Benitez: I have no cash for a summer spree
- Thread starter the count
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
[quote author=Fabio Alrighty-o link=topic=39515.msg1077204#msg1077204 date=1269721964]
I fucking love single, he's a fucking monster
[/quote]
Yup, excellent post. Well researched and well stated.
I fucking love single, he's a fucking monster
[/quote]
Yup, excellent post. Well researched and well stated.
Single ruling yet again
Good post SR. Now get back to talking about incredibly filthy porn.
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077068#msg1077068 date=1269696179]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077062#msg1077062 date=1269694333]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=39515.msg1077059#msg1077059 date=1269694046]
This is Benitez absolving himself of blame.
I think everyone knows that without CL football we're about 20m worse off in revenues. Luckily this year the slack should be made up by the increased sponsorship and TV money. But if we do qualify for the CL we'll have a positive net spend. If we don't we won't.
[/quote]
No, he was just calling it as it is.
[/quote]
The two are not mutually exclusive.
While his point may be a valid one, it's actually unlikely to be that close to the mark - as what he is saying is "Every time I've qualified for the Champions League they haven't given me any extra money" though he has generally still been given a reasonable war chest - this time not qualifying for the Champions League might see him get *actually* nothing.
He's saying it like he hasn't had *any* money to spend, when in actual fact we've bought Torres at £20M, Mascher at £18Mish and smashed our transfer record for a defender three times, not to mention spunking £19M on Robbie Keane, nigh on £12M on a striker that he refuses to play as a winger, and £17M on a creative midfielder he doesn't trust to play when we're looking utterly devoid of creation. Now he's having a bitch (a justified bitch, but a bitch nonetheless) that when the team he's created doesn't get fourth place there's not gonna be a pot of gold waiting for him at the end of the rainbow.
Well, duh.
The blame for that has to lie predominantly at Rafa's feet if - as the article suggests - he knew beforehand that his budget was entirely dependant on sales. If he knew that was all he had, some should have been kept aside as either back up for Fernando, or for replacements for Kuyt or Babel so that they could play up front. Instead he's prioritised completely the wrong areas, found the team has come up short, hasn't had any options - or been unwilling to take them - to overcome these issues, and as a result we're going to be up the shitter.
It's not just a matter of making a mistake in the transfer market - everybody does that, Wenger, Ginsoak and Maureen no exception. Buying a player and getting it wrong is part-and-parcel of football, fair enough.
But forgetting to buy a proper back up for an injury prone player (and a key player at that) whilst at the same time spending £17.5M on a position that could be filled for £5/6M and spending another £17M on an injured player who can't play for months, and then isn't played when he is available?
Negligent.
Rafa needs to take a look at himself before he starts dragging everyone else's name through the mud - everyone can see what a pair of fuck ups the owners are, we don't need reminding of that - but it's a bit fucking rich to start acting like he's infallible or something
[/quote]
Well i could counter that by saying Rafa has spent about 75-80M net on transfers and he has brought in that amount through CL qualification and progress in said comp. However that would be detracting from the real point and that is wages and what we have to pay our top players to keep them. Teams like Chelsea and now City have raised wages to a point of being riciulous in the extreme and it is fucking us up big time.
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077062#msg1077062 date=1269694333]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=39515.msg1077059#msg1077059 date=1269694046]
This is Benitez absolving himself of blame.
I think everyone knows that without CL football we're about 20m worse off in revenues. Luckily this year the slack should be made up by the increased sponsorship and TV money. But if we do qualify for the CL we'll have a positive net spend. If we don't we won't.
[/quote]
No, he was just calling it as it is.
[/quote]
The two are not mutually exclusive.
While his point may be a valid one, it's actually unlikely to be that close to the mark - as what he is saying is "Every time I've qualified for the Champions League they haven't given me any extra money" though he has generally still been given a reasonable war chest - this time not qualifying for the Champions League might see him get *actually* nothing.
He's saying it like he hasn't had *any* money to spend, when in actual fact we've bought Torres at £20M, Mascher at £18Mish and smashed our transfer record for a defender three times, not to mention spunking £19M on Robbie Keane, nigh on £12M on a striker that he refuses to play as a winger, and £17M on a creative midfielder he doesn't trust to play when we're looking utterly devoid of creation. Now he's having a bitch (a justified bitch, but a bitch nonetheless) that when the team he's created doesn't get fourth place there's not gonna be a pot of gold waiting for him at the end of the rainbow.
Well, duh.
The blame for that has to lie predominantly at Rafa's feet if - as the article suggests - he knew beforehand that his budget was entirely dependant on sales. If he knew that was all he had, some should have been kept aside as either back up for Fernando, or for replacements for Kuyt or Babel so that they could play up front. Instead he's prioritised completely the wrong areas, found the team has come up short, hasn't had any options - or been unwilling to take them - to overcome these issues, and as a result we're going to be up the shitter.
It's not just a matter of making a mistake in the transfer market - everybody does that, Wenger, Ginsoak and Maureen no exception. Buying a player and getting it wrong is part-and-parcel of football, fair enough.
But forgetting to buy a proper back up for an injury prone player (and a key player at that) whilst at the same time spending £17.5M on a position that could be filled for £5/6M and spending another £17M on an injured player who can't play for months, and then isn't played when he is available?
Negligent.
Rafa needs to take a look at himself before he starts dragging everyone else's name through the mud - everyone can see what a pair of fuck ups the owners are, we don't need reminding of that - but it's a bit fucking rich to start acting like he's infallible or something
[/quote]
Well i could counter that by saying Rafa has spent about 75-80M net on transfers and he has brought in that amount through CL qualification and progress in said comp. However that would be detracting from the real point and that is wages and what we have to pay our top players to keep them. Teams like Chelsea and now City have raised wages to a point of being riciulous in the extreme and it is fucking us up big time.
that was a very enjoyable read from SR but it misses two key points;
a) arsenal have won, fuck all since rafa has arrived.
b) rafa has finished above arsenal a couple of times.
so in closing the teams with the highest wages, who are also spending most money (manu and chelsea) are also the two teams who have 'amazingly' won the league every season rafa has been here. sure you can say at least this season arsenal is challenging and liverpool is nowhere, but who is to say that isn't a blip rather than a trend for BOTH teams? the difference is every year arsenal spend in their new stadium they will have more and more money to spend.
a) arsenal have won, fuck all since rafa has arrived.
b) rafa has finished above arsenal a couple of times.
so in closing the teams with the highest wages, who are also spending most money (manu and chelsea) are also the two teams who have 'amazingly' won the league every season rafa has been here. sure you can say at least this season arsenal is challenging and liverpool is nowhere, but who is to say that isn't a blip rather than a trend for BOTH teams? the difference is every year arsenal spend in their new stadium they will have more and more money to spend.
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077200#msg1077200 date=1269717171]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077078#msg1077078 date=1269697365]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077075#msg1077075 date=1269697162]
And so should a manager of such purported 'genius'
[/quote]
Ill conceived comment and a waste of bandwidth.
[/quote]
To answer the second part you could look at Arsenal - in summer 2007, the year the Yanks took over Wenger sold Henry, Ljungberg and Aliadiere for a combined £21M ish and bought Sagna, Eduardo and Fabianski for about £17M, replacing two ageing players with two first teamers who came in and performed. Rafa sold Bellers, Djibs, Mark Gonzalez, Paletta and swapped Luis for Fernando, earning a combined £22M and bought Torres, Babel, Lucas, Yossi, Insua and Voronin for a combined £44M, replacing two first teamers with one worthy sure-starter, two sure-starters by default, and a couple of squaddies that regularly get played out of their best position.
In the January transfers the Gooners sold Diarra for £5.5M and bought nobody, we sold Momo for about £8M, and bought Skrtel and Mascher for a combined £25M ish. A good swap on our part.
Summer 08 the Gooners sold Hleb for £12M and bought Ramsey and Nasri for £16M. We sold JAR, Crouch, Guthrie and Carson for a combined £25.5M and bought Dossena, Riera, Keane, Ngog and Cavalieri for a combined £39M. Good for them, nothing less than disastrous for us.
Jan 09 the Gooners bought Arshavin for £10M. We sacked off Pennant for an undisclosed fee, joining Finnan and Le Tallec.
Summer 09 they flogged Adebayor for £25M and bought Vermaelen for £10M. We sold Xabi, Arbeloa, and Leto for a combined £36.5M and bought Magic, Aqua and Kyrgiakos for the same sum - the only time it can be truly said Rafa had to sell in order to buy. Meanwhile Wenger - the blind prune faced cunt - regularly turned a profit. Their respective records read:
Rafa - sold £92M, bought £144.5M
Wenger - sold £63.5M, bought £53M
They finished in those seasons:
Rafa - 4th, 2nd, and currently lying 6th 20 points behind the leaders.
Wenger - 3rd, 4th and currently lying 3rd 3 points behind the leaders.
Hopefully this will answer both points - actually the only season we've had to sell in order to buy was this one, whereas Wenger has been doing it and still remaning within spitting distance, and certainly within the top 4 whilst making a £10M profit. During that same time Rafa has made a loss of £52.5M, has a team playing like a bunch of strangers and needing several additions to fill in the 'missing pieces of the jigsaw'. Who else at the top does that? Wenger does, and does it successfully, Rafa doesn't, and is no longer at the top - not even in the top 4!
[/quote]
I think you've forgot to take into account £12m we got back for Keane + Roughly £33m more in wages that the Gooners paid over this period of time.
So the difference in spend is actually closer to £7.5m.
Looking at the players that both teams have signed, i'd still choose ours (even if it did cost us £7.5m more).
Eduardo, Sagna, Vermelen, Nasri, Ramsey, Fab, and Arshavin
Or
Torres, Mascher, Skrtel, Magic, Aquilani, Riera, Yossi, Lucas, Insua, Babel, Ng'og and the Greek.
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077078#msg1077078 date=1269697365]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077075#msg1077075 date=1269697162]
And so should a manager of such purported 'genius'
[/quote]
Ill conceived comment and a waste of bandwidth.
[/quote]
To answer the second part you could look at Arsenal - in summer 2007, the year the Yanks took over Wenger sold Henry, Ljungberg and Aliadiere for a combined £21M ish and bought Sagna, Eduardo and Fabianski for about £17M, replacing two ageing players with two first teamers who came in and performed. Rafa sold Bellers, Djibs, Mark Gonzalez, Paletta and swapped Luis for Fernando, earning a combined £22M and bought Torres, Babel, Lucas, Yossi, Insua and Voronin for a combined £44M, replacing two first teamers with one worthy sure-starter, two sure-starters by default, and a couple of squaddies that regularly get played out of their best position.
In the January transfers the Gooners sold Diarra for £5.5M and bought nobody, we sold Momo for about £8M, and bought Skrtel and Mascher for a combined £25M ish. A good swap on our part.
Summer 08 the Gooners sold Hleb for £12M and bought Ramsey and Nasri for £16M. We sold JAR, Crouch, Guthrie and Carson for a combined £25.5M and bought Dossena, Riera, Keane, Ngog and Cavalieri for a combined £39M. Good for them, nothing less than disastrous for us.
Jan 09 the Gooners bought Arshavin for £10M. We sacked off Pennant for an undisclosed fee, joining Finnan and Le Tallec.
Summer 09 they flogged Adebayor for £25M and bought Vermaelen for £10M. We sold Xabi, Arbeloa, and Leto for a combined £36.5M and bought Magic, Aqua and Kyrgiakos for the same sum - the only time it can be truly said Rafa had to sell in order to buy. Meanwhile Wenger - the blind prune faced cunt - regularly turned a profit. Their respective records read:
Rafa - sold £92M, bought £144.5M
Wenger - sold £63.5M, bought £53M
They finished in those seasons:
Rafa - 4th, 2nd, and currently lying 6th 20 points behind the leaders.
Wenger - 3rd, 4th and currently lying 3rd 3 points behind the leaders.
Hopefully this will answer both points - actually the only season we've had to sell in order to buy was this one, whereas Wenger has been doing it and still remaning within spitting distance, and certainly within the top 4 whilst making a £10M profit. During that same time Rafa has made a loss of £52.5M, has a team playing like a bunch of strangers and needing several additions to fill in the 'missing pieces of the jigsaw'. Who else at the top does that? Wenger does, and does it successfully, Rafa doesn't, and is no longer at the top - not even in the top 4!
[/quote]
I think you've forgot to take into account £12m we got back for Keane + Roughly £33m more in wages that the Gooners paid over this period of time.
So the difference in spend is actually closer to £7.5m.
Looking at the players that both teams have signed, i'd still choose ours (even if it did cost us £7.5m more).
Eduardo, Sagna, Vermelen, Nasri, Ramsey, Fab, and Arshavin
Or
Torres, Mascher, Skrtel, Magic, Aquilani, Riera, Yossi, Lucas, Insua, Babel, Ng'og and the Greek.
[quote author=Rafa4PM link=topic=39515.msg1077255#msg1077255 date=1269766696]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077200#msg1077200 date=1269717171]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077078#msg1077078 date=1269697365]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077075#msg1077075 date=1269697162]
And so should a manager of such purported 'genius'
[/quote]
Ill conceived comment and a waste of bandwidth.
[/quote]
To answer the second part you could look at Arsenal - in summer 2007, the year the Yanks took over Wenger sold Henry, Ljungberg and Aliadiere for a combined £21M ish and bought Sagna, Eduardo and Fabianski for about £17M, replacing two ageing players with two first teamers who came in and performed. Rafa sold Bellers, Djibs, Mark Gonzalez, Paletta and swapped Luis for Fernando, earning a combined £22M and bought Torres, Babel, Lucas, Yossi, Insua and Voronin for a combined £44M, replacing two first teamers with one worthy sure-starter, two sure-starters by default, and a couple of squaddies that regularly get played out of their best position.
In the January transfers the Gooners sold Diarra for £5.5M and bought nobody, we sold Momo for about £8M, and bought Skrtel and Mascher for a combined £25M ish. A good swap on our part.
Summer 08 the Gooners sold Hleb for £12M and bought Ramsey and Nasri for £16M. We sold JAR, Crouch, Guthrie and Carson for a combined £25.5M and bought Dossena, Riera, Keane, Ngog and Cavalieri for a combined £39M. Good for them, nothing less than disastrous for us.
Jan 09 the Gooners bought Arshavin for £10M. We sacked off Pennant for an undisclosed fee, joining Finnan and Le Tallec.
Summer 09 they flogged Adebayor for £25M and bought Vermaelen for £10M. We sold Xabi, Arbeloa, and Leto for a combined £36.5M and bought Magic, Aqua and Kyrgiakos for the same sum - the only time it can be truly said Rafa had to sell in order to buy. Meanwhile Wenger - the blind prune faced cunt - regularly turned a profit. Their respective records read:
Rafa - sold £92M, bought £144.5M
Wenger - sold £63.5M, bought £53M
They finished in those seasons:
Rafa - 4th, 2nd, and currently lying 6th 20 points behind the leaders.
Wenger - 3rd, 4th and currently lying 3rd 3 points behind the leaders.
Hopefully this will answer both points - actually the only season we've had to sell in order to buy was this one, whereas Wenger has been doing it and still remaning within spitting distance, and certainly within the top 4 whilst making a £10M profit. During that same time Rafa has made a loss of £52.5M, has a team playing like a bunch of strangers and needing several additions to fill in the 'missing pieces of the jigsaw'. Who else at the top does that? Wenger does, and does it successfully, Rafa doesn't, and is no longer at the top - not even in the top 4!
[/quote]
I think you've forgot to take into account £12m we got back for Keane + Roughly £33m more in wages that the Gooners paid over this period of time.
So the difference in spend is actually £7.5m.
Looking at the players that both teams have signed, i'd still choose ours (even if it did cost us £7.5 more).
Eduardo, Sagna, Vermelen, Nasri, Ramsey and Arshavin
Or
Torres, Mascher, Skrtel, Magic, Aquilani, Riera and Yossi
[/quote]
good research r4pm 🙂
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077200#msg1077200 date=1269717171]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077078#msg1077078 date=1269697365]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077075#msg1077075 date=1269697162]
And so should a manager of such purported 'genius'
[/quote]
Ill conceived comment and a waste of bandwidth.
[/quote]
To answer the second part you could look at Arsenal - in summer 2007, the year the Yanks took over Wenger sold Henry, Ljungberg and Aliadiere for a combined £21M ish and bought Sagna, Eduardo and Fabianski for about £17M, replacing two ageing players with two first teamers who came in and performed. Rafa sold Bellers, Djibs, Mark Gonzalez, Paletta and swapped Luis for Fernando, earning a combined £22M and bought Torres, Babel, Lucas, Yossi, Insua and Voronin for a combined £44M, replacing two first teamers with one worthy sure-starter, two sure-starters by default, and a couple of squaddies that regularly get played out of their best position.
In the January transfers the Gooners sold Diarra for £5.5M and bought nobody, we sold Momo for about £8M, and bought Skrtel and Mascher for a combined £25M ish. A good swap on our part.
Summer 08 the Gooners sold Hleb for £12M and bought Ramsey and Nasri for £16M. We sold JAR, Crouch, Guthrie and Carson for a combined £25.5M and bought Dossena, Riera, Keane, Ngog and Cavalieri for a combined £39M. Good for them, nothing less than disastrous for us.
Jan 09 the Gooners bought Arshavin for £10M. We sacked off Pennant for an undisclosed fee, joining Finnan and Le Tallec.
Summer 09 they flogged Adebayor for £25M and bought Vermaelen for £10M. We sold Xabi, Arbeloa, and Leto for a combined £36.5M and bought Magic, Aqua and Kyrgiakos for the same sum - the only time it can be truly said Rafa had to sell in order to buy. Meanwhile Wenger - the blind prune faced cunt - regularly turned a profit. Their respective records read:
Rafa - sold £92M, bought £144.5M
Wenger - sold £63.5M, bought £53M
They finished in those seasons:
Rafa - 4th, 2nd, and currently lying 6th 20 points behind the leaders.
Wenger - 3rd, 4th and currently lying 3rd 3 points behind the leaders.
Hopefully this will answer both points - actually the only season we've had to sell in order to buy was this one, whereas Wenger has been doing it and still remaning within spitting distance, and certainly within the top 4 whilst making a £10M profit. During that same time Rafa has made a loss of £52.5M, has a team playing like a bunch of strangers and needing several additions to fill in the 'missing pieces of the jigsaw'. Who else at the top does that? Wenger does, and does it successfully, Rafa doesn't, and is no longer at the top - not even in the top 4!
[/quote]
I think you've forgot to take into account £12m we got back for Keane + Roughly £33m more in wages that the Gooners paid over this period of time.
So the difference in spend is actually £7.5m.
Looking at the players that both teams have signed, i'd still choose ours (even if it did cost us £7.5 more).
Eduardo, Sagna, Vermelen, Nasri, Ramsey and Arshavin
Or
Torres, Mascher, Skrtel, Magic, Aquilani, Riera and Yossi
[/quote]
good research r4pm 🙂
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077200#msg1077200 date=1269717171]
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077078#msg1077078 date=1269697365]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077075#msg1077075 date=1269697162]
And so should a manager of such purported 'genius'
[/quote]
Ill conceived comment and a waste of bandwidth.
[/quote]
Please elaborate.
And then justify why the very same thing cannot be applied to your previous post.
You reckon £20M is not a lot of money for 'a club of our stature' and yet in the history of the league that has only been bested a grand total of nine times - SWP to the Chavs, Shrek, Dogbra , Essien, Veron to the Scum, Duckface, Shevchenko, Berbatov and Robinho - so four times by the Scum, five times by the Chavs, and once by Citeh.
That would seem to suggest it's still a fair bit of money that is only thrown around on occasion, and for the new owners that summer who - at the time had recouped about £22M from sales and spent about £44M - the accusation that they did not back the manager who was forced to sell in order to buy just doesn't ring true.
Of course, we all know it's gone downhill since then - but to answer your question "why should we have to sell before we buy? Who else at the top does that?" Firstly it could be argued that Rafa's revolving door policy whereby players are bought, found inadequate and shipped out at a loss will haven taken it's toll over the years, forcing our hand so that in order to buy we have to sell - however, let us look at this in a bit more detail.
To answer the second part you could look at Arsenal - in summer 2007, the year the Yanks took over Wenger sold Henry, Ljungberg and Aliadiere for a combined £21M ish and bought Sagna, Eduardo and Fabianski for about £17M, replacing two ageing players with two first teamers who came in and performed. Rafa sold Bellers, Djibs, Mark Gonzalez, Paletta and swapped Luis for Fernando, earning a combined £22M and bought Torres, Babel, Lucas, Yossi, Insua and Voronin for a combined £44M, replacing two first teamers with one worthy sure-starter, two sure-starters by default, and a couple of squaddies that regularly get played out of their best position.
In the January transfers the Gooners sold Diarra for £5.5M and bought nobody, we sold Momo for about £8M, and bought Skrtel and Mascher for a combined £25M ish. A good swap on our part.
Summer 08 the Gooners sold Hleb for £12M and bought Ramsey and Nasri for £16M. We sold JAR, Crouch, Guthrie and Carson for a combined £25.5M and bought Dossena, Riera, Keane, Ngog and Cavalieri for a combined £39M. Good for them, nothing less than disastrous for us.
Jan 09 the Gooners bought Arshavin for £10M. We sacked off Pennant for an undisclosed fee, joining Finnan and Le Tallec.
Summer 09 they flogged Adebayor for £25M and bought Vermaelen for £10M. We sold Xabi, Arbeloa, and Leto for a combined £36.5M and bought Magic, Aqua and Kyrgiakos for the same sum - the only time it can be truly said Rafa had to sell in order to buy. Meanwhile Wenger - the blind prune faced cunt - regularly turned a profit. Their respective records read:
Rafa - sold £92M, bought £144.5M
Wenger - sold £63.5M, bought £53M
They finished in those seasons:
Rafa - 4th, 2nd, and currently lying 6th 20 points behind the leaders.
Wenger - 3rd, 4th and currently lying 3rd 3 points behind the leaders.
Hopefully this will answer both points - actually the only season we've had to sell in order to buy was this one, whereas Wenger has been doing it and still remaning within spitting distance, and certainly within the top 4 whilst making a £10M profit. During that same time Rafa has made a loss of £52.5M, has a team playing like a bunch of strangers and needing several additions to fill in the 'missing pieces of the jigsaw'. Who else at the top does that? Wenger does, and does it successfully, Rafa doesn't, and is no longer at the top - not even in the top 4!
"My point is, a club of our size with our ambitions should be able to suck up things like the Aqua setback or if a signing fails to deliver."
And my point was that if rafa is such a genius then so should he - not just a pithy comment, but a perfectly valid and fair assessment I would say.
You reckon it's ill conceived and a waste of bandwidth - so justify this and give your reasons why - or were you simply resorting to insults because you can't really back up your argument?
I've backed up mine, do the same or stick it
[/quote]
Excellent post and really well researched and certainly not ''waste of bandwidth. Clearly the last 2 transfer window have not added to the team and has been disasterous.
However all this comparison with Arsenal, who are unique in their approach, probably in European football, still does not deny the fact that to compete at the very top takes money. Just last year, the calls for Wenger's head reached fever pitch. Arsenal over the last five years have been less successful than us in terms of League position and trophies won. Arsenal aren't our targets, our targets are Chelsea and Man Utd.
Look at Arsenals wage bill which you omitted from your compelling argument. Sorry I don't
do facts and figures, but I know its significantly higher. There is a correlation between wage bill and premiership position. I don't have the facts and figures, (a recurring theme) but we've actually been punching above our weight in the Premiership certainly and probably in Europe.
Wenger is the 2nd longest serving Manager in the Premiership, he's been there over a decade and has complete control. He's taken his team from regular contenders and winners to battling for 4th position, so it can be argued he's taken that club backwards over the last 5 years.
It is a slightly unfair comparison though it does make fascinating reading and in the context of your argument backs it greatly from that perspective. In that regard I'm humble enough to say I was certainly 'owned' and I'm flattered that you clearly took the time and trouble to obtain the statistics to do so. I'm glad that I can inspire another poster in that way.
In closing I'm humbled by your post, magnifico.
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077078#msg1077078 date=1269697365]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=39515.msg1077075#msg1077075 date=1269697162]
And so should a manager of such purported 'genius'
[/quote]
Ill conceived comment and a waste of bandwidth.
[/quote]
Please elaborate.
And then justify why the very same thing cannot be applied to your previous post.
You reckon £20M is not a lot of money for 'a club of our stature' and yet in the history of the league that has only been bested a grand total of nine times - SWP to the Chavs, Shrek, Dogbra , Essien, Veron to the Scum, Duckface, Shevchenko, Berbatov and Robinho - so four times by the Scum, five times by the Chavs, and once by Citeh.
That would seem to suggest it's still a fair bit of money that is only thrown around on occasion, and for the new owners that summer who - at the time had recouped about £22M from sales and spent about £44M - the accusation that they did not back the manager who was forced to sell in order to buy just doesn't ring true.
Of course, we all know it's gone downhill since then - but to answer your question "why should we have to sell before we buy? Who else at the top does that?" Firstly it could be argued that Rafa's revolving door policy whereby players are bought, found inadequate and shipped out at a loss will haven taken it's toll over the years, forcing our hand so that in order to buy we have to sell - however, let us look at this in a bit more detail.
To answer the second part you could look at Arsenal - in summer 2007, the year the Yanks took over Wenger sold Henry, Ljungberg and Aliadiere for a combined £21M ish and bought Sagna, Eduardo and Fabianski for about £17M, replacing two ageing players with two first teamers who came in and performed. Rafa sold Bellers, Djibs, Mark Gonzalez, Paletta and swapped Luis for Fernando, earning a combined £22M and bought Torres, Babel, Lucas, Yossi, Insua and Voronin for a combined £44M, replacing two first teamers with one worthy sure-starter, two sure-starters by default, and a couple of squaddies that regularly get played out of their best position.
In the January transfers the Gooners sold Diarra for £5.5M and bought nobody, we sold Momo for about £8M, and bought Skrtel and Mascher for a combined £25M ish. A good swap on our part.
Summer 08 the Gooners sold Hleb for £12M and bought Ramsey and Nasri for £16M. We sold JAR, Crouch, Guthrie and Carson for a combined £25.5M and bought Dossena, Riera, Keane, Ngog and Cavalieri for a combined £39M. Good for them, nothing less than disastrous for us.
Jan 09 the Gooners bought Arshavin for £10M. We sacked off Pennant for an undisclosed fee, joining Finnan and Le Tallec.
Summer 09 they flogged Adebayor for £25M and bought Vermaelen for £10M. We sold Xabi, Arbeloa, and Leto for a combined £36.5M and bought Magic, Aqua and Kyrgiakos for the same sum - the only time it can be truly said Rafa had to sell in order to buy. Meanwhile Wenger - the blind prune faced cunt - regularly turned a profit. Their respective records read:
Rafa - sold £92M, bought £144.5M
Wenger - sold £63.5M, bought £53M
They finished in those seasons:
Rafa - 4th, 2nd, and currently lying 6th 20 points behind the leaders.
Wenger - 3rd, 4th and currently lying 3rd 3 points behind the leaders.
Hopefully this will answer both points - actually the only season we've had to sell in order to buy was this one, whereas Wenger has been doing it and still remaning within spitting distance, and certainly within the top 4 whilst making a £10M profit. During that same time Rafa has made a loss of £52.5M, has a team playing like a bunch of strangers and needing several additions to fill in the 'missing pieces of the jigsaw'. Who else at the top does that? Wenger does, and does it successfully, Rafa doesn't, and is no longer at the top - not even in the top 4!
"My point is, a club of our size with our ambitions should be able to suck up things like the Aqua setback or if a signing fails to deliver."
And my point was that if rafa is such a genius then so should he - not just a pithy comment, but a perfectly valid and fair assessment I would say.
You reckon it's ill conceived and a waste of bandwidth - so justify this and give your reasons why - or were you simply resorting to insults because you can't really back up your argument?
I've backed up mine, do the same or stick it
[/quote]
Excellent post and really well researched and certainly not ''waste of bandwidth. Clearly the last 2 transfer window have not added to the team and has been disasterous.
However all this comparison with Arsenal, who are unique in their approach, probably in European football, still does not deny the fact that to compete at the very top takes money. Just last year, the calls for Wenger's head reached fever pitch. Arsenal over the last five years have been less successful than us in terms of League position and trophies won. Arsenal aren't our targets, our targets are Chelsea and Man Utd.
Look at Arsenals wage bill which you omitted from your compelling argument. Sorry I don't
do facts and figures, but I know its significantly higher. There is a correlation between wage bill and premiership position. I don't have the facts and figures, (a recurring theme) but we've actually been punching above our weight in the Premiership certainly and probably in Europe.
Wenger is the 2nd longest serving Manager in the Premiership, he's been there over a decade and has complete control. He's taken his team from regular contenders and winners to battling for 4th position, so it can be argued he's taken that club backwards over the last 5 years.
It is a slightly unfair comparison though it does make fascinating reading and in the context of your argument backs it greatly from that perspective. In that regard I'm humble enough to say I was certainly 'owned' and I'm flattered that you clearly took the time and trouble to obtain the statistics to do so. I'm glad that I can inspire another poster in that way.
In closing I'm humbled by your post, magnifico.
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You can't deny a fact because it doesn't suit your opinion, mate and then try to undermine it's worth. That's just silly. The corellation between wage bill and Premiership success is probably the most accurate barometer. It's more accurate than net spend.
Yes, the last 2 transfer windows have been less than successful.
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You can't deny a fact because it doesn't suit your opinion, mate and then try to undermine it's worth. That's just silly. The corellation between wage bill and Premiership success is probably the most accurate barometer. It's more accurate than net spend.
Yes, the last 2 transfer windows have been less than successful.
[quote author=KopKing link=topic=39515.msg1077260#msg1077260 date=1269767913]You can't deny a fact because it doesn't suit your opinion, mate and then try to undermine it's worth. That's just silly. The corellation between wage bill and Premiership success is probably the most accurate barometer. It's more accurate than net spend.
Yes, the last 2 transfer windows have been less than successful.
[/quote]
There is something to be said for such a correlation and I do actually agree to some extent with your earlier assertion that a club of our ambitions should be able to offer a little more leeway in dealing with 20M purchases, however I always say that to talk about winning the Premiership - or even challenging - is slightly missing the point.
That is a goal set by the fans in all reality. Rafa's actual minimum target is more likely a fourth placed finish and in sporting terms, a team that shows direction and promise for the future.
This season we have pretty much failed on both counts (and even if we do make fourth by some fluke, it's been a real shocking display). Rafa has been here long enough and spent enough money to achieve the bare minimum. Rafa has also been given enough time and enough funds to be able to deal with one barren summer (which is all it's really been).
Yes, the last 2 transfer windows have been less than successful.
[/quote]
There is something to be said for such a correlation and I do actually agree to some extent with your earlier assertion that a club of our ambitions should be able to offer a little more leeway in dealing with 20M purchases, however I always say that to talk about winning the Premiership - or even challenging - is slightly missing the point.
That is a goal set by the fans in all reality. Rafa's actual minimum target is more likely a fourth placed finish and in sporting terms, a team that shows direction and promise for the future.
This season we have pretty much failed on both counts (and even if we do make fourth by some fluke, it's been a real shocking display). Rafa has been here long enough and spent enough money to achieve the bare minimum. Rafa has also been given enough time and enough funds to be able to deal with one barren summer (which is all it's really been).
Premier League clubs pay their stars over a billion in wages
June 4th, 2009
Abramovich’s Chelsea paid out the most in wages - 172 million pounds.
Runners-up Manchester United had a salary bill of 121 million pounds.
Third-placed Arsenal forked out 101 million pounds,
followed by Liverpool, whose players earned 90 million pounds.
Newcastle United - relegated last month - had the fifth-biggest wage bill at 75 million pounds,
I think its safe to say man city have a higher wage bill than liverpool as of now as well.
June 4th, 2009
Abramovich’s Chelsea paid out the most in wages - 172 million pounds.
Runners-up Manchester United had a salary bill of 121 million pounds.
Third-placed Arsenal forked out 101 million pounds,
followed by Liverpool, whose players earned 90 million pounds.
Newcastle United - relegated last month - had the fifth-biggest wage bill at 75 million pounds,
I think its safe to say man city have a higher wage bill than liverpool as of now as well.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
[/quote]
Why is it Mark?
When posters are talking about what Rafa has spent, then i think it's only fair to take into account the PLAYER wage bill as well.
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
[/quote]
Why is it Mark?
When posters are talking about what Rafa has spent, then i think it's only fair to take into account the PLAYER wage bill as well.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? [/quote]
I don't think its bollocks at all and I've read plenty of stories that suggest the yanks include wages as part of the transfer kitty, i.e. if you give a current player a significant pay hike you will have less to spend on bringing in a new player.
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? [/quote]
I don't think its bollocks at all and I've read plenty of stories that suggest the yanks include wages as part of the transfer kitty, i.e. if you give a current player a significant pay hike you will have less to spend on bringing in a new player.
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=39515.msg1077266#msg1077266 date=1269768757]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? [/quote]
I don't think its bollocks at all and I've read plenty of stories that suggest the yanks include wages as part of the transfer kitty, i.e. if you give a current player a significant pay hick you will have less to spend on bringing in a new player.
[/quote]
They dont include wages as part of the transfer kitty, its part of the football budget. They give us x to spend a year on football and we have to make it work. Unfortunately Chelsea and now City are raising Wages to a point that we have had to pay SG and FT more than we would like and a few others as well. It's fucked up but it is what it is.
We need a new stadium asap just to keep up.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? [/quote]
I don't think its bollocks at all and I've read plenty of stories that suggest the yanks include wages as part of the transfer kitty, i.e. if you give a current player a significant pay hick you will have less to spend on bringing in a new player.
[/quote]
They dont include wages as part of the transfer kitty, its part of the football budget. They give us x to spend a year on football and we have to make it work. Unfortunately Chelsea and now City are raising Wages to a point that we have had to pay SG and FT more than we would like and a few others as well. It's fucked up but it is what it is.
We need a new stadium asap just to keep up.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
everton are definately punching above their weight, no one is going to attempt to argue that point, but the point is the same if the people above them are spending more and offering more wages is it fair to expect them to secure a CL place (or in our case, the league)?
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
everton are definately punching above their weight, no one is going to attempt to argue that point, but the point is the same if the people above them are spending more and offering more wages is it fair to expect them to secure a CL place (or in our case, the league)?
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077272#msg1077272 date=1269769164]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[/quote]
Well dodged.
Clearly the gulf in wages has made a significant difference between us and them, given they're 2 points behind us in the league.
People seem quick to explain the difference between us and the big three as being down to wages. If you look at it with a bit of objection it's pretty clear that we're underachieving, you don't needs stats or wage bills to work out that much anyway. Just watch us play football.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[/quote]
Well dodged.
Clearly the gulf in wages has made a significant difference between us and them, given they're 2 points behind us in the league.
People seem quick to explain the difference between us and the big three as being down to wages. If you look at it with a bit of objection it's pretty clear that we're underachieving, you don't needs stats or wage bills to work out that much anyway. Just watch us play football.
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=39515.msg1077273#msg1077273 date=1269769195]
everton are definately punching above their weight, no one is going to attempt to argue that point, but the point is the same if the people above them are spending more and offering more wages is it fair to expect them to secure a CL place (or in our case, the league)?
[/quote]
Have we not been spending enough consistently to take fourth this year?
Spurs and more recently, Villa and City, spent a lot of money, but we have done so over a longer period of time, have enjoyed better players for a longer period of time and our manager has been building for a longer period of time.
Most considered us title challengers at the beginning of the season and no-one, even the most pessimistic of the bunch, really contemplated losing out on fourth place. There is a reason for that and it's not a lack of foresight.
All the facts and stats can be used to build an argument that suggests we have been unable to consistently challenge for the title. I don't believe one could do the same for finishing 4th. Do you?
everton are definately punching above their weight, no one is going to attempt to argue that point, but the point is the same if the people above them are spending more and offering more wages is it fair to expect them to secure a CL place (or in our case, the league)?
[/quote]
Have we not been spending enough consistently to take fourth this year?
Spurs and more recently, Villa and City, spent a lot of money, but we have done so over a longer period of time, have enjoyed better players for a longer period of time and our manager has been building for a longer period of time.
Most considered us title challengers at the beginning of the season and no-one, even the most pessimistic of the bunch, really contemplated losing out on fourth place. There is a reason for that and it's not a lack of foresight.
All the facts and stats can be used to build an argument that suggests we have been unable to consistently challenge for the title. I don't believe one could do the same for finishing 4th. Do you?
I think we spend enough to challenge for the league until at least jan/feb we've definately underachieved in that respect.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
And Newcastle. 5th highest wage bill last season. The Championship material this season.
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
And Newcastle. 5th highest wage bill last season. The Championship material this season.
[quote author=keniget link=topic=39515.msg1077276#msg1077276 date=1269769439]
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=39515.msg1077273#msg1077273 date=1269769195]
everton are definately punching above their weight, no one is going to attempt to argue that point, but the point is the same if the people above them are spending more and offering more wages is it fair to expect them to secure a CL place (or in our case, the league)?
[/quote]
Have we not been spending enough consistently to take fourth this year?
Spurs and more recently, Villa and City, spent a lot of money, but we have done so over a longer period of time, have enjoyed better players for a longer period of time and our manager has been building for a longer period of time.
Most considered us title challengers at the beginning of the season and no-one, even the most pessimistic of the bunch, really contemplated losing out on fourth place. There is a reason for that and it's not a lack of foresight.
All the facts and stats can be used to build an argument that suggests we have been unable to consistently challenge for the title. I don't believe one could do the same for finishing 4th. Do you?
[/quote]
Sorry, major fail
[quote author=spider-neil link=topic=39515.msg1077273#msg1077273 date=1269769195]
everton are definately punching above their weight, no one is going to attempt to argue that point, but the point is the same if the people above them are spending more and offering more wages is it fair to expect them to secure a CL place (or in our case, the league)?
[/quote]
Have we not been spending enough consistently to take fourth this year?
Spurs and more recently, Villa and City, spent a lot of money, but we have done so over a longer period of time, have enjoyed better players for a longer period of time and our manager has been building for a longer period of time.
Most considered us title challengers at the beginning of the season and no-one, even the most pessimistic of the bunch, really contemplated losing out on fourth place. There is a reason for that and it's not a lack of foresight.
All the facts and stats can be used to build an argument that suggests we have been unable to consistently challenge for the title. I don't believe one could do the same for finishing 4th. Do you?
[/quote]
Sorry, major fail
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077275#msg1077275 date=1269769378]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077272#msg1077272 date=1269769164]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[/quote]
Well dodged.
Clearly the gulf in wages has made a significant difference between us and them, given they're 2 points behind us in the league.
People seem quick to explain the difference between us and the big three as being down to wages. If you look at it with a bit of objection it's pretty clear that we're underachieving, you don't needs stats or wage bills to work out that much anyway. Just watch us play football.
[/quote]
Fuck Everton. Seriously, i do not care.
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077272#msg1077272 date=1269769164]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[/quote]
Well dodged.
Clearly the gulf in wages has made a significant difference between us and them, given they're 2 points behind us in the league.
People seem quick to explain the difference between us and the big three as being down to wages. If you look at it with a bit of objection it's pretty clear that we're underachieving, you don't needs stats or wage bills to work out that much anyway. Just watch us play football.
[/quote]
Fuck Everton. Seriously, i do not care.
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077300#msg1077300 date=1269774097]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077275#msg1077275 date=1269769378]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077272#msg1077272 date=1269769164]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[/quote]
Well dodged.
Clearly the gulf in wages has made a significant difference between us and them, given they're 2 points behind us in the league.
People seem quick to explain the difference between us and the big three as being down to wages. If you look at it with a bit of objection it's pretty clear that we're underachieving, you don't needs stats or wage bills to work out that much anyway. Just watch us play football.
[/quote]
Fuck Everton. Seriously, i do not care.
[/quote]
You brought up the 'barometer of success' bollocks and how wages and money spent are proportional to that. If it explains the gap between us and the big three, then use your own logic to explain the teams that are close to us in points, despite some of them spending alot less.
Exactly, you can't so your best is to resort to obnoxious bollocks.
Fail.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077275#msg1077275 date=1269769378]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077272#msg1077272 date=1269769164]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077268#msg1077268 date=1269768924]
[quote author=Biggus Dickus link=topic=39515.msg1077264#msg1077264 date=1269768498]
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=39515.msg1077258#msg1077258 date=1269767466]
The wage bill bollocks is neither here nor there, is someone going to look up signing on fees too? Should we also take the managers contract into consideration?
The fact is Rafa's had enough money to make a success of it, and he hasn't, proven no more so than his policy over the last two windows, which has essentially cost us £40m in shite and £40m in misguided priority.
[/quote]
You taking the piss? To bring it back to basics you get what you put in so the money spent on football by clubs is clearly the best barometer to measure performance. Wages is the biggest bill every club has every year and is clearly relevant. Moreso that gross spend and even net spend. What clubs spend on there football teams is extremely relevant and to discard it as bollocks is to delude oneself.
[/quote]
Ok then, as a barometer of success, shall we look at it the other way? How much less than us do Everton spend in wages and where are they in the table.
Oh.
[/quote]
Yuo are taking the piss then. What the fuck have Everton done, won or whatever. Fuck them and the ship they came in on.
[/quote]
Well dodged.
Clearly the gulf in wages has made a significant difference between us and them, given they're 2 points behind us in the league.
People seem quick to explain the difference between us and the big three as being down to wages. If you look at it with a bit of objection it's pretty clear that we're underachieving, you don't needs stats or wage bills to work out that much anyway. Just watch us play football.
[/quote]
Fuck Everton. Seriously, i do not care.
[/quote]
You brought up the 'barometer of success' bollocks and how wages and money spent are proportional to that. If it explains the gap between us and the big three, then use your own logic to explain the teams that are close to us in points, despite some of them spending alot less.
Exactly, you can't so your best is to resort to obnoxious bollocks.
Fail.
I do feel a need to remonstrate with the Cult of Benitez tho.
I had been saving their litany of excuses to be used this weekend when I visited my Manc relatives
(Not my choice; my wife's family is littered with them).
Yes, it's a bit pathetic to use a bunch of excuses that I don't believe in; but...it is Mancs we're talking about.
In my defence, I've been providing them with amusement for the past 3 years; and I knew this weekend would be bad.
(I was actually visiting my inlaws the very day The Scum took 18 and some of the relatives took the chance to visit and rub it in; I actually hid in a bedroom and pretended to be ill..pathetic, but there you go)
I used 'wage bill'.
That was a mistake; but I did manage to make em' laugh and shake their heads..and laugh some more..
If they manage to stop laughing long enough to elaborate, I'll post it here.
I had been saving their litany of excuses to be used this weekend when I visited my Manc relatives
(Not my choice; my wife's family is littered with them).
Yes, it's a bit pathetic to use a bunch of excuses that I don't believe in; but...it is Mancs we're talking about.
In my defence, I've been providing them with amusement for the past 3 years; and I knew this weekend would be bad.
(I was actually visiting my inlaws the very day The Scum took 18 and some of the relatives took the chance to visit and rub it in; I actually hid in a bedroom and pretended to be ill..pathetic, but there you go)
I used 'wage bill'.
That was a mistake; but I did manage to make em' laugh and shake their heads..and laugh some more..
If they manage to stop laughing long enough to elaborate, I'll post it here.
- Status
