Liverpool FC Forum

by **Mark 23** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:57 pm

I wonder how many other top flight clubs have done that. Arsenal were meant to be friendly to a Belgium club I think, but it was merely to snap up their young talent.

by **bigmick** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:08 pm

I don't think it necessarily follows that because Rafa hasn't blown a fortune it means Liverpool are skint. My suspicion is that the kitty is perhaps a little bigger than some are assuming and that Benitez has done a good job over the last couple of seasons in convincing everybody that money is very limited.
In the cases of both Newcastle and Tottenham they have spent big money on central midfielders and central defenders whereas we have produced a top-class player for free in each position so by definition our need is not as great. FWIW I think the signing of Berbatov in particular is a very risky use indeed of 11 million pounds.

by **puroresu** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:09 pm

Judge wrote:just a little tip puroreso: spending wisely is the key to success

Do not disagree with that. However you cannot tell me that you would not like it if we were in a position to compete for the top players

by **bigmick** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:21 pm

puroresu wrote: However you cannot tell me that you would not like it if we were in a position to compete for the top players

To be honest I think we are. I think Alonso is a top player, similarly Sissoko. A couple of lads we have signed in the transfer window have the potential to become top players and along the way we've picked up blokes like Crouch and Garcia who are very good players aswell.
It's true that we can't go in and buy the Ballacks and Shevcenko's of this World but neither can anybody else except Chelsea and I wouldn't swap places with them TBH. We are as able as most to compete for the "top" players, it's just that we have to have a touch of talent in the scouting department and pick them up before they've become World superstars.
When all said and done it's the best way aswell. Madrid and Chelsea have proven between them that the Harlem Globetrotter approach is not the way to greatness. Not only does buying all the best players and then winning something lack a basic virtue, but the very biggest prizes tend to go to the best teams rather than the biggest and best collections of players.

by **account deleted by request** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:27 pm

My worry is not that we cant afford the top players but that we may have to compromise on players in our so called price range to save a few quid.Ie buying Pennant rather than Rafa's first choice Alves.

by **dawson99** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:28 pm

i bet that if rafa said

"we need this player, he will cost 15 million" that we could find the money. we are just a bit wiser than that

by **account deleted by request** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:33 pm

dawson99 wrote:i bet that if rafa said

"we need this player, he will cost 15 million" that we could find the money. we are just a bit wiser than that

I am sure we could but if Rafa said we need 2 players one costing £15million and one costing £10million would he get them then or would he have to compromise and get one at £15million or 2 at £8million apiece?

by **red_indian** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:46 pm

other than an over ambitious man in dan levy there is no way spurs in theory should have more money than us - they've never won a european trophy in the last decade, and hardly ever had any kind of run in europe let alone the champions league so without the extra revenues they cannot compare with our spending power. But that then means either they dwindle away in to obscurity like shef wed or the like or else make big bets in a hope they can regularly get in to the top4 and get that money spinning champs league cycle going from which the rich clubs just get richer.

but big bets can blow up in your face - spurs i guess have one, max 2 seasons to crack the top 4 else they'll have to sell on their best players for most likely less than they paid as those players will want to move (if they are that good) to play at the highest level. Not quite the Leeds situation, but getting there. Also if you look at their squad list, player turnover is quite high, they get a guy for a season then moves on - edman, mido etc, so no consistency which is hardly good if you want to win things. They also have a pretty big squad (may be some will get unhappy, defoe, ziegler, whoever) but with only average players in midfield (danny murphy!) and at the back (robinson may be an exception), their front line is the main asset - we have a better blend of players and a better overall squad by some distance.

at then end of the day i'm sure we could afford the likes of duff but rafa is buidling something more sustainable and long term, not a :censored:

or bust bet.

by **LFCFan4Life** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 9:34 pm

Spurs aren't trying to finance a 160 million pound stadium where as we are and therefore all of our money isn't going to the transfer market.

Our ticket prices are also lower meaning less revenue.

by **kobashi** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:37 pm

LFCFan4Life wrote:Spurs aren't trying to finance a 160 million pound stadium where as we are and therefore all of our money isn't going to the transfer market.

Our ticket prices are also lower meaning less revenue.

Ticket prices in Europe are cheap yet the Big clubs still have funds.

I look at an example of a Zambrotta for instance. Now if he came avaliable at say £12 million. Could Rafa buy him at that price?

by **RUSHIE#9** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:10 am

I can really see another leeds situation building at somewhere like spurs or Newcastle. They are pouring millions and millions of pounds into players but with very little success on the pitch and we all know that is a recipe for bankruptcy. Admittedly we don't know the state of their finances but Newcastle must be using a large chunk of their gate income and merchandising profits to supplement their spending. 'Spurs have just signed a supposedly lucrative sponsorship with this Mansion lot and do rotate their shirt sponsor quite regularly but that can't allow them to get massive sums of money from such short term deals. I think with them it will eventually come down trying to maximise the amount of money they can make from the transfer of one or two of their top players. The mancs are currently trying to get carrick and are supposed to be offering around £15 million for him. This could represent as much as £10m profit on a player that they may already have a replacement for in their vast squad whether he's of a similar quality or not.
We may not be setting any records in the market but we are picking out quality for the money we are spending instead of casting a wide net and hoping to find a gem in amogst a possible pile of crap.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:29 am

puroresu wrote:
RUSHIE#9 wrote:It comes down to plain old trophies in the cabinet and not how much money you waste in the transfer market, and waste is exactly what 'spurs have been doing for the past couple of years. They have probably spent somewhere close to what Houllier spent but haven't won anything apart from the carling cup back in georgie 'brown paper bag' graham's day.
I've said it before and i'll say it again; Rafa doesn't and probably won't spend massive sums of money on big name players unless they are 110% proven to deliver the goods and the championship and seeing as how spurs are buying big names and winning nothing proves big names don't equal success. Rafa seems to prefer a player who shows his committment to the shirt and is able to get on with a job for the team without having to have his name up in lights every week. I get the feeling that is why Michael Owen probably won't pull on the red shirt again - but thats a different discussion altogether.

Isnt that Harsh on Jol. His done a pretty decent job since he took over. Granted however the minimum he has to get this year is Champions League qualification considering the money he spent.

I don't think it's harsh at all, mate.

Martin Jol is a punk. He's a monotonal gimp, with a jaw the size of Lake Michigan.

He's a nothing. He profits from the vast over-spending done by their worthless a*se-crust of a chairman.

Tottenham are a dirty club.

They must be washed.

by **Effes** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:49 am

It could be worse - Everton have got Delron Buckley on trial!!

My God

by **Lando_Griffin** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:52 am

Effes wrote:It could be worse - Everton have got Delron Buckley on trial!!

My God

Whatever next!?!

Could they actually WIN a match!?!

The Bitter's - another dirty, DIRTY club that must be washed. :no

by **LFCFan4Life** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:44 am

kobashi wrote:
LFCFan4Life wrote:Spurs aren't trying to finance a 160 million pound stadium where as we are and therefore all of our money isn't going to the transfer market.

Our ticket prices are also lower meaning less revenue.

Ticket prices in Europe are cheap yet the Big clubs still have funds.

I look at an example of a Zambrotta for instance. Now if he came avaliable at say £12 million. Could Rafa buy him at that price?

Yes but those big clubs have bigger stadium capacities than we do.

Zambrotta won't be available for 12 million and do we need him? Madrid,Barcelona and Chelsea can offer Juventus alot more than 12 million and considering the situation they're in, the player will go to the highest bidder.

Liverpool FC Forum

Lack of money! - Even tottenham spend more.

Who is online