Do you reckon Sergio Aguero ever regrets the fact that he's wasted the best years of his career at a plastic...

Do you reckon Sergio Aguero ever regrets the fact that he's wasted the best years of his career at a plastic, nothing club?

Other urls found in this thread:

espnfc.co.uk/club/manchester-city/382/blog/post/2854398/sergio-aguero-100-goals-premier-league-most-efficient-scorer
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

a literalwho player for a literalwho club

Do you reckon OP ever regrets the fact that he's wasted the best years of his youth shitposting on a taiwanese cartoon forum?

Why do you hate your country's second best striker?

I suppose second best doesn't sound very good but that's only because your other striker is, statistically speaking, exceptional.

Aguero's one of the best strikers in the world, his strike rate has been pretty consistently great in the Premier League

>a literalwho club
Well I agree with you there

Erry day

Where else would he have gone?

>Juve
Shit league

>Real
Maybe, but then Atletico would hate him, and their fans are plastic too

>Barca
Didn't need him

>Bayern
Nobody cares about Bayernsliga

>PSG
plastic

>Chelsea
plastic

overrated AF pham. made of glass and every time ive seen him play hes running around doing nothing

lester city

He's no Batistuta
Shame Messi's prime wasn't during those late 90s early 2000s Argie teams

All of those teams are better than City, every single one

And Chelsea are nowhere near as plastic as City. PSG... yes they're plastic but I'd still say they have more soul than City.

Stats don't lie f.a.m.

He has the best goals/minutes ratio of anyone EVER in the Premier League

espnfc.co.uk/club/manchester-city/382/blog/post/2854398/sergio-aguero-100-goals-premier-league-most-efficient-scorer

>And Chelsea are nowhere near as plastic as City

top kek, Roman

>And Chelsea are nowhere near as plastic as City.

t. Roman Abramovic

>And Chelsea are nowhere near as plastic as City.

Aguero is pretty much as close as you can get to the definition of a plastic, nothing player though

you're obviously not from france.
PSG here is considered even more plastic than city, it was a nobody club, bought by qataris that never developed a singler player and just bought the league.

Chelsea have been a big club since the late 90's. City have been a big club since the late 2000's

Am I being rused?

The only thing Chelsea won in the 50 years pre-Roman was an FA cup. They were no different than clubs like West Ham.

t. Buttmad United / Lelverpool / Arsenal supporters
(I know you're not City supporters because City don't have any supporters)

Well since he plays for City perhaps you're right but he was such a promising talent. He was like the talk of Europe when he was at Atleti. And he's delivered on that promise by being consistently great in the Prem. It's just a shame he went to a shitty plastic club.

True, I get that the French hate QSG but I just hate City more because I have to read about them every day

This. I'm not a Chelsea supporter by the way, they just aren't as plastic.

>League titles before takeover
City 2 - 1 Chelsea

Checkmate, atheist.

Also...
>Van Laal

Your clearly a buttflustered United fan

I remember PSG being fairly successful in the 90s
Are you some angry Marseilles

More exactly, PSG has its history, with, before QSI, and have had success : in thirty years, two championships (plus one rejected by the owner company because it didn't want to lose customers in southern France), five national cups plus some other minor trophies, and an european cup (C2, in 1996). I've had great emotions with my club. And the atmosphere was awesome in the Parc des Princes. Electrical, even sometimes scary (several fights, some people even died), but awesome. Although, from the beginning in the '70s, PSG was money-blooded (plus, Saint-Germain is one of the richest towns of all) and the non-parisians hated PSG since there. The deal with QSI just made this hate bigger.

After all, PSG is just like parisians now.

Chelsea have interesting characters all around the club and had a core of players with muh heart their fans loved and everyone else hated for being racist or just assholes in general. Plastic perhaps when they once got rich, but you love them or you hate them, usually the latter, and they play a key role in cucking other teams out of glory and keeping the uefa coefficient high by being the only not shit team in Europe lately.

City are a soulless club with zero heart, with nothing aside from their youtube channel where you watch their players try to be interesting. Their fanbase is full of glory hunters who want their Arab masters to buy every good player in Europe and pretend they have a team just like their fifa career modes. No one except autistic dutch posters would care whether they're good or not. The players don't even care, as you saw in the Madrid game.

I'm a pompey fan

Chelsea are not as plastic as City

Get over it

I don't reckon aguero gives a fuck what you think. He said he can achieve all he ever wanted at city and 2 league cups, 2 capital ones and an fa cup is more trophies then most veterans of the premiere league win over a long and decorated career. He is the most lethal striker the prem has ever seen and under guardiola he'll do great things.

Dutch Autist please get off your proxy, thanks

and if some shit skin or some gook or nigger decided to support united or arsenal or liverpool, they wouldn't be glory hunters? Fuck off. People always talk about history, well give city 20 years and then talk about history. Soulless you say? They weren't soulless when they had to score 2 goals in extra time to win the league and pip the league's most bandwaggoned shit stain of a club. They weren't soulless when they went back and beat bayern at home after conceding 2 goals. Fuck off nigger

Do you think of Sergio when you masturbate?

you are talking about the players, we are talking about the clubs. Not exactly the same, pal.

he plays in a mickey mouse league known as the EPL and gets a massive paycheck playing for a club that fans dont care for

imagine if he was at a real club and had expectations.

notice he is terrible against real teams in the champions league or world cup. EPL is fucking shit.

so what? City were averaging a 35 thousand attendance evry game when they were rotting in the 3rd league of english football. They have the 3rd or 4th highest attendance in all the premiere league today. So I'm not sure what you're getting at.

...

No. No I don't. What a strange fucking question.

If he is so good then how come he turned invisible for 179 minutes against Real?

They are definitely a plastic club but I don't know, there was some heart from Cech, Terry, Lampard and Drogba that I've never seen in City or PSG. It might be nostalgia blinding me, though.

>>Barca
>Didn't need him

Implying they needed Villa, Ibrahimovic and Suarez.

I know Aguero in real life, he like fat chicks, I hate the guy because when he is playing america cup he only is interesed in party and prostitute. FUCK YOU NIGGER

Shut up, Carlos.

Chelsea were always a famous club in England. Their name is frequently mentioned in popular culture throughout the 20th century, mainly because they were considered a very fashionable team to support and from the capital. They always had a big fanbase too, I knew plenty of Chelsea fans before 2003, and I live on the south coast. Their record attendance is over 80,000 from when Stamford Bridge was enormous, and that was in the 1930s.

Pre-money they had won a handful of FA cups and league cups, the league, and had European pedigree (2 cup winners' cups and a supercup, against Real Madrid I believe). They were in the Champions League knockouts in the 90s, I remember one year they beat Barca at home but were knocked out in the second leg in extra time. They topped a group with a superb Milan team in it that year too.

They've also had world class footballers such as Zola (arguably in the Premier League all time XI), Gullit, Desailly, and others all before Ambramovich arrived. They are one of I think just six teams to always be in the Premier League since its introduction, now Villa are relegated. They were a top 6 club since the PL started and even managed top 2 or 3 on a few occasions.

I'm no fan (support Bournemouth), but I respect Chelsea as an old British institution of football. Maybe not the most successful but always a famous team and a big fanbase. They've become more unlikeable since the takeover, but I don't understand how people can say they are completely plastic or on City's level. Money does cheapen trophies a little, but it's just the reality of modern football. They have had players with a lot of passion: Drogba, Lampard, Terry, Cech, Cole, Essien, Ballack, Ivanovic, etc. Their miraculous Champions League win exemplifies their spirit. Could you even begin to imagine Arsenal for example pulling off the results they did?

I don't understand why people loathe them. Of course you are bound to get some plastic fans when you become a very successful club.

>I'm not a Chelsea fan

Sure thing Mohammad

Owned

Yet they can't even fill their stadium no matter how many extra seats they add. Average attendance wise they're not doing very well. I don't particularly have anything against bandwagoners, my point was that Chelsea is past the stage of a fanbase chock full of plastic bandwagoners and the constant heart the players have, and certain likeable characters within the camp for the past decade, such as Lampard, Drogba, Cech, and others the media hate but the club's fans love.

City don't do themselves favors signing players by paying them ridiculous money, who otherwise would never be interested in them, or by filling their team with Johnny foreigners who jog and show no heart in the biggest game of their career, or having fans that walk out on their manager of three years that gave them three trophies and the best UCL run in their history. All of that says or at least heavily implies a club whose fans and players love the money and power it gives them more than the club itself.