EPL Matchday 31

(Log in to remove this ad.)

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,348
Likes
15,700
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
He's right though, we have spent a lot of money, but it's been the Suarez, Sterling, Coutinho money.
The price you got for Sterling, Suarez and Coutinho has nothing to do with how this team performs.

If they had all left on a free you be £250m worse off but you wouldn't expect your current squad to perform any different.

It's an accountants stat, not a football one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,606
Likes
14,187
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
The price you got for Sterling, Suarez and Coutinho has nothing to do with how this team performs.

If they had all left on a free you be £250m worse off but you wouldn't expect your current squad to perform any different.

It's an accountants stat, not a football one.
If they all left on a free many of the current side wouldn't have been able to be signed. Of course it is a football stat.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,348
Likes
15,700
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
If they all left on a free many of the current side wouldn't have been able to be signed. Of course it is a football stat.
Team A sells a player for £50m and buys a replacement for £50m.

Team B loses a player on a free and spends £50m on a replacement.

Your expectations of both replacements are the same.

Suarez, Coutinho, Sterling have nothing to do with how your squad of 25 should be performing. Even from a financial point to f view, nett Spend isnt something that clubs pay any attention to (they'd look more at amortisation and wages).
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,606
Likes
14,187
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
Team A sells a player for £50m and buys a replacement for £50m.

Team B loses a player on a free and spends £50m on a replacement.

Your expectations of both replacements are the same.

Suarez, Coutinho, Sterling have nothing to do with how your squad of 25 should be performing. Even from a financial point to f view, nett Spend isnt something that clubs pay any attention to (they'd look more at amortisation and wages).
What the hell? Team B losers player for zero they dont buy a replacement for 50m.

Some clubs rely on transfer income to reinvest. Of course it matters.
 

SM

Bigfooty Legend
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Posts
83,710
Likes
44,729
Location
North Shore
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Hull City, Adelaide United, EH
The price you got for Sterling, Suarez and Coutinho has nothing to do with how this team performs.

If they had all left on a free you be £250m worse off but you wouldn't expect your current squad to perform any different.

It's an accountants stat, not a football one.
They wouldn't have that current squad if they were 250m worse off...
 

SM

Bigfooty Legend
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Posts
83,710
Likes
44,729
Location
North Shore
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Hull City, Adelaide United, EH
Team A sells a player for £50m and buys a replacement for £50m.

Team B loses a player on a free and spends £50m on a replacement.

Your expectations of both replacements are the same.

Suarez, Coutinho, Sterling have nothing to do with how your squad of 25 should be performing. Even from a financial point to f view, nett Spend isnt something that clubs pay any attention to (they'd look more at amortisation and wages).
No one said the expectations wouldn't be different? The point is that they replaced outgoing talent like for like, rather than adding to a formidable squad they had one out one in essentially.

You added Jesus to Aguero, you didn't sell Aguero to buy Jesus.

You added Laporte to Kompany, Stones and Otamendi. You didn't sell one or two of them to buy Laporte.

You added Ederson to Bravo.

Etc. etc.

Pretty simple.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,348
Likes
15,700
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
No one said the expectations wouldn't be different? The point is that they replaced outgoing talent like for like, rather than adding to a formidable squad they had one out one in essentially.

You added Jesus to Aguero, you didn't sell Aguero to buy Jesus.

You added Laporte to Kompany, Stones and Otamendi. You didn't sell one or two of them to buy Laporte.

You added Ederson to Bravo.

Etc. etc.

Pretty simple.
They've got a squad that cost £x to purchase. They should perform at that level.

Whether they sold Coutinho for £100m or £1m has no effect on how that squad should perform.
 

SM

Bigfooty Legend
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Posts
83,710
Likes
44,729
Location
North Shore
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Hull City, Adelaide United, EH
They've got a squad that cost £x to purchase. They should perform at that level.

Whether they sold Coutinho for £100m or £1m has no effect on how that squad should perform.
Again, of course not. The point is just that they have built their squad on funds raised from sales, rather than other sources of revenue, and that's commendable, as their talent pool has basically been self-sustaining rather than relying on other streams of revenue.

What's difficult to grasp about that?
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,348
Likes
15,700
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
What the hell? Team B losers player for zero they dont buy a replacement for 50m.

Some clubs rely on transfer income to reinvest. Of course it matters.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter. I'm saying that using nett Spend to judge the performance of a team is flawed.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Posts
34,606
Likes
14,187
Location
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, Liverpool, Victory
They've got a squad that cost £x to purchase. They should perform at that level.

Whether they sold Coutinho for £100m or £1m has no effect on how that squad should perform.
I'm sure you recently stated that our reported profit of £100m + on our latest books was mostly down to player trading.

Now you seem to be claiming that player trading is irrelevant to the club and its financials.

Hurry up and decide which way you would like to go as this thread has now dragged on for two weeks.
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,348
Likes
15,700
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
Again, of course not. The point is just that they have built their squad on funds raised from sales, rather than other sources of revenue, and that's commendable, as their talent pool has basically been self-sustaining rather than relying on other streams of revenue.

What's difficult to grasp about that?
Nothing. I'm not arguing against that. They've got very good value for their spending. But the price they got for Coutinho has absolutely no effect on how the squad they have now should be performing.

Just that Liverpool are where they are because they spent big money on top players. IMO you need to push the boat out on top quality to take the next step.

I've said before, if you going to use nett spend to assess squad building you'd need to factor in wages, agent fees, value of the squad before, value of the squad after etc.
 

SM

Bigfooty Legend
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Posts
83,710
Likes
44,729
Location
North Shore
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Hull City, Adelaide United, EH
Nothing. I'm not arguing against that. They've got very good value for their spending. But the price they got for Coutinho has absolutely no effect on how the squad they have now should be performing.

Just that Liverpool are where they are because they spent big money on top players. IMO you need to push the boat out on top quality to take the next step.

I've said before, if you going to use nett spend to assess squad building you'd need to factor in wages, agent fees, value of the squad before, value of the squad after etc.
So what are you arguing against? Literally you responded to me pointing out to Cruyff that the money they spent was generated from sales UNLIKE City/United/Arsenal. That was it. Are you denying that? If not, who are you arguing against?
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Posts
52,348
Likes
15,700
Location
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City
I'm sure you recently stated that our reported profit of £100m + on our latest books was mostly down to player trading.

Now you seem to be claiming that player trading is irrelevant to the club and its financials.

Hurry up and decide which way you would like to go as this thread has now dragged on for two weeks.
For a start, nett spend isn't used to calculate profit or loss. I still remember Robinho being bought for £32m, being sold 3 years later. For £18m and it going down as a small profit.

All I'm saying is that when I look at your squad you have right now, and question how they should be performing, the price you got for players sold 1, 3, 4 years ago doesn't factor.

If I was assessing how Liverpool had performed financially then yeah, I'd be looking at that. But that's more an accounting/business debate than a football one.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom