Buying the league?

[AdamMarrett]

I hate this argument from the media and opposing fans. It's a load of bollocks. Someone show me a team that had won titles, that is made up of only academy prospects. It doesn't happen. If a small club had that, the team would develop a bit have a couple of good seasons then it would be picked off and apart in the market by the bigger clubs. Fact of football.

We had to spend big to get to where we are, that's the way it is. The so called birth right big clubs have been doing it for decades, and no one bats a eyelid. To compete at the level we are now, the huge investment was needed early days, and is still needed to build on what we have to challenge the squad going forward.

Hell the media forget part of the reason Liverpool competed this season was they spent big coin on a keeper, defender, in their midfield and up front. But that gets glossed over cause they sold Coutinho for a ridiculous price and their net spend is never ending apparently.

I'm all for it, I hope we continue to spend big to spite them all.

 

[goalmole]

I hate this argument from the media and opposing fans. It's a load of bollocks. Someone show me a team that had won titles, that is made up of only academy prospects. It doesn't happen. If a small club had that, the team would develop a bit have a couple of good seasons then it would be picked off and apart in the market by the bigger clubs. Fact of football.

We had to spend big to get to where we are, that's the way it is. The so called birth right big clubs have been doing it for decades, and no one bats a eyelid. To compete at the level we are now, the huge investment was needed early days, and is still needed to build on what we have to challenge the squad going forward.

Hell the media forget part of the reason Liverpool competed this season was they spent big coin on a keeper, defender, in their midfield and up front. But that gets glossed over cause they sold Coutinho for a ridiculous price and their net spend is never ending apparently.

I'm all for it, I hope we continue to spend big to spite them all.

Yeah fuck'em. May their wailing, and the gnashing of Klopps teeth get ever louder.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

If anyone ever talks about transfers - just mention Rooney £33 million in 2004....15 years ago

Or...Rio Ferdinand for £41million in 2002....£40 mill on one player - this is the season we spent a TOTAL of £40mill on players. (Anelka, Fowler, Vuoso, Distin, Sommeil)

No doubt they will say "yeah but we were spending money we earned".....you simply counter that with did the Glazers buy your club with money they "earned"?!?!?!

The Rags, Arsenal and Liverpool weren’t spending money they earnt when John Henry Davies, Henry Norris, James W Gibson or John Moores were spending never been seen before amounts of money on failing clubs who had either never been successful, were about to go bust or were just nothing Second Division clubs.

If it wasn’t for huge cash injections Newton Heath and then a few decades later Manchester United would have gone bust and never been seen again and Arsenal and Liverpool would have just remained down in the league below.

None of the success any of those clubs have had would have happened without big investment. None of them started out their most successful periods spending money they earnt from previous success.

Even United before Ferguson’s successful era spent transfer record after transfer record in the 1970s and 80s while going 26 years without winning the league. Their 1989-90 team was the most expensive group of players ever assembled at the time but it wasn’t bought through money earnt through success. It came through huge funding from the Edwards family.

Liverpool’s recent good looking net spend is only there because they’ve won next to fuck all for years and their best players want to leave them for clubs that win trophies so they recoup a load of transfer fees, it’s not some brilliant business plan, it’s lack of success that’s evened out their net spend.

 

[01cravend]

If only we were a selling club like Liverpool. Then we could sit on our net spend pedestal and look down on all the clubs that keep their best players.

 

[blightee]

It has always been the case. Look at the early days of Shankly.

"To deal with what he saw as a below average playing squad, he placed 24 players on the transfer list. All of them had left the club within one year. Shankly resolutely pursued his strength through the middle goal and always knew which three players he needed to achieve it"

"Liverpool's recovery depended on new players being acquired and, in his autobiography, Shankly recalled the struggles he had with the board to make them realise the club's potential and the need to spend money on good players. He said there were times when he felt like walking out. He found a valuable ally in Eric Sawyer, of the Littlewoods pools organisation, who joined the board not long after Shankly's appointment and shared Shankly's vision of Liverpool as the best club in England. At one board meeting in 1961 when Shankly insisted the club make offers for two players in Scotland, the board's initial response was that they couldn't afford them, but Sawyer stepped in and said: "We can't afford not to buy them"."

Liverpools success that made them famous was all bought and paid for. They were making british record signings in the 70s (to overcome a city side filled with homegrown talent lol), just because Liverpudlians have the memory of a goldfish does not change that fact.

 

[davymcfc]

Can’t be true. We always got told we can’t buy success.

 

[4andcounting]

I believe it's impossible to 'buy the EPL'.

When you weigh up Plastic United's spending and the level of football they produce, compared to the football and number of goals that the champions produce, then everybody in the league should be thanking City for showing them what domination really is.