£472m net spend, 2 PL titles, 1 FA Cup, 1 Capital One trophy & 1 Charity Shield.
This is the unbiased and complete picture.
It is Sandy and he got a position in the league that Spurs can only deam of. As you say spending helps and no-one disputes this. What about the £200m net you spent in the five years previous to your subjective stat? It was those players bought then, for millions, that allowed the net spend in the future. It's all relative.
comment by Thudd!! (U1029)
posted 4 minutes ago
"Look at Tottenham, you spent £100million you should be challenging for the league"
B.Rodgers
I have no control over what Brendan Rodgers says but he's right really isn't he. Apprently no-one has spent that though so why you worried? Apparently Andy Carroll cost minus £15m and Brendan has only spent £35m this summer that's in the squad.
That's what I'm told anyway. Personally I think it's subjective bollox.
We spent loads of money last year and no one can deny that.
Another way you could put it is that we swapped Bale and a few other players in exchange for Soldado, Lamela, Eriksen, Paulinho, Chadli, Capoue, Chiriches and several million pounds spare in the bank etc.
City and Chelsea may well now be generating more of their own money now than in the past because of their success. But if you were to take away all the private money invested that was not generated by the clubs they would be in dire trouble even now.
We can both agree Robbing that both LIverpool and Spurs have wasted money
mancini
£472m net spend, 2 PL titles, 1 FA Cup, 1 Capital One trophy & 1 Charity Shield.
This is the unbiased and complete picture.
Without that spend it would have probably been zero trophies. Funny how prior to that net spend, City had gone 30 years without a trophy. Proving that with that amount of money spent, it is possible to buy trophies.
Thudd!!
We can both agree Robbing that both LIverpool and Spurs have wasted money
In Spurs case money given by other clubs to help in the funding of buying players. Without the Bale money, Spurs would not have spent the £100 million.
The mistakes both Liverpool and Tottenham made was assuming that no matter how you distribute your money you're going to get talent's worth.
What I mean is that we sold Bale for £85.3m (worth of talent) and expected that if we reinvest that over a number of players we'd bring in £85.3m worth of talent and it would all be okay plus we have more positions covered.
Unfortunately, and similarly with Liverpool that isn't the case being the top class players like Bale and Suarez make such a huge difference to the team that it has a bigger influence that 6 players could.
Tottenham need to learn from this and invest wisely in 1 or 2 quality players at a time. Slowly build your team with influential players and move on from there instead of a squad full of average alternatives.
"I have no control over what Brendan Rodgers says but he's right really isn't he."
We shall see if that story changes the moment comes that the Poool are not going to be winning the PL this season.
My money is on a "What I meant was ..." .
Boss By Hugo (U18550)
Very fair. You can only get 11 on the pitch at the end of the day.
comment by The RDBD (demoted to supporting the team managed by Pep Guardiola) (U1062)
posted 24 seconds ago
"I have no control over what Brendan Rodgers says but he's right really isn't he."
We shall see if that story changes the moment comes that the Poool are not going to be winning the PL this season.
My money is on a "What I meant was ..." .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really sure what this means. It's as clear as day that we're not going to win the prem and apparently neither LFC or Spurs spent £100m anyway.
"Not really sure what this means."
It means you have done a "Spurs" .
But Brenton will now try to dig himself out of that particular hole, and explain (and I use that word VERY loosely in his case ) as to why your transfer business this summer and its effects on your season is nothing like what happened to Spurs in 2013-14.
Liverpool are the biggest spenders in terms of underachievement. For the money they spend they really should be winning the league.
A truly pathetic joke club supported by clowns.
It has been consistently proven to them over and over again they have spend considerably more than Spurs on transfers and wages, and their joke fans still deny it.
comment by The RDBD (demoted to supporting the team managed by Pep Guardiola) (U1062)
posted 3 minutes ago
"Not really sure what this means."
It means you have done a "Spurs" .
But Brenton will now try to dig himself out of that particular hole, and explain (and I use that word VERY loosely in his case) as to why your transfer business this summer and its effects on your season is nothing like what happened to Spurs in 2013-14.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If we "do a Spurs" and finish 3 points worse off I'll have a vvank!
RC - Spurs spend umpteen millions more per trophy and that, I'm afraid, is a fact.
Oh and RC please do one of your hilarious articles for this weekend. LFC need a win.
"If we "do a Spurs" and finish 3 points worse off I'll have a vvank!"
As we are so often told here, only final table position matters and not total points.
Bit short sighted that I feel. For example I think the two times LFC came second in recent years would have won the Prem on about 10 occasssions or something. I can't be disappointed with the lads for that effort - you just have to give credit to the winners.
RC - Spurs spend umpteen millions more per trophy and that, I'm afraid, is a fact.
___
You really are the worst on this. It is proven to you over and over again that Liverpool consistently outspend Spurs on transfers and wages.
We show statistics every single month that clearly rank Spurs as the club with the lowest net spend of any single club in the Prem currently (and they have been bottom of this table for about 7 years).
The Spurs team that qualified for the Champions League cost less than 50 million (or a Carrol and a Downing).
You cannot accept it because it simply underline what a truly massive, massive failure Liverpool are a football club.
You spend almost as much as Chelsea and have been garbage for about 8 years.
"Bit short sighted that I feel."
Of course it is. But that is some people for you.
Liverpool are as responsible as Chelsea and City for inflated wages and insane transfer valuations - which lead to fans being ripped off. Unless they have a sugar daddy like City, whose owner subsidizes ticket prices.
It is sc.um clubs like Liverpool which mean a 'top sides' season ticket price is now over a grand.
And you did all of this, paying ridiculous money for average players and accomplished nothing.
All good supporters should hold Liverpool in contempt. At least Chelsea selfishly won trophies through doing it.
interesting if true.....
http://shewore.com/2014/04/21/spend-net-spend-of-top-7-clubs-over-last-5-years/
The RC - Football Expert & gentleman (U17921)
Sigh - yes RC we do but in that time we have also had a few title challenges, CL win and finals, super cups, UEFA cup, FA's cups and League cups.
Spurs have not. So yes we have spent more but we have also achieved far more. That's how it works but in the fiarness of parity we have spent less per trophy and ergo have a better spend ratio whether you accept this or not.
Where have you been?
Everton, Spurs and Arsenal living within their means. It's tough but the only way football will survive in the long-term.
It is an absolute joke the toothless FIFA 'Fairplay' regulations haven't simply annihilated the likes of Liverpool and City.
Spurs and Liverpool have roughly the same turnover so Liverpool are clearly spending beyond their means.
Sigh - yes RC we do but in that time we have also had a few title challenges, CL win and finals, super cups, UEFA cup, FA's cups and League cups.
___
Tittle challenges, CL wins, "super cups" , and UEFA cups in the last 7 years?
You are a downright liar.
When the last time Liverpool won a trophy?
Sign in if you want to comment
Top Four net spend clubs
Page 3 of 5
posted on 11/12/14
£472m net spend, 2 PL titles, 1 FA Cup, 1 Capital One trophy & 1 Charity Shield.
This is the unbiased and complete picture.
posted on 11/12/14
It is Sandy and he got a position in the league that Spurs can only deam of. As you say spending helps and no-one disputes this. What about the £200m net you spent in the five years previous to your subjective stat? It was those players bought then, for millions, that allowed the net spend in the future. It's all relative.
comment by Thudd!! (U1029)
posted 4 minutes ago
"Look at Tottenham, you spent £100million you should be challenging for the league"
B.Rodgers
I have no control over what Brendan Rodgers says but he's right really isn't he. Apprently no-one has spent that though so why you worried? Apparently Andy Carroll cost minus £15m and Brendan has only spent £35m this summer that's in the squad.
posted on 11/12/14
That's what I'm told anyway. Personally I think it's subjective bollox.
posted on 11/12/14
We spent loads of money last year and no one can deny that.
Another way you could put it is that we swapped Bale and a few other players in exchange for Soldado, Lamela, Eriksen, Paulinho, Chadli, Capoue, Chiriches and several million pounds spare in the bank etc.
City and Chelsea may well now be generating more of their own money now than in the past because of their success. But if you were to take away all the private money invested that was not generated by the clubs they would be in dire trouble even now.
posted on 11/12/14
We can both agree Robbing that both LIverpool and Spurs have wasted money
posted on 11/12/14
mancini
£472m net spend, 2 PL titles, 1 FA Cup, 1 Capital One trophy & 1 Charity Shield.
This is the unbiased and complete picture.
Without that spend it would have probably been zero trophies. Funny how prior to that net spend, City had gone 30 years without a trophy. Proving that with that amount of money spent, it is possible to buy trophies.
posted on 11/12/14
Thudd!!
We can both agree Robbing that both LIverpool and Spurs have wasted money
In Spurs case money given by other clubs to help in the funding of buying players. Without the Bale money, Spurs would not have spent the £100 million.
posted on 11/12/14
The mistakes both Liverpool and Tottenham made was assuming that no matter how you distribute your money you're going to get talent's worth.
What I mean is that we sold Bale for £85.3m (worth of talent) and expected that if we reinvest that over a number of players we'd bring in £85.3m worth of talent and it would all be okay plus we have more positions covered.
Unfortunately, and similarly with Liverpool that isn't the case being the top class players like Bale and Suarez make such a huge difference to the team that it has a bigger influence that 6 players could.
Tottenham need to learn from this and invest wisely in 1 or 2 quality players at a time. Slowly build your team with influential players and move on from there instead of a squad full of average alternatives.
posted on 11/12/14
"I have no control over what Brendan Rodgers says but he's right really isn't he."
We shall see if that story changes the moment comes that the Poool are not going to be winning the PL this season.
My money is on a "What I meant was ..." .
posted on 11/12/14
Boss By Hugo (U18550)
Very fair. You can only get 11 on the pitch at the end of the day.
posted on 11/12/14
comment by The RDBD (demoted to supporting the team managed by Pep Guardiola) (U1062)
posted 24 seconds ago
"I have no control over what Brendan Rodgers says but he's right really isn't he."
We shall see if that story changes the moment comes that the Poool are not going to be winning the PL this season.
My money is on a "What I meant was ..." .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really sure what this means. It's as clear as day that we're not going to win the prem and apparently neither LFC or Spurs spent £100m anyway.
posted on 11/12/14
"Not really sure what this means."
It means you have done a "Spurs" .
But Brenton will now try to dig himself out of that particular hole, and explain (and I use that word VERY loosely in his case ) as to why your transfer business this summer and its effects on your season is nothing like what happened to Spurs in 2013-14.
posted on 11/12/14
Liverpool are the biggest spenders in terms of underachievement. For the money they spend they really should be winning the league.
A truly pathetic joke club supported by clowns.
It has been consistently proven to them over and over again they have spend considerably more than Spurs on transfers and wages, and their joke fans still deny it.
posted on 11/12/14
comment by The RDBD (demoted to supporting the team managed by Pep Guardiola) (U1062)
posted 3 minutes ago
"Not really sure what this means."
It means you have done a "Spurs" .
But Brenton will now try to dig himself out of that particular hole, and explain (and I use that word VERY loosely in his case) as to why your transfer business this summer and its effects on your season is nothing like what happened to Spurs in 2013-14.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If we "do a Spurs" and finish 3 points worse off I'll have a vvank!
posted on 11/12/14
RC - Spurs spend umpteen millions more per trophy and that, I'm afraid, is a fact.
posted on 11/12/14
Oh and RC please do one of your hilarious articles for this weekend. LFC need a win.
posted on 11/12/14
"If we "do a Spurs" and finish 3 points worse off I'll have a vvank!"
As we are so often told here, only final table position matters and not total points.
posted on 11/12/14
Bit short sighted that I feel. For example I think the two times LFC came second in recent years would have won the Prem on about 10 occasssions or something. I can't be disappointed with the lads for that effort - you just have to give credit to the winners.
posted on 11/12/14
RC - Spurs spend umpteen millions more per trophy and that, I'm afraid, is a fact.
___
You really are the worst on this. It is proven to you over and over again that Liverpool consistently outspend Spurs on transfers and wages.
We show statistics every single month that clearly rank Spurs as the club with the lowest net spend of any single club in the Prem currently (and they have been bottom of this table for about 7 years).
The Spurs team that qualified for the Champions League cost less than 50 million (or a Carrol and a Downing).
You cannot accept it because it simply underline what a truly massive, massive failure Liverpool are a football club.
You spend almost as much as Chelsea and have been garbage for about 8 years.
posted on 11/12/14
"Bit short sighted that I feel."
Of course it is. But that is some people for you.
posted on 11/12/14
Liverpool are as responsible as Chelsea and City for inflated wages and insane transfer valuations - which lead to fans being ripped off. Unless they have a sugar daddy like City, whose owner subsidizes ticket prices.
It is sc.um clubs like Liverpool which mean a 'top sides' season ticket price is now over a grand.
And you did all of this, paying ridiculous money for average players and accomplished nothing.
All good supporters should hold Liverpool in contempt. At least Chelsea selfishly won trophies through doing it.
posted on 11/12/14
interesting if true.....
http://shewore.com/2014/04/21/spend-net-spend-of-top-7-clubs-over-last-5-years/
posted on 11/12/14
The RC - Football Expert & gentleman (U17921)
Sigh - yes RC we do but in that time we have also had a few title challenges, CL win and finals, super cups, UEFA cup, FA's cups and League cups.
Spurs have not. So yes we have spent more but we have also achieved far more. That's how it works but in the fiarness of parity we have spent less per trophy and ergo have a better spend ratio whether you accept this or not.
Where have you been?
posted on 11/12/14
Everton, Spurs and Arsenal living within their means. It's tough but the only way football will survive in the long-term.
It is an absolute joke the toothless FIFA 'Fairplay' regulations haven't simply annihilated the likes of Liverpool and City.
Spurs and Liverpool have roughly the same turnover so Liverpool are clearly spending beyond their means.
posted on 11/12/14
Sigh - yes RC we do but in that time we have also had a few title challenges, CL win and finals, super cups, UEFA cup, FA's cups and League cups.
___
Tittle challenges, CL wins, "super cups" , and UEFA cups in the last 7 years?
You are a downright liar.
When the last time Liverpool won a trophy?
Page 3 of 5