Liverpool Thread 2013/14 (continued)

[aguero93:20]

Robbie Keane - 19,000,000

Raul Meireles - 11,500,000

Andrea Dossena - 7,000,000

Christian Poulson - 4,500,000

That forward from Belgium I think that was Milan Jovanovich and he was on a free.

Now what about Andriy Voronin?

What about Raul Morientes, Dossena, Arbeloa, Mascherano etc etc etc etc, established elite clubs giving out about others spending money.
It's mine and I don't like sharing, boo hoo hoo.....

 

[LPoolFan]

The whole spending argument is rather tiresome, it's unfair to criticize a team for who they're owned by. Like it's something out of choice? I don't agree with calling City an 'oil club', and of course we've spent big as well.

While we've spent a lot though, it's been extremely inconsistent and we've sold plenty to recoup funds. We've never been able to spend consistently each season, this was epitomised by having to sell to buy on the back of finishing 2nd. That was horrible. We haven't had stable ownership which has severely effected our spending and leadership, 3 owners over a 5 year span is ridiculous for any football club.

For the record I thought Benitez done quite well in his 6 years here, on spent £16 million a season on average and pulled in some good signings, if not world class then at least great for us:

Xabi Alonso
Javier Mascherano
Pepe Reina
Daniel Agger
Martin Skrtel
Mohamed Sissoko
Fábio Aurélio
Fernando Torres
Dirk Kuyt
Álvaro Arbeloa
Lucas Leiva
Luis Garcia
Glen Johnson
Raheem Sterling

It's been messy since Benitez left, on and off the field. But no mistake about it the problems filter down from the owners. We're stable now and seem to have some direction, hopefully it continues.

 

[jay_mcfc]

The next arguement for the Scousers (although the last post was a good one so cheers for that LPoolFan) is 'net spend'. I've never heard of this until Liverpool bought shit for so many years that they started to negate the price they paid with what they recuperated. Anyway, digress as our leader would say.

Surely if we are taking net spend into account we should also look at assets. How much, in todays market, would Hart, Zabaleta, Kompany, Kolarov, Nasri, Fernandinho, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Dzeko, Aguero, Negredo, Navas, Garcia etc etc be worth? I would say around £350m if you include a few of the others that will be worth a few quid who are not on the list. So if our gross spend is £500m, our net spend is £350m and our assets are £350m and we are winning trophies, who is doing things the right way and who isn't.......

Of course this will just be ignored like my last post and I know football fans generally only see things from their own clubs point of view but the shite that gets spouted about evil money v old historic mega club is boring.

 

[chris85mcfc]

The next arguement for the Scousers (although the last post was a good one so cheers for that LPoolFan) is 'net spend'. I've never heard of this until Liverpool bought shit for so many years that they started to negate the price they paid with what they recuperated. Anyway, digress as our leader would say.

Surely if we are taking net spend into account we should also look at assets. How much, in todays market, would Hart, Zabaleta, Kompany, Kolarov, Nasri, Fernandinho, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Dzeko, Aguero, Negredo, Navas, Garcia etc etc be worth? I would say around £350m if you include a few of the others that will be worth a few quid who are not on the list. So if our gross spend is £500m, our net spend is £350m and our assets are £350m and we are winning trophies, who is doing things the right way and who isn't.......

Of course this will just be ignored like my last post and I know football fans generally only see things from their own clubs point of view but the shite that gets spouted about evil money v old historic mega club is boring.

I take your point Jay. It almost seems pretty pointless going over points like this, and money spent in general because its almost like having your excuses written out already.

But its a good point that you make, how many of Liverpools players could they actually make a good return on if they were looking to sell?

If you look through there team i think only Coutinho, Sturridge and Suarez would pull good money, and 'perhaps' Sterling and Flanagan because they are potentially decent young English players (which we all know adds a few million on).

But apart from that they are made up of good PL players that they wouldn't get much return on, Johnson, Skrtel, Agger, Henderson, Allen, Lucas who are all decent players but individually wouldn't get in a top 4 team (maybe Agger at a push).

Obviously i haven't factored Gerrard in this because he only has a couple of years left and isnt really an asset to them anymore.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

The next arguement for the Scousers (although the last post was a good one so cheers for that LPoolFan) is 'net spend'. I've never heard of this until Liverpool bought shit for so many years that they started to negate the price they paid with what they recuperated. Anyway, digress as our leader would say.

Surely if we are taking net spend into account we should also look at assets. How much, in todays market, would Hart, Zabaleta, Kompany, Kolarov, Nasri, Fernandinho, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Dzeko, Aguero, Negredo, Navas, Garcia etc etc be worth? I would say around £350m if you include a few of the others that will be worth a few quid who are not on the list. So if our gross spend is £500m, our net spend is £350m and our assets are £350m and we are winning trophies, who is doing things the right way and who isn't.......

Of course this will just be ignored like my last post and I know football fans generally only see things from their own clubs point of view but the shite that gets spouted about evil money v old historic mega club is boring.

I would say net spend is irrelevant, the reality is that as long as the club continues to function then if we're debating who's doing a better job at the top then it is purely gross spend and value of the squad that is relevant, as that's what you've spend in order to try and win trophies. Doesn't matter if you had to sell to buy first, if you'd wanted to you could have kept the original player so by selling him you've concluded you don't want him so therefore that is as much a tactical decision as it is a business one.

If people want an argument over how we actually run our club, as opposed to how much we've spent on players then net spend could have some bearing but we can point to everything else that our amazing club is doing and the opposition can run off with the tails between their legs wishing their club would do the same for them.

 

[supercity88]

The next arguement for the Scousers (although the last post was a good one so cheers for that LPoolFan) is 'net spend'. I've never heard of this until Liverpool bought shit for so many years that they started to negate the price they paid with what they recuperated. Anyway, digress as our leader would say.

Surely if we are taking net spend into account we should also look at assets. How much, in todays market, would Hart, Zabaleta, Kompany, Kolarov, Nasri, Fernandinho, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Dzeko, Aguero, Negredo, Navas, Garcia etc etc be worth? I would say around £350m if you include a few of the others that will be worth a few quid who are not on the list. So if our gross spend is £500m, our net spend is £350m and our assets are £350m and we are winning trophies, who is doing things the right way and who isn't.......

Of course this will just be ignored like my last post and I know football fans generally only see things from their own clubs point of view but the shite that gets spouted about evil money v old historic mega club is boring.

I would say net spend is irrelevant, the reality is that as long as the club continues to function then if we're debating who's doing a better job at the top then it is purely gross spend and value of the squad that is relevant, as that's what you've spend in order to try and win trophies. Doesn't matter if you had to sell to buy first, if you'd wanted to you could have kept the original player so by selling him you've concluded you don't want him so therefore that is as much a tactical decision as it is a business one.

If people want an argument over how we actually run our club, as opposed to how much we've spent on players then net spend could have some bearing but we can point to everything else that our amazing club is doing and the opposition can run off with the tails between their legs wishing their club would do the same for them.

Yeah it is all a load of nonsense. If you have to take a loan to start a business but then continually to make money thereafter then all is well. We have taken a huge amount of investment from our owners but if we build things the right way then we will be in a great position. But I don't care about those kinds of arguments. Even Barca have to spend big on players from time to time, I'm sure as long as the club continues to exist and wins trophies they couldn't give a toss whether the money is from a die hard Liverpool/City/Barca fan or from a rich foreign investor. I for one don't care. Liverpool have spent money just like everyone else and it has not just been through their own revenues. They are as guilty as everyone else even if the scales are different.

 

[LPoolFan]

The next arguement for the Scousers (although the last post was a good one so cheers for that LPoolFan) is 'net spend'. I've never heard of this until Liverpool bought shit for so many years that they started to negate the price they paid with what they recuperated. Anyway, digress as our leader would say.

Surely if we are taking net spend into account we should also look at assets. How much, in todays market, would Hart, Zabaleta, Kompany, Kolarov, Nasri, Fernandinho, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Dzeko, Aguero, Negredo, Navas, Garcia etc etc be worth? I would say around £350m if you include a few of the others that will be worth a few quid who are not on the list. So if our gross spend is £500m, our net spend is £350m and our assets are £350m and we are winning trophies, who is doing things the right way and who isn't.......

Of course this will just be ignored like my last post and I know football fans generally only see things from their own clubs point of view but the shite that gets spouted about evil money v old historic mega club is boring.

The whole net spend thing came about because of how the media treated Benitez here, he was berated for spending so much money and failing to capitalise on the league. The reality of the situation is he often had transfer targets and our owners fucked around for ages, deals were stalled and ultimately fell through. Often leading us to panic buy someone towards the end of the window which was a gamble. That was often the cycle for our transfer windows.

 

[PSmyth07]

I love how confident they are about beating us.

Should be interesting games between us and Chelsea, however I don't think the you score 3 we'll score 4 tactic will work so well against Chelsea and ourselves. It'll probably suit us.

 

[Thenumber1blue]

Net spend only applies to selling clubs !

 

[Blue_Rossy]

I love how confident they are about beating us.

Should be interesting games between us and Chelsea, however I don't think the you score 3 we'll score 4 tactic will work so well against Chelsea and ourselves. It'll probably suit us.

If you read on rawk, they are adamant they will hammer us, saying last time we won was when anelka got a last min winner after they hammered us for 89 mis lol. Don't think we've won there since 2002 can someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Would love to snatch a 1-0 or a 2-1. But they are 100% confident they will smash us.