£215,000
£2,850,000
-£3,980,000
£2,900,000
£500,000
-£2,525,000
£25,950,000
£16,050,000
-£8,300,000
= £33,660,000
United net spend from 92-00
Liverpool net spend from 92-00 = £68,825,000
Chelsea net spend from 92-00 = £55,290,000
Newcastle net spend from 92-00 = £44,585,000
It's even better than I thought not only were we smaller spenders than Liverpool but even Newcastle and Chelsea spent more than us!
Shows how much media driven perceptions can effect your view on something as I didn't even realise that before I checked out the figures!!
This boring football is a myth! Every year during his tenure we scored more and more goals, the 08/09 season I think we had the most goals scored!
His alonso/masch setup was great to watch and I still miss a midfield like that.
No idea why he isn't rated - probably because he lacks charisma and is too serious! Therefore not appealing to others!
United's low net spend in the 90's is attributable to one factor - the emergence of Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Neville's etc. There's absolutely nothing wrong with acquiring half a team of fantastic players from the youth setup. But it's disingenuous to claim that this proves that you didn't spend big on players. You simply didn't have to buy as many players as other teams. When you did need a player you spent big. Cole's fee smashed the English record. Yorke cost only 2 million less than the prevailing transfer record. These figures do not indicate a club that was averse to spending big if it had to.
FSB
I don't think anyone is claiming United or Fergie have been averse to investing in success over the years, just disputing the tired old claim that success was simply 'bought'.
FSB difference is saf sold and bought bit like wenger.
"Took him about 5 years to do that and that season they finished trophy less anyway "
Tell me, how long did it take Fergie to win a title at OT?
Longer than 5 years wasn't it......
Tell me, how long did it take Fergie to win a title at OT?
------------------------------
He won 'a title' (FA Cup) when he'd been at the club for three and a half years.
He didn't win 'the title' until he'd been at the club for six and a half years.
And how long was it until he won Champls league?
Credit to Benitez that this thread has gone on a tangent to Fergie
RR, the raw net spend figures for the period were presented to indicate that United spend less than other clubs. While it's undoubtedly true that over that period they did, low net spend over this period was something of a statistical anomaly. It's more indicative of lack of a need to spend than a policy of low spending. United have always been a big spending club, they broke the English transfer record more often than anyone else before the arrival of Abramovic and the Sheikh. Nothing wrong with that but people are trying to deny it
Hajifur, I'm not sure that buying cheap and selling high explains the low net spend. Which players are you thinking of?
I don't get this 'Liverpool, Chelsea etc spent more than United' theory. If you wanted to look at his much each club spent, you'd look at the gross figure only?0 Looking at net shows how much teams recouped in transfer fees.
Napoli were at 15/2 (and better on online) to win the league title. When I mentioned this everyone laughed off... Still early to call it though but those odds were generous.
Too many football pundits on JA606..
It's squad cost that matters. We had a higher player turnover but at no point has our squad cost more than Man Utd's for about 20 years.
Benitez is an excellent manager, however it seems there are certain people who he will never win over.
Perhaps it is because of his personality and that clouds peoples' judgements, admittedly I have similar reservations when it comes to Mourinho but if you ask me why I believe Mourinho is overrated then I can put my point across very reasonably.
There's nothing wrong in not liking Benitez, but I really do not understand why people say he is an average manager or as is the case with some people they say he is "below average".
red_man23 - Will be doing plenty of gardening from May . (U1669)
Surely comparing gross spend is nonsensical, and net spend far more logical?
I agree with Winston there, if you sell 3 30m players and replace them with three 30m players, your net spend is 0, but your gross spend is 90m....
It isn't fashionable to call him a fat spanish waiter.
If you call him that you are an illeducated, xenophobic, moronic idiot.
Javier-Stevie&Xabi (U7411)
I'm not sure you'd be quite so opinionated with those insulting Ferguson, would you?
Don't take things so seriously.
Look there are people that will never rate Benitez as a manager regardless of what he achieves, if they can back this up with footballing reasons then I won't necessarily agree with them but fair enough. If it is about personality then that's hardly fair.
Winston (U16525)
posted 7 minutes ago
Javier-Stevie&Xabi (U7411)
I'm not sure you'd be quite so opinionated with those insulting Ferguson, would you?
Don't take things so seriously.
==============
Who's doing that then?
Javier-Stevie&Xabi (U7411)
Er - you?
that was supposed to be Christopher Nolan's The Joker
I'm not sure you'd be quite so opinionated with those insulting Ferguson, would you?
====================================================
If anybody slagged Fergie off on the basis of a stereotype of his nationality (as opposed to the fact that he’s a spiteful ^rse), then I’d agree with Javier that they were an ill-educated, xenophobic, moronic idiot, and I think I could safely reach that conclusion without chewing the carpet in anger.
Sign in if you want to comment
Credit to Benitez
Page 4 of 6
6
posted on 19/9/13
£215,000
£2,850,000
-£3,980,000
£2,900,000
£500,000
-£2,525,000
£25,950,000
£16,050,000
-£8,300,000
= £33,660,000
United net spend from 92-00
Liverpool net spend from 92-00 = £68,825,000
Chelsea net spend from 92-00 = £55,290,000
Newcastle net spend from 92-00 = £44,585,000
posted on 19/9/13
It's even better than I thought not only were we smaller spenders than Liverpool but even Newcastle and Chelsea spent more than us!
Shows how much media driven perceptions can effect your view on something as I didn't even realise that before I checked out the figures!!
posted on 19/9/13
This boring football is a myth! Every year during his tenure we scored more and more goals, the 08/09 season I think we had the most goals scored!
His alonso/masch setup was great to watch and I still miss a midfield like that.
No idea why he isn't rated - probably because he lacks charisma and is too serious! Therefore not appealing to others!
posted on 19/9/13
United's low net spend in the 90's is attributable to one factor - the emergence of Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Neville's etc. There's absolutely nothing wrong with acquiring half a team of fantastic players from the youth setup. But it's disingenuous to claim that this proves that you didn't spend big on players. You simply didn't have to buy as many players as other teams. When you did need a player you spent big. Cole's fee smashed the English record. Yorke cost only 2 million less than the prevailing transfer record. These figures do not indicate a club that was averse to spending big if it had to.
posted on 19/9/13
FSB
I don't think anyone is claiming United or Fergie have been averse to investing in success over the years, just disputing the tired old claim that success was simply 'bought'.
posted on 19/9/13
FSB difference is saf sold and bought bit like wenger.
posted on 19/9/13
"Took him about 5 years to do that and that season they finished trophy less anyway "
Tell me, how long did it take Fergie to win a title at OT?
Longer than 5 years wasn't it......
posted on 19/9/13
Tell me, how long did it take Fergie to win a title at OT?
------------------------------
He won 'a title' (FA Cup) when he'd been at the club for three and a half years.
He didn't win 'the title' until he'd been at the club for six and a half years.
posted on 19/9/13
And how long was it until he won Champls league?
posted on 19/9/13
Credit to Benitez that this thread has gone on a tangent to Fergie
posted on 19/9/13
RR, the raw net spend figures for the period were presented to indicate that United spend less than other clubs. While it's undoubtedly true that over that period they did, low net spend over this period was something of a statistical anomaly. It's more indicative of lack of a need to spend than a policy of low spending. United have always been a big spending club, they broke the English transfer record more often than anyone else before the arrival of Abramovic and the Sheikh. Nothing wrong with that but people are trying to deny it
Hajifur, I'm not sure that buying cheap and selling high explains the low net spend. Which players are you thinking of?
posted on 19/9/13
I don't get this 'Liverpool, Chelsea etc spent more than United' theory. If you wanted to look at his much each club spent, you'd look at the gross figure only?0 Looking at net shows how much teams recouped in transfer fees.
posted on 19/9/13
Napoli were at 15/2 (and better on online) to win the league title. When I mentioned this everyone laughed off... Still early to call it though but those odds were generous.
Too many football pundits on JA606..
posted on 19/9/13
It's squad cost that matters. We had a higher player turnover but at no point has our squad cost more than Man Utd's for about 20 years.
posted on 19/9/13
Benitez is an excellent manager, however it seems there are certain people who he will never win over.
Perhaps it is because of his personality and that clouds peoples' judgements, admittedly I have similar reservations when it comes to Mourinho but if you ask me why I believe Mourinho is overrated then I can put my point across very reasonably.
There's nothing wrong in not liking Benitez, but I really do not understand why people say he is an average manager or as is the case with some people they say he is "below average".
posted on 19/9/13
red_man23 - Will be doing plenty of gardening from May . (U1669)
Surely comparing gross spend is nonsensical, and net spend far more logical?
posted on 19/9/13
I agree with Winston there, if you sell 3 30m players and replace them with three 30m players, your net spend is 0, but your gross spend is 90m....
posted on 19/9/13
It isn't fashionable to call him a fat spanish waiter.
If you call him that you are an illeducated, xenophobic, moronic idiot.
posted on 19/9/13
Javier-Stevie&Xabi (U7411)
I'm not sure you'd be quite so opinionated with those insulting Ferguson, would you?
Don't take things so seriously.
posted on 19/9/13
Look there are people that will never rate Benitez as a manager regardless of what he achieves, if they can back this up with footballing reasons then I won't necessarily agree with them but fair enough. If it is about personality then that's hardly fair.
posted on 19/9/13
Winston (U16525)
posted 7 minutes ago
Javier-Stevie&Xabi (U7411)
I'm not sure you'd be quite so opinionated with those insulting Ferguson, would you?
Don't take things so seriously.
==============
Who's doing that then?
posted on 19/9/13
Javier-Stevie&Xabi (U7411)
Er - you?
posted on 19/9/13
Javier
Why so serious??
posted on 19/9/13
that was supposed to be Christopher Nolan's The Joker
posted on 19/9/13
I'm not sure you'd be quite so opinionated with those insulting Ferguson, would you?
====================================================
If anybody slagged Fergie off on the basis of a stereotype of his nationality (as opposed to the fact that he’s a spiteful ^rse), then I’d agree with Javier that they were an ill-educated, xenophobic, moronic idiot, and I think I could safely reach that conclusion without chewing the carpet in anger.
Page 4 of 6
6