paid by a UK club has been broken Man Utd have been responsible 4 times (all before Ronaldo). Why is what City and Chelsea doing any different?

You seriously don't know the answer to that?

 

[Bwian]

The money men of Chelsea & Man City are really demeaning the amazing history of football. I would join Man Utd out of principle as they are truly a massive and historically world class football club.

Of course Man Utd never bought any of their recent titles. They even dropped 'football club' off of their badge for commercial reasons-yep, real class.

 

[folkestonesgull]

i'd go to chelsea, quicker on the eurostar home back to belgium and more chance of playing every week.

 

[Mackenzie]

 

[Deleted member 18477]

Scoring goals isn't the reason Arsenal haven't won anything for 8 years, it's the other end that is badly in need of sorting and Wenger just doesn't seem capable of solving it

Oh agreed they would probably still fall short. It would certainly make them more dangerous though. They'll be lucky to keep van Persie anyway and have no chance of signing hazard due to wage demands.

 

[Deleted member 18477]

Man Utd earned their money by success on the pitch spanning decades coupled with a great business model.

Chelsea and Man City don't have a business model - they have lost massive amounts of money. They historically have no right to be where they are now. Chelsea recorded a £140m loss on their first season, Man City nearly £200m this year. It is not deserved, it is an insult to the fine history of English football.

Maybe your opinion would change if some Chinese businessman with more money than sense bought Palace, spent £1bn on playing squad and they won the Premier league?

Or maybe Brighton should aspire to find a rich investor, rather than a top class business model?

This