This article is for Man City, United, Chelsea, Arsenal and LFC fans, but of course, anyone can add their thoughts.
I wanted to see whether there is any correlation between the 2 - Spend and Success and whether that's always been a constant, especially after reading lots of posts on here about '£1b spent' blah-de-blah.
Of course, we know who the most successful teams are - trophy wise. This article is not to dispute that or how many we (City) have won compared to the other big 4.
However, has money always bought a club success?
I've put together a list only using the PL era for ease of use. I've only used player spends, not net spend, as the players are clearly brought in to improve the team. This is not a article about profit, club wealth etc, purely an article about how much each club has spent over a 23 yr period and whether that money has been wisely spent and brought success.
I've broke it down into year by year, club by club, then added trophy count and used an average 5 year period from 92' onwards and shown the success in that period (only for ease of use, no other reason).
YEAR/CLUB/PLAYER SPEND
* PL winners ** CL winners ***FA Cup ****LC Winners
2015/16
LFC £45m
CHELSEA 12.5m
UNITED £76.1m
CITY £65m
ARSENAL £10m
2014/15
LFC £117m
CHELSEA £118.3m PL LC
UNITED £145.5m
CITY £87.5m
ARSENAL £95.6m FA
2013/14
LFC £48.8m
CHELSEA £105.9m
UNITED £67.7m
CITY £103.2m PL LC
ARSENAL £42.5m FA
2012/13
LFC £49.3m
CHELSEA £92m
UNITED £63m PL
CITY £54m
ARSENAL £52.3m
2011/12
LFC £56.4m
CHELSEA £87.8m FA CL
UNITED £52.9m
CITY £76m PL
ARSENAL £53.2m
2010/11
LFC £80.5m
CHELSEA £94.6m
UNITED £27.2m PL
CITY £154.1m FA
ARSENAL £14.5m
2009/2010
LFC £36m
CHELSEA £23.5m PL FA
UNITED £21m LC
CITY £125m
ARSENAL £10m
2008/9
LFC £39m
CHELSEA £24.2m FA
UNITED £35.8m PL LC
CITY £127.7m
ARSENAL £15.8m
2007/8
LFC £70m
CHELSEA £40.5m
UNITED £62m PL CL
CITY £45m
ARSENAL £31m
2006/7
LFC £28.9m
CHELSEA £12m FA LC
UNITED £18.6m PL
CITY £2.4m
ARSENAL £13.9m
2005/6
LFC £35.1m FA
CHELSEA £112m PL
UNITED £19.5m LC
CITY £9.7m
ARSENAL £37m
2004/5
LFC £39.8m CL
CHELSEA £59.9m PL LC
UNITED £27.2m
CITY £0
ARSENAL £4.5m FA
2003/4
LFC £8.5m
CHELSEA £153.4m
UNITED £53.4m FA
CITY £9.8m
ARSENAL £20.5m PL
2002/3
LFC £13.7m LC
CHELSEA £15m
UNITED £29m PL
CITY £10.2m
ARSENAL £6.6m FA
2001/2
LFC £30.9m
CHELSEA £15m
UNITED £57m
CITY £32.7m
ARSENAL £15.3m PL FA
2000/1
LFC £18.5m FA LC
CHELSEA £26.7m
UNITED £0 PL
CITY £13.2m
ARSENAL £35m
1999/2000
LFC £35.9m
CHELSEA £41.1m FA
UNITED £17.8m PL
CITY £7.4m
ARSENAL £22.9m
1998/9
LFC £12.1m
CHELSEA £0.33m
UNITED £27.8m PL FA CL
CITY £1.4m
ARSENAL £13.8m
1997/8
LFC £5m
CHELSEA £14.9m LC
UNITED £6.1m
CITY £7.5m
ARSENAL £0.8m PL FA
1996/7
LFC £14.4m
CHELSEA £10.8m FA
UNITED £5m PL
CITY £4.9m
ARSENAL £20.2m
1995/6
LFC £4.5m
CHELSEA £9.7m
UNITED £8.8m PL FA
CITY £8.7m
ARSENAL £12.4m
1994/5
LFC £17.1m LC
CHELSEA £2.8m
UNITED £8.3m
CITY £30k
ARSENAL £12.4m
1993/4
LFC £1.9m
CHELSEA £6.3m
UNITED £3.9m PL FA
CITY £8.2m
ARSENAL £3.7m
1992/3
LFC £5.4m
CHELSEA £5m
UNITED £2.3m PL
CITY £3.4m
ARSENAL £4.1m FA LC
TOTAL TROPHIES 1992-present day:
LFC - 6
CHELSEA - 15
UNITED - 22
CITY - 4
ARSENAL – 11
5 YEAR SPEND AVERAGE/TROPHIES WON IN THAT PERIOD (x)
1992-1997
LFC - £43.3m x1
CHELSEA - £33.6m x1
UNITED - £28.3m x6
CITY - £25.2m x0
ARSENAL – £52.8m x2
1997-2002
LFC - £102.4m x2
CHELSEA - £99m x2
UNITED - £108.5m x5
CITY - £62.2m x0
ARSENAL – £97.8m x4
2002-2007
LFC - £126.2m x3
CHELSEA - £352.3m x5
UNITED - £147.7m x4
CITY - £32.1m x0
ARSENAL – £114.6m x3
2007-2012
LFC - £281.9m x0
CHELSEA - £270.6m x6
UNITED - £198.9m x6
CITY - £527.8m x4
ARSENAL – £124.5m x0
2012-present day
LFC - £260.1m x0
CHELSEA - £328.7m x2
UNITED - £352.3m x1
CITY - £309.7m x2
ARSENAL – £200.4m x2
Spend v Success?
posted on 23/7/15
comment by raheemsnewtrophycleaner (U20585)
posted 54 minutes ago
Agree. That demonstrates our recent success.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does. You still have a lot of work to do commercially however. Chelsea have come on leaps and bounds in that respect. City still have some way to go to get that global popularity.
posted on 23/7/15
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by raheemsnewtrophycleaner (U20585)
posted 54 minutes ago
Agree. That demonstrates our recent success.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does. You still have a lot of work to do commercially however. Chelsea have come on leaps and bounds in that respect. City still have some way to go to get that global popularity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We do have a massive amount to do commercially, to catch United that has been built up over 3 decades. I think when you consider we're now 2nd behind United as the most commercially successful team in the PL, shows how far we have come in 7 years, ahead of both Chelsea and Arsenal.
posted on 23/7/15
I did say to Boris Man Utd didn't spend much in the early years
posted on 23/7/15
Man Utd net spend from 1992 to 1998 was like minus £40000 but most people think we took advantage of sky money and bought titles during that period .
posted on 23/7/15
All it shows is if you get good youngsters you don't have to spend much to win trophies.
posted on 23/7/15
comment by Posh Mufc Great Hafi Not Arrogant Just Better (U6578)
posted 28 minutes ago
Man Utd net spend from 1992 to 1998 was like minus £40000 but most people think we took advantage of sky money and bought titles during that period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how you stopped at 98. As the next season 98/99 your net spend was £25.9m.
posted on 23/7/15
comment by Posh Mufc Great Hafi Not Arrogant Just Better (U6578)
posted 31 minutes ago
All it shows is if you get good youngsters you don't have to spend much to win trophies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
However, I do agree with you on this.
posted on 23/7/15
http://www.espn.co.uk/football/barclays-premier-league/story/2532763/arsene-wenger-arsenal-wont-emulate-man-united-spending
Wenger rarely every mentioned about SAF spending as Man utd net spend was very little during the years he managed for Man utd as a lot of the players used were promoted from within.
He realises now man utd are flexing the money because we have a lot of money and are now doing things differently instead of waiting patiently for the youngsters to grow into the 1st team player we want like SAF used to do.
posted on 23/7/15
Arsene knows Arsenal fans
http://www.espn.co.uk/football/barclays-premier-league/story/2532763/arsene-wenger-arsenal-wont-emulate-man-united-spending
"Of course," he said. "When you lose your best players and see opponents strengthen their squad -- and they are already stronger than you -- it is impossible."
posted on 23/7/15
In this day and age club owners do not want to waste time on waiting for youth to come through. The emphasis on winning silverware is far greater now than it has ever been because of the investment & the rewards of success. No way will a manager be given a few years to build a team from youth ahead of winning trophy's. The days of longevity in management without reward for the top clubs is long gone, Bar Wenger of course but I believe he will be the last in the premier league.