The on topic thread

[chef]

Yeah of course, but id rather expand Anfield than build a new sparkly stadium. You guys cant expand Stamford Bridge though can you? No room to move or what?

They also need to redesign the surrounding area to improve exits. Once we deck over the train line it'll give us plenty of room.

Im not that fussed about pulling it down and rebuilding as we are in need of more corporate space as well as seats for fans, plus it won't be the first time it's been rebuilt. This will give us a state of the art stadium rather than some patchwork job, seems the best of both worlds for everyone, a sparkly new stadium in SW6.

 

[Jatz]

United post a loss for the first 3 months of the year.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32738997

 

[Jatz]

The Value for money table:

1 - Swansea (£386,608 Per Point)

2 - Southampton (£410,526)

3 - Stoke (£719,000)

4 - Tottenham (£968,966)

5 - Burnley (£1,074,483)

6 - Leicester (£1,129,730) (Leicester's net spend is £41.8m and they have collected 37 points, giving a cost per point of £1,129,730)

7 - Chelsea (£1,216,667)

8 - Crystal Palace (£1,229,524)

9 - Aston Villa (£1,276,316)

10 - West Brom (£1,389,268)

11 - Sunderland (£1,419,722)

12 - West Ham (£1,540,426)

13 - Hull City (£1,658,824)

14 - Everton (£1,712,500)

15 - Liverpool (£1,806,452)

16 - Newcastle (£1,813,889)

17 - QPR (£2,288,889)

18 - Arsenal (£2,295,714)

19 - Man City (£2,424,658)

20 - Man Utd (£3,484,824)

http://talksport.com...on-150514146723

Chelsea good value for money there. Utd, City, Arsenal - not so much. But if you can afford it, it's not a big concern obviously.

 

[elhadjihenry]

The David Luiz sale helping Chelsea up that table, still boggles the mind that PSG paid that much for him

 

[SM]

The Value for money table:

1 - Swansea (£386,608 Per Point)

2 - Southampton (£410,526)

3 - Stoke (£719,000)

4 - Tottenham (£968,966)

5 - Burnley (£1,074,483)

6 - Leicester (£1,129,730) (Leicester's net spend is £41.8m and they have collected 37 points, giving a cost per point of £1,129,730)

7 - Chelsea (£1,216,667)

8 - Crystal Palace (£1,229,524)

9 - Aston Villa (£1,276,316)

10 - West Brom (£1,389,268)

11 - Sunderland (£1,419,722)

12 - West Ham (£1,540,426)

13 - Hull City (£1,658,824)

14 - Everton (£1,712,500)

15 - Liverpool (£1,806,452)

16 - Newcastle (£1,813,889)

17 - QPR (£2,288,889)

18 - Arsenal (£2,295,714)

19 - Man City (£2,424,658)

20 - Man Utd (£3,484,824)

http://talksport.com...on-150514146723

Chelsea good value for money there. Utd, City, Arsenal - not so much. But if you can afford it, it's not a big concern obviously.

I thought you thought net spends were useless to look at though?

 

[Jatz]

I thought you thought net spends were useless to look at though?

Context my friend.

How about instead of trying to take potshots at me you actually engage in conversation about football?

 

[Jatz]

The Oldham manager is off to a rough start

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/32699022

 

[SM]

Context my friend.

How about instead of trying to take potshots at me you actually engage in conversation about football?

How was that a potshot? I am engaging in the conversation. You said only the other day that net spends aren't relevant when comparing clubs, because the gross spend is what's spent improving a team. Now you're pointing to the net spend because it portrays Leicester better.

 

[Jatz]

How was that a potshot? I am engaging in the conversation. You said only the other day that net spends aren't relevant when comparing clubs, because the gross spend is what's spent improving a team. Now you're pointing to the net spend because it portrays Leicester better.

I just told you. The context of both discussions was totally different.

The article itself didn't focus solely on Leicester.

Swansea are doing incredibly well. Excellently run club that one.

 

[SM]

I just told you. The context of both discussions was totally different.

The article itself didn't focus solely on Leicester.

Swansea are doing incredibly well. Excellently run club that one.

Ok, so in this case looking at net spends is a relevant way to assess how clubs have spent their money and the level of success they've achieved? Right? The other picture, which showed the table, and the gross spends of each club was showing what exactly? There is no different context so you might now understand why I took issue with you saying net spend was irrelevant the other day.

 

[Jatz]

Ok, so in this case looking at net spends is a relevant way to assess how clubs have spent their money and the level of success they've achieved? Right? The other picture, which showed the table, and the gross spends of each club was showing what exactly? There is no different context so you might now understand why I took issue with you saying net spend was irrelevant the other day.

Yes, it is.

The other table looked specifically at what you spent on your club to strengthen your playing squad for this season. It didn't care for what you sold.

Anyway, I don't care to discuss something that we went over in great detail 3 days ago.

 

[SM]

Yes, it is.

The other table looked specifically at what you spent on your club to strengthen your playing squad for this season. It didn't care for what you sold.

Anyway, I don't care to discuss something that we went over in great detail 3 days ago.

Lol ok, I was just 'engaging in the football discussion'. If you don't understand why a gross spend does not look at what a club spent to strengthen their squad then I can't help you.

 

[Jatz]

Lol ok, I was just 'engaging in the football discussion'. If you don't understand why a gross spend does not look at what a club spent to strengthen their squad then I can't help you.

You're right, you can't. Can you give up now then?

 

[SM]

You're right, you can't. Can you give up now then?

Don't post graphics if you don't want people to respond to them. If you want to brag about Leicester without having people respond, take it to the Leicester thread.

 

[Jatz]

Don't post graphics if you don't want people to respond to them. If you want to brag about Leicester without having people respond, take it to the Leicester thread.

For the last time, it wasn't about Leicester. There's 20 teams in that graphic.

Hell, I even tried talking Swansea and all you wanted to do was swing the discussion back to something we discussed 3 days ago.

Give it up mate, it's tiring.

 

[SM]

For the last time, it wasn't about Leicester. There's 20 teams in that graphic.

Hell, I even tried talking Swansea and all you wanted to do was swing the discussion back to something we discussed 3 days ago.

Give it up mate, it's tiring.

Because of the fact that you're being ridiculously inconsistent. We can chat about Stoke and how well they've done if you want, I'll still pull you up on the fact you're twisting and turning in your stance on what is a good measure of the amount spent to improve a squad. Got nothing to do with Leicester, and nothing to do with Hull.

 

[Flameboy]

Without wanting to get in the way of this lovers tiff...

Good to see Rafa, the European genius make it a through to another final against Dnipro in the morning.

Oh wait.

And I believe Hamsik started on the bench too. Anyone know why?

 

[Cruyff14]

Isn't the whole point of a forum to you know, discuss things?

 

[Jatz]

Who said it wasn't?

 

[Cruyff14]

Who said it wasn't?

You're right, you can't. Can you give up now then?

 

[Jatz]

Context again.

I assume you don't enjoy reading us argue the same shit for days on end?

 

[Cruyff14]

Well if you didn't constantly contradict yourself.......

Can't have it both ways mate and just shift the goal posts when it suits you.

 

[SM]

Context again.

I assume you don't enjoy reading us argue the same shit for days on end?

To be honest don't see a big difference between this sort of legitimate discussion and the discussion about EPL v First Division, apart from the fact this is only two posters. It's not as if we're flaming each other or spanning multiple threads. It's a pretty on topic discussion I would think.

 

[Jatz]

Well if you didn't constantly contradict yourself.......

Can't have it both ways mate and just shift the goal posts when it suits you.

They weren't my discussions. One came from Talksport and one came from the BBC.

They were discussing different matters and compared different figures.

But I'll let them know you're unhappy they aren't talking about the exact same thing.

 

[Cruyff14]

You're missing the point, but I cannot say that is surprising.

It's about you using different figures to talk about the same thing when it suits you.