Meltonblue, I read it somewhere, can't remember where. I tried looking for the link but can't find it, but I definitely remember it saying that that Utd team was the most expensive squad assembled in English foothall at teh time. Obviously the amounts are insignificant compared to the price of players/squads now but at the time it was a lot of money.

Haven't read Pay as you Play. Heard about it though. Co-written by a Liverpool fan, Paul Tomkins.

I think Spurs, but you'll probably tell me it was Liverpool.

comment by meltonblue (U10617) posted 42 seconds ago
Barf Vader got it right, it was Newcastle.

For eight seasons in a row, they had one of the two most expensive teams . They managed to only get one 2nd place out of it all.

--------------------------
Would never have guessed that

Always annoys me too when it's claimed the geordies are the most loyal fans

Before Keegan went there the first time, they were getting crowds of 14k. Keegan then more than doubled that overnight

comment by meltonblue (U10617)

posted 2 minutes ago

Barf Vader got it right, it was Newcastle.

For eight seasons in a row, they had one of the two most expensive teams . They managed to only get one 2nd place out of it all.


-----------------------------------------------

City have spent a lot of money and they haven't yet managed to finish in 2nd place...

Maybe this year...fingers crossed!

Their spending was obscene Macca compared to their costs per point, which is basically what that book is about and how the influence money has had on the game since the early 90s has grown.

Jan,

It is by him yes, really interesting book. The Wenger stuff is worth reading in it as well, certainly debunks a few myths about them.

Newcastle -interesting. I wouldn't have guessed that. Spurs must be a close second. I think they've spent over £450m since 1992 and doen very little with with, except in the last couple of years.

comment by Mæstro - I'm a FRICKIN United fan biatches!! (U8867)

posted 8 minutes ago

Here's a question for you then. From mid nineties to the mid noughties, who do you reckon the the biggest underachievers in terms of squad assembly cost against final position were?

--------------

Leeds surely worth a mention? Newcastle also a good shout - people forget that Shearer was a British transfer record at the time, and the likes of Asprilla, Bellamy et al. didn't come cheap.

I'll have a check when I get home about Spurs, think they were pretty high though.

Barf,

I think the PL is basically done this season, I really can't see that gap changing by much. There always will be seasons when the most expensive team won't win it (United have been it, but not often), likewise the other way round. The last time a team won it that weren't in the top two in terms of squad expense was Arsenal in 2004. Again though, if you look at Wengers early titles and how much Fizman invested in them to make it happen, they can absolutely be called hypocrites though!

Ultimately though, it just shows that money, regardless of where it comes from, plays an enormous factor in the final position.

What Wenger myths?

That he didn't spend a lot of money?

That and the fact that Arsenal have built the right way. Fizman injected around about 50 million into the club that allowed them to buy Vieira, Petit, Overmars etc. They have a go at clubs that don't do "organic growth", yet were just as guilty themselves.

Its always been a fallacy that Wenger spend nothing. When they were at Highbury they spent loads of money, and that was when they won things, and since they stopped spending, they've not won anything. There was no organic growth .

What he did do though is buy players on the cheap and sell them for a lot of money - Vieira, Anelka, Van Persie, Fabregas, Toure etc. That was pretty impressive. One or two would be a fluke, but he did it quite a lot.

Agree with that Jan. Ultimately though, who is benefitting from that? Arsenals shareholders, but that's it. They would have probably made more money out of keeping those players and actually winning something!

It must be very frustrating supporting Arsenal,this sustainable model nonsense is a complete con that theyve lapped up and now cling to FFP as if its the saviour.
It wont make a blind bit of difference while the board only look at the balance sheet above actually competing to win trophies.
The FA Cup loss to Blackburn being the case in point where Wenger put out a weakened side to compete for the only realistic trophy available but with a prize fund of about £4m(we made 3.4m the other year) to prioritise the champions league where they have no realistic chance (66-1 at the bookies)but would make more money just getting through past Bayern than winning the FA cup
Be interesting to see what they do if they drop out of the top 4, as we made £26.5m on our disastrous campaign last year so as they normally progress further its likely to be a real drop in revenue

What an embarrassing article

Posting from the Stretford End Ruiney?

ONH prize tool

ONH. I'm an avid watcher of "People Like Us" on BBC 3, which one of the characters is you in real life?