Associate
So only 1 good all round team there then yeh?
So who has been buying success in the Premier League?
- Thread starter toon_mad
- Start date
So only 1 good all round team there then yeh?
Man of Honour
Depends what you mean by all round.
They all won...
They all won...
tbh Southerns teams dont know how to win over long periods of time, no stamina
37 between Man U and Lpool, Gunners with 13 next is Everton at 9
FA Cup
League Cup
Euro titles
if you live in London just accept that the north west is going to clean up if they fail you might have a chance and people wonder why the north west is such a hub of passionate football!
Considering how much "wealth" is in the south how football is so underfunded, do you all watch Union and Boat Racing?
37 between Man U and Lpool, Gunners with 13 next is Everton at 9
FA Cup
League Cup
Euro titles
if you live in London just accept that the north west is going to clean up if they fail you might have a chance and people wonder why the north west is such a hub of passionate football!
Considering how much "wealth" is in the south how football is so underfunded, do you all watch Union and Boat Racing?
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 2,307
You've picked an odd set of figures there as it's just transfer spend and not net transfer spend which is clearly the more important one. i.e.
# Nett Spend 92 - 2011
1 Chelsea £515,965,000
2 Manchester City £473,627,000
3 Liverpool £226,235,000
4 Manchester United £177,310,000
5 Tottenham £168,832,500
6 Aston Villa £128,115,000
7 Sunderland £103,985,000
8 Newcastle £99,820,000
9 Fulham £91,686,000
10 Wolves £57,024,000
11 Stoke City £53,485,000
12 Everton £52,975,500
13 West Bromwich Albion £39,112,499
14 Queens Park Rangers £29,143,500
15 Arsenal £21,616,000
16 Bolton £16,300,000
17 Wigan £9,022,500
18 Swansea City £7,142,500
19 Blackburn Rovers -£3,723,000
20 Norwich City -£15,625,000
Namely it shows how ridiculously well Arsenal have done in the transfer market over the last 10 years - there is a whole Emirates stadium (390 million) difference just in transfer fees between Chelsea/City and ArsenalFactor in wages too and I think Chelsea have spent almost a billion pounds more than Arsenal
Can't believe we(Norwich) have managed to compete in the prem several times during that period despite making a profit from transfers. If we sell Holt that'll only increase our transfer profits seeing as we bought him for about 400k...
Very interesting to see that Arsenal, a team that has regularly challenged for the title and in Europe have a net spend which is less than QPR's, a team that has sat in the Championship for most of that time.. The Arsenal fans can complain all they want about not winning trophies for several years, but my word he knows how to build a sustainable, competitive team.
Sounds like an excuse to be fair for not having instant riches/success
Arsenal did do it on and off for a number of years (when they were happy with buying quality as well as developing it). Yes they had a core side that had grown up with them, but they were happy to go out and get individual players on occasion too (Henry for example, he may well have been a good winger rather than a brilliant striker before the transfer, but the quality was already evident). The problem they ran into was not developing much youth internally before the old players retired (Im sure they tried, but it didnt work out)
(Obviously recently the cost of the huge stadium may have hit team development from buying in expensive players, but developing kids into first team players should be a constant rolling process).
It will be interesting to see how Spurs / Newcastle can push on in the next season or two , and if they manage to grow stronger season on season
Chelsea and Liverpool (these two's main competitors currently for CL/Europa places) may have oodles of cash which they cant compete with but it could also be argued that both of the squads arent at anywhere near their strongest either
It doesnt HAVE to be about instant success, but that success built over time.
It's been that way since 2003.
What irks me about Chelsea and City is that their bought success hampers other teams who have genuinely done it the right way (spending wisely, playing good football, bringing through youth), for example Tottenham or Everton (where Moyes has been doing a fantastic job).
You can look at United's or Liverpool's spending but they have built their history and fan base that warrants that spending.
Soldato
You're basing this bitterness on what?
Associate
The era of teams gradual success and decline is now over. Due to 1 thing. Cash. Man City is the epitome of that. 2 seasons ago they were no where. Football isnt about becoming the best in an instant, its about the highs and lows and the success throughout the years that makes fans loyal and foes respectful. I have no respect for Man City what so ever.
The top teams in the EPL now have cash to look after them, that same cash is what makes it impossible for teams lower down or newly promoted to stand any chance.
All this talk of money infuriates me, but at the same time im the fool who pays £40 to watch the game. Rock and hard place pop to mind. Its a dim future for club football if regulations are not brought in.
The top teams in the EPL now have cash to look after them, that same cash is what makes it impossible for teams lower down or newly promoted to stand any chance.
All this talk of money infuriates me, but at the same time im the fool who pays £40 to watch the game. Rock and hard place pop to mind. Its a dim future for club football if regulations are not brought in.
Associate
I wouldnt call them bitter, more just gutted that there joint closest rivals have the wealthiest owner in football and has bought them the league when they have worked hard for the last 20 years for what will seem **** all.
I suppose you could point the finger at the players though. They want to go to a club thats going to pay them millions and buy cups and leagues. Thats not what football is about. I know when I was younger on the the brink of being pro all I wanted was to play for respected teams but I wasnt bothered about millions, just being wealthy enough to look after myself and my family and doing the job I loved.
Constantly claiming that Chelsea/City bought the title as if they believe that United won all of theirs without the aid of any money.
Nobody could compete with United when it came to attracting big name players and splashing the cash until the rich owners started buying up clubs, all that the clubs who have supposedly 'bought the title' did was break the hegemony that United had built up over several decades.
JDeeLFC said:
But prior to the rich owners United were the biggest spenders in the last 20yrs (Ferdinand, Veron, RvN, Berbatov, Yorke, Cole, Stam etc), since 1993 United broke the English transfer record five times to get the players they wanted, even going back to the 60s they made a few other British record signings due to their wealth advantage over others.
When Chelsea/City become big worldwide brands like United they won't need sugar daddy owners splashing the cash to attract players, but to become big brands they needed to invest in players up front and break United's strangehold on the EPL and to win trophies, without investment they would have just continued as 'also ran' teams whilst United mop up yet more titles and attract all of the best players through their dominance/success.
Last edited:
Soldato
Man of Honour
who's said that?
Most manyoo fans
Soldato
Like who?
So tell me how Liverpool failed so dismally (in relation to how much they have spent in the last 18 months) if its ONLY down to money
Im sorry, but its clearly not.
You can blame Kenny and his scouts for targetting the wrong players, but surely this is just as likely (possibly even more likely) to happen at smaller clubs too.
Chelsea have spent £60m on hiring and firing managers in the last 12 /24 months (given the double hit on AVB), and the same again on players - yet look at their league position - and there is no gaurentee anyone they buy will settle in England / perform straight away
Newcastle and to a lesser extent Spurs did brilliantly to finish where they did , and maybe the odds are against them to do it again, but its still very possible
Can also blame him for his tactics and man management skills too..
His team was stuck in the 80's, creating chances on the basis the other team isn't as good so they must score, when in reality a bit of focus on decent goal scoring moments would be much more sensible.
Associate
Their success has earnt them that money. No one can say that Utd have ever had the type of cash injection that city and chelsea have had.
We didnt fail dismally. We failed dismally if your comparing us to when we were winning everything with ease. In fact we improved on last season, thats not a failure.
Also, its a gradual progression and decline as I said in my first post. Citys isnt, its a massive leap.
Can also blame him for his tactics and man management skills too..
His team was stuck in the 80's, creating chances on the basis the other team isn't as good so they must score, when in reality a bit of focus on decent goal scoring moments would be much more sensible.
Dont wink, its true and I agree. Kenny was our issue last season
Associate
Re-reading your reply, I think you have missed the whole point of what im getting at.
Im a Liverpool fan, I have respect for what Man U have done over the years.
Yes, Newcastle have done well and they are the gradual decline and success im talking about. They will never win the league though and no team will without cash. Its simple as.
Associate
Either you have to accept people buying success, or you have to accept Manyoo and Arsenal winning everything, basically
Chelsea and Citeh spending outside money was the only way to compete with Manyoo. Without them doing so, Manyoo could have just abused their dominant position... in a way! (They make TONNES of money, because of past success, and could just use that additional money to fuel on-going success... so they'd be nothing to crack the status quo!) They spent a lot, but they needed to, in order to attract the right players at the right time.
That's not Manyoo's fault, of course.
Yep, regualtions. I already said, as above.
Lol, whats with the Manyoo and Citeh......
Disagree though, Arsenal had an amazing team a few years back. Not massive injections of money, just good management and finances and players ofc. Then Wenger turned stupid and got rid of the class, repleced with potential future class and it bit him in the ***.
Love it, im a poet and I dint know it