Leicester ! How good was it ? Brilliant. Never happen again.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah Leicester was a bit of an anomaly, but I think Liverpool have proven it’s not impossible to compete with the oil cashLeicester ! How good was it ? Brilliant. Never happen again.
They have still spent a lot though.Yeah Leicester was a bit of an anomaly, but I think Liverpool have proven it’s not impossible to compete with the oil cash
Yeah we’ve spent an absolute shitload...Of course we have, so have all the top 6 clubs. You gotta spend money to compete.
They have still spent a lot though.
He's right though, we have spent a lot of money, but it's been the Suarez, Sterling, Coutinho money.Be rude not to
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.
Jod saying I'm right about something..
Team A sells a player for £50m and buys a replacement for £50m.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).
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.
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).
They've got a squad that cost £x to purchase. They should perform at that level.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.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter. I'm saying that using nett Spend to judge the performance of a team is flawed.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.
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.
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.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.
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.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.