comment by Greatteamswinit4times- A terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 8 minutes ago
This are the official wage bills:
http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11095/9642781/chelseas-wage-bill-rises-to-1631905million-a-year
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2013/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've read it wrong...
The bottom line is, Liverpool have massively underachieved and have no excuses.
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by T Bone Steak Roysters (U3947)
posted 1 minute ago
OK so the source was not accurate but the positioning is correct. Arsenal in their favourite position 4th and us in 5th.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool should be doing and should have done way better than Arsenal have. Liverpool are fourth in the total net spend from 2009-2014 with a net spend of £98.05 million compared to Arsenal's -£0.55 million. These figures haven't counted last season but Liverpool would still be higher than Arsenal and Manchester United could have potentially overtaken Chelsea.
Source:
http://shewore.com/2014/04/21/spend-net-spend-of-top-7-clubs-over-last-5-years/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get.
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by T Bone Steak Roysters (U3947)
posted 1 minute ago
OK so the source was not accurate but the positioning is correct. Arsenal in their favourite position 4th and us in 5th.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool should be doing and should have done way better than Arsenal have. Liverpool are fourth in the total net spend from 2009-2014 with a net spend of £98.05 million compared to Arsenal's -£0.55 million. These figures haven't counted last season but Liverpool would still be higher than Arsenal and Manchester United could have potentially overtaken Chelsea.
Source:
http://shewore.com/2014/04/21/spend-net-spend-of-top-7-clubs-over-last-5-years/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But when you even out Arsenal's net spend and wage bill to Liverpool's net spend and wage bill, Arsenal are below Liverpool thus there are no excuses for Liverpool underachieving and should be in the top 4 and not 5th.
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4Gaza (U1108)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were not nearly in administration and went through 2 sets of owners and numerous managers who usually buy their own players and change the squads.
It is not an excuse but it is probably why they are achieving more than us
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
You also have to overspend to attract players if you are not in the champions league. Just look at Man Utd for instance. They had to pay well over the odds for their new players in summer
Current 25 man squads that are competing in the PL, I would question whether ours cost more than Arsenals.
Sherriff must have the stats, he knows all about it...
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have around £100 million more net spend than us and we have around £25 million more wage bill. We are lower than Liverpool when these balance out and there are no excuses for Liverpool underachieving, massively.
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe but Arsenal have been smart in the market by not overpaying for players, especially English players
Being in London you have to automatically pay more than the North West. Is the Arsenal wage bill just on players or does it include Wenger who is one of the most well paid managers in world football.
tiki you want us to say we are, well yes in some ways we are, most sensible fans will happily admit this.
you've also got to look at it like Arsenal have a settled system in place for over a decade. Arsenal as a squad are ahead of us in terms of development and also now are starting to make the big signings to supplement the squad already in place.
In the same period we have had 3 different owners and 5 odd managers.
We basically started this current project when FSG came in, even in that time we have had 3 managers, it's not as simple as you spent this you should be here, while wages form a better correlation of where a team should finish it is not an exact science.
I can easily argue Arsenal are only and have only done the bare minimum in the past 10 years, won 1 cup and finished 4th on average, they have the 4th highest wage bill and have done for years, ergo finishing 4th is the bare minimum.
"Current 25 man squads that are competing in the PL, I would question whether ours cost more than Arsenals. "
Would be very surprised if it did.
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have around £100 million more net spend than us and we have around £25 million more wage bill. We are lower than Liverpool when these balance out and there are no excuses for Liverpool underachieving, massively.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If we finish one place behind you does that mean you have massively underachieved?
As I mentioned above. Over the last 5 years there was a lot of turmoil at our club. Changes of managers etc , not consistently finishing in the top 4 does not generate revenue. Our club is playing catch up to the rest in terms of sponsorship and global Commercial revenue due to our past owners not having a scooby doo. All these things are important factors.
"Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get."
Not really true. Both transfers and wages are part of the budget, so there's no reason one should be more influential than the other. The top transfer spenders are also often the top wage spenders. The point is Liverpool are financially well in touch with Arsenal and it would be absurd to blame your woes on your lack of spending as if you were Everton.
Cant believe there's Arsenal fans here talking about underachievement
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe but Arsenal have been smart in the market by not overpaying for players, especially English players
Being in London you have to automatically pay more than the North West. Is the Arsenal wage bill just on players or does it include Wenger who is one of the most well paid managers in world football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For player wages? I don't agree with that, sure 2 of the top 4 clubs in terms of wages are in Manchester and 2 in London, that point makes no sense,. Sunderland probably have a higher wage bill then crystal Palace,.
No idea how this became yet another comparison thread between Liverpool and Arsenal. We can never get enough of those....
Arsenal are a very well run club, that's the bottom line. No other club has managed to maintain solid league position with such little player investment. Despite Arsenal fans having yearly whinges about Wenger, the job he's done is remarkable.
However, you can't get away from the fact that we're spending between £25m and £70m less per year on our players than the clubs we have to overtake. That's the nub of the issue.
I think every Liverpool fan knows that the money we spent last season wasn't entirely successful, players like Lovren and Balotelli haven't been successes. No hiding that.
The original question was should we expect better given the income and expenditure of the club and those above it. I would say based on player wages and income then 5th is our par. However, I think there are ongoing question marks around player purchases. These are our attempts to bridge the gap and there is a mixed record.
Come on Sheriff.
Where are these stats that show our squad costs a lot more than yours.
comment by Sterling Work (U6997)
posted 13 seconds ago
No idea how this became yet another comparison thread between Liverpool and Arsenal. We can never get enough of those....
Arsenal are a very well run club, that's the bottom line. No other club has managed to maintain solid league position with such little player investment. Despite Arsenal fans having yearly whinges about Wenger, the job he's done is remarkable.
However, you can't get away from the fact that we're spending between £25m and £70m less per year on our players than the clubs we have to overtake. That's the nub of the issue.
I think every Liverpool fan knows that the money we spent last season wasn't entirely successful, players like Lovren and Balotelli haven't been successes. No hiding that.
The original question was should we expect better given the income and expenditure of the club and those above it. I would say based on player wages and income then 5th is our par. However, I think there are ongoing question marks around player purchases. These are our attempts to bridge the gap and there is a mixed record.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal have massively underachieved as well but I am not getting into that now. This article is about us
Paul Tomkins conducted a study on 3000 premiership transfers and it was apparant that only 50% of signings become a huge success.
We had to take risks on young players as we needed many to make up the squad unlike the settled top 4 who only had to add quality.
If you look at Utd, Chelsea, City and Arsenal's signings over the last 2 seasons did over 50% of them become first team starters on a regular occasion?
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 4 minutes ago
"Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get."
Not really true. Both transfers and wages are part of the budget, so there's no reason one should be more influential than the other. The top transfer spenders are also often the top wage spenders. The point is Liverpool are financially well in touch with Arsenal and it would be absurd to blame your woes on your lack of spending as if you were Everton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You generate a bigger revenue. Hence the reason you are a richer club
T Bone, by your own logic the current top four will just keep spending our ill gotten gains to maintain the current picture. If you were going to get champs league regularly this would have been the year to start with Arsenal stuttering and United awful for most of the season. It looks a long shot to displace Chelsea, City or Arsenal, so United are your realistic target until Wenger retires I guess.
"Come on Sheriff. Where are these stats that show
our squad costs a lot more than yours."
I'm not on my PC or tablet, so I can't be bothered linking sites from my phone. It's easily available on just about any site documenting transfers. This season and last were our biggest spending seasons EVER and were STILL outspent by Liverpool. I can't believe you consider it disputable.
To answer your article, YES, you should expect to finish higher than fifth. You SHOULD be finishing above us in terms of net spend and wage bill. 4th should be the minimum position that Liverpool finish.
Sign in if you want to comment
Should we expect higher than 5th
Page 3 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 8/4/15
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- A terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 8 minutes ago
This are the official wage bills:
http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11095/9642781/chelseas-wage-bill-rises-to-1631905million-a-year
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2013/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've read it wrong...
posted on 8/4/15
The bottom line is, Liverpool have massively underachieved and have no excuses.
posted on 8/4/15
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
posted on 8/4/15
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by T Bone Steak Roysters (U3947)
posted 1 minute ago
OK so the source was not accurate but the positioning is correct. Arsenal in their favourite position 4th and us in 5th.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool should be doing and should have done way better than Arsenal have. Liverpool are fourth in the total net spend from 2009-2014 with a net spend of £98.05 million compared to Arsenal's -£0.55 million. These figures haven't counted last season but Liverpool would still be higher than Arsenal and Manchester United could have potentially overtaken Chelsea.
Source:
http://shewore.com/2014/04/21/spend-net-spend-of-top-7-clubs-over-last-5-years/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get.
posted on 8/4/15
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by T Bone Steak Roysters (U3947)
posted 1 minute ago
OK so the source was not accurate but the positioning is correct. Arsenal in their favourite position 4th and us in 5th.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool should be doing and should have done way better than Arsenal have. Liverpool are fourth in the total net spend from 2009-2014 with a net spend of £98.05 million compared to Arsenal's -£0.55 million. These figures haven't counted last season but Liverpool would still be higher than Arsenal and Manchester United could have potentially overtaken Chelsea.
Source:
http://shewore.com/2014/04/21/spend-net-spend-of-top-7-clubs-over-last-5-years/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But when you even out Arsenal's net spend and wage bill to Liverpool's net spend and wage bill, Arsenal are below Liverpool thus there are no excuses for Liverpool underachieving and should be in the top 4 and not 5th.
posted on 8/4/15
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4Gaza (U1108)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were not nearly in administration and went through 2 sets of owners and numerous managers who usually buy their own players and change the squads.
It is not an excuse but it is probably why they are achieving more than us
posted on 8/4/15
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
posted on 8/4/15
You also have to overspend to attract players if you are not in the champions league. Just look at Man Utd for instance. They had to pay well over the odds for their new players in summer
posted on 8/4/15
Current 25 man squads that are competing in the PL, I would question whether ours cost more than Arsenals.
Sherriff must have the stats, he knows all about it...
posted on 8/4/15
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have around £100 million more net spend than us and we have around £25 million more wage bill. We are lower than Liverpool when these balance out and there are no excuses for Liverpool underachieving, massively.
posted on 8/4/15
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe but Arsenal have been smart in the market by not overpaying for players, especially English players
Being in London you have to automatically pay more than the North West. Is the Arsenal wage bill just on players or does it include Wenger who is one of the most well paid managers in world football.
posted on 8/4/15
Kash.
posted on 8/4/15
tiki you want us to say we are, well yes in some ways we are, most sensible fans will happily admit this.
you've also got to look at it like Arsenal have a settled system in place for over a decade. Arsenal as a squad are ahead of us in terms of development and also now are starting to make the big signings to supplement the squad already in place.
In the same period we have had 3 different owners and 5 odd managers.
We basically started this current project when FSG came in, even in that time we have had 3 managers, it's not as simple as you spent this you should be here, while wages form a better correlation of where a team should finish it is not an exact science.
I can easily argue Arsenal are only and have only done the bare minimum in the past 10 years, won 1 cup and finished 4th on average, they have the 4th highest wage bill and have done for years, ergo finishing 4th is the bare minimum.
posted on 8/4/15
"Current 25 man squads that are competing in the PL, I would question whether ours cost more than Arsenals. "
Would be very surprised if it did.
posted on 8/4/15
comment by TikiTakaFootball49 (U17636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have around £100 million more net spend than us and we have around £25 million more wage bill. We are lower than Liverpool when these balance out and there are no excuses for Liverpool underachieving, massively.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If we finish one place behind you does that mean you have massively underachieved?
As I mentioned above. Over the last 5 years there was a lot of turmoil at our club. Changes of managers etc , not consistently finishing in the top 4 does not generate revenue. Our club is playing catch up to the rest in terms of sponsorship and global Commercial revenue due to our past owners not having a scooby doo. All these things are important factors.
posted on 8/4/15
"Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get."
Not really true. Both transfers and wages are part of the budget, so there's no reason one should be more influential than the other. The top transfer spenders are also often the top wage spenders. The point is Liverpool are financially well in touch with Arsenal and it would be absurd to blame your woes on your lack of spending as if you were Everton.
posted on 8/4/15
Cant believe there's Arsenal fans here talking about underachievement
posted on 8/4/15
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (Kash) Mario Balle Balle Balotelli - Justice4G... (U1108)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 7 minutes ago
Your wage stats are total crap. We're higher than Liverpool, but certainly not £180m. Our published wage figure in the latest account is £166m and well lower than Chelsea who you put below us (despite ranking them higher). And again, there's no way in hell our squad costs more than yours. Since the days of Benitez to Kenny to Brendan, you've always been significantly higher transfer spenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is correct. We have spent and spunked a lot of money on transfers compared to Arsenal.
Both sides have had to sell there top players but Arsenal are still able to sustain a regular CL spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the wage bills that dictates more then net spend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe but Arsenal have been smart in the market by not overpaying for players, especially English players
Being in London you have to automatically pay more than the North West. Is the Arsenal wage bill just on players or does it include Wenger who is one of the most well paid managers in world football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For player wages? I don't agree with that, sure 2 of the top 4 clubs in terms of wages are in Manchester and 2 in London, that point makes no sense,. Sunderland probably have a higher wage bill then crystal Palace,.
posted on 8/4/15
No idea how this became yet another comparison thread between Liverpool and Arsenal. We can never get enough of those....
Arsenal are a very well run club, that's the bottom line. No other club has managed to maintain solid league position with such little player investment. Despite Arsenal fans having yearly whinges about Wenger, the job he's done is remarkable.
However, you can't get away from the fact that we're spending between £25m and £70m less per year on our players than the clubs we have to overtake. That's the nub of the issue.
I think every Liverpool fan knows that the money we spent last season wasn't entirely successful, players like Lovren and Balotelli haven't been successes. No hiding that.
The original question was should we expect better given the income and expenditure of the club and those above it. I would say based on player wages and income then 5th is our par. However, I think there are ongoing question marks around player purchases. These are our attempts to bridge the gap and there is a mixed record.
posted on 8/4/15
Come on Sheriff.
Where are these stats that show our squad costs a lot more than yours.
posted on 8/4/15
comment by Sterling Work (U6997)
posted 13 seconds ago
No idea how this became yet another comparison thread between Liverpool and Arsenal. We can never get enough of those....
Arsenal are a very well run club, that's the bottom line. No other club has managed to maintain solid league position with such little player investment. Despite Arsenal fans having yearly whinges about Wenger, the job he's done is remarkable.
However, you can't get away from the fact that we're spending between £25m and £70m less per year on our players than the clubs we have to overtake. That's the nub of the issue.
I think every Liverpool fan knows that the money we spent last season wasn't entirely successful, players like Lovren and Balotelli haven't been successes. No hiding that.
The original question was should we expect better given the income and expenditure of the club and those above it. I would say based on player wages and income then 5th is our par. However, I think there are ongoing question marks around player purchases. These are our attempts to bridge the gap and there is a mixed record.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal have massively underachieved as well but I am not getting into that now. This article is about us
Paul Tomkins conducted a study on 3000 premiership transfers and it was apparant that only 50% of signings become a huge success.
We had to take risks on young players as we needed many to make up the squad unlike the settled top 4 who only had to add quality.
If you look at Utd, Chelsea, City and Arsenal's signings over the last 2 seasons did over 50% of them become first team starters on a regular occasion?
posted on 8/4/15
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 4 minutes ago
"Net spend is a valid point but it's wages that dictate more then anything, the more you pay the better players you get."
Not really true. Both transfers and wages are part of the budget, so there's no reason one should be more influential than the other. The top transfer spenders are also often the top wage spenders. The point is Liverpool are financially well in touch with Arsenal and it would be absurd to blame your woes on your lack of spending as if you were Everton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You generate a bigger revenue. Hence the reason you are a richer club
posted on 8/4/15
T Bone, by your own logic the current top four will just keep spending our ill gotten gains to maintain the current picture. If you were going to get champs league regularly this would have been the year to start with Arsenal stuttering and United awful for most of the season. It looks a long shot to displace Chelsea, City or Arsenal, so United are your realistic target until Wenger retires I guess.
posted on 8/4/15
"Come on Sheriff. Where are these stats that show
our squad costs a lot more than yours."
I'm not on my PC or tablet, so I can't be bothered linking sites from my phone. It's easily available on just about any site documenting transfers. This season and last were our biggest spending seasons EVER and were STILL outspent by Liverpool. I can't believe you consider it disputable.
posted on 8/4/15
To answer your article, YES, you should expect to finish higher than fifth. You SHOULD be finishing above us in terms of net spend and wage bill. 4th should be the minimum position that Liverpool finish.
Page 3 of 7
6 | 7