Liverpool FC Forum

by **account deleted by request** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:49 am

As I have always argued its the Gross spend that you should use not the NET spend. The Net spend gives a very false picture of what has occured and takes no account of players already at the club. E.G. a new manager takes over at Liverpool and sells Torres for £70million, Gerrard for £40million, buys a load of cr@p for £100million ..... Then the excuse is what do you expect he hasn't spent a penny since he came.

So on top of whatever total you dream come up with you should also include the money Rafa made selling the players already at the club :- Owen £8million/Baros £6.5million/Cisse £6million + all the bits and pieces like Riise £4m/ Murphy £2.5m/Diouf £3.5/Diarra £2m Pongole £3.5m etc etc

Net also doesn't account fully for all the players that are bought and then sold (mistakes ) like Keane/ Dossena etc etc as they all get a large signing on fee, nice wages while they are here and usually a lump sum to help them on their way as the next club can't afford to match the wages we pay.

by **maguskwt** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 5:14 am

Well it depends on how you look at it really. Gross spend doesn't take into account that if a certain player doesn't work out you need to sell and and buy another one that fits better to the team. If you spent 20 million for a player and he doesn't work out. You sell him for 16 million and with that money you buy a player who is a more successful player. This means that you have spent 20 million in player value in the end and not 36 million. The 4 million lost in the mean time is the manager's own risk. As a result you get better success on the pitch (if the replacement is a better fit). For example, in case of Veron for the Mancs, they spent 28 million for him and sold to Chelsea for 15 million or so. With that 15 million they would have bought other players for the same position or other positions as sees fit and Ferguson would have still spent 28 million and not 28 + XX + XX for all those players attained. The value reduction from 28 million to 15 million is due to the failure of Veron being a success on the pitch. The most flawed aspect about just looking at Gross spend is that in the case of Rafa, he likes to buy and then sell quickly if the player doesn't work out. As a result he carried out alot of transfers and it is objectively unfair to just look at his Gross spend. The fact that he might be carrying out too many transfers is another issue and should not be the gauge of how much he's spending. Hence my preference at looking Net spend. Because the Net spend takes into consideration the value fluctuations.

Clubs always have existing value in terms of players. In the case of Rafa, he had a squad which didn't have much value under Houllier and Parry. We sold a former European Player of the year and one of europe's premier top striker for 8 million. Whereas Ferguson had the luxury to sell Beckham at 25 million. Both came from their respective academies and IMO the values shouldn't be that much of a difference. So here comes the factors of handling the contracts of player as well as on pitch successes.

If a manager comes in and wants to sell Torres for 70 million then that's his prerogative, but he has to make sure with that money he buys players which will at least equal the value or eventually have more value then 70 million. At the end of the day I think what Rafa has been saying all along is correct. You have to look at the value of the squad at a single time to gauge whether a manager is successful in the transfer market. If the overall value of the squad is increasing, that means that the manager is doing something right, on the pitch, in handling of the contracts etc. If the overall value of the squad is decreasing, that means the manager is doing something wrong. I think this is a fair and objective gauge, not gross spend or net spend.

by **kazza** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 7:47 am

Maickito wrote:Some fans come out and glorify the likes of the UEFA Cup and Carling Cup as they are today as an achievement ![B]

Ill pull up the pants and get on with life but in all honesty your standards have dropped if you think they are a success.......
We were a show under Moores I dunno how you think Hicks who financed torres has it up by the way either

From my understanding the Torres deal was done before Hicks came. Hicks merely ok'd it.

by **leep33** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:16 am

Unless we get new investment i just do not see where Rafa is going to get transfer funds unless he sells players first.

by **kazza** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:32 am

leep33 wrote:Unless we get new investment i just do not see where Rafa is going to get transfer funds unless he sells players first.

So basically like every year

by **Reg** » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:16 pm

Got to be said the news the yanks are selling couldnt come at a better time to lift the lads spirits to beat Athletico. Visions of new owners, a transfer kitty and the new stadium being back on will give the lads an extra yard. If this news lifts the gloom then the lads can go all the way.

I´ve got my travel agent looking into flights for Hamburg as I type this, I´ll make the reservation either later today or on monday.

Who else of you will be going?? (May 12th)

by **tubby** » Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:11 pm

I should be Reg. Need to see what weekend this stag do is going to be pushed back to in May but if it isn't that week im there for sure.

by **Reg** » Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:16 pm

Tell the lad to postpone his wedding, his girl will understand........ :laugh:

by **NANNY RED** » Sat Apr 17, 2010 12:28 am

Ill be going Reg , i owe you a bevvy

by **J*o*n*D*o*e** » Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:54 pm

so anyone know what happens if the team are unable to fly out later in the week, do both games get moved or does our home leg then become the first game, provided where even flying by that time aswell.

Liverpool FC Forum

Europa league - Here we come

Who is online