It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a nonsensical comment.
Don't buy it, you can't buy players because the owner doesn't have the will to invest.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a nonsensical comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. You both spend money badly and at similar amounts but if you continue to do so while they start to get it right theyll be on you.
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a nonsensical comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. You both spend money badly and at similar amounts but if you continue to do so while they start to get it right theyll be on you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what you are saying is if Everton were better than us they would be better than us but they are not better than us. Okay
No what I'm saying is that for the first time teams outside the top six can rival Arsenal's spending and as such there is a far higher opportunity for them to overtake Arsenal than there was before. The new variable being financial backing.
It's pretty simple stuff.
What happens to the money generated from sales over the last 3 seasons. We sold a lot of players. Yes it's probably not a lot but must be in excess of £150M?
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 39 seconds ago
No what I'm saying is that for the first time teams outside the top six can rival Arsenal's spending and as such there is a far higher opportunity for them to overtake Arsenal than there was before. The new variable being financial backing.
It's pretty simple stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can't though. We have spent a lot more than them over a substantial period
comment by Castor Troy (U8700)
posted 1 minute ago
What happens to the money generated from sales over the last 3 seasons. We sold a lot of players. Yes it's probably not a lot but must be in excess of £150M?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have spent far more than that
Everton spend past three seasons: circa £330m
Arsenal spending past three seasons: circa £270m
If you're going to be contrary at least try and be accurate.
They had one season where they made a lot of money in sales and spent it (largely on the back of the Lukaku sale). One season doesn't make a substantial period
They've spent more than you in the past three seasons. This is not up for debate as it is simply a fact.
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 36 seconds ago
They've spent more than you in the past three seasons. This is not up for debate as it is simply a fact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, that is on one season where they made a lot of money. That doesn't happen very often, they will struggle to get £75m for a player in their current squad in order to repeat that. And that is what you are suggesting, a regular outspending of Arsenal by Everton.
Sigh.
Everton spend:
16/17 - £76m
17/18 - £168m
18/19 - £80m
Arsenal spend:
16/17 - £91m
17/18 - £110m
18/19 - £71m
You're just wrong so I'll leave it. Think you need to accept that Everton, regardless of the Lukaku sale, have similar spend since their takeover. Sorry.
Arsenal's massive failure was to not bite the bullet with Sanchez & Ozil in the summer of 2017.
Wenger had blind faith they'd sign and went into the season with both with 1 year on their contracts.
They should have been sold at that point.
They were not. It forced them into bad decisions made in the January in taking Mhiki in a swap from Utd. With Sanchez gone it would have looked awful if Ozil had then left, and they gave him a mega deal.
Made worse as Wenger was to retire, this left his successor with a massively paid Ozil, who had under-performed for seasons and who now had little incentive to try any harder.
real lack of succession planning both in terms of manager, squad and individuals which has made Arsenal transition much harder and lumbered the new man with some expensive deadwood.
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
Shouldn’t be a problem for Arsenal in the summer due to reduction of the wage bill and increased commercial revenues. Though it’ll make things more difficult attracting the highest calibre of players without CL football.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But the first one we spent more So two years wherein Everton made a massive sale. Unless they can find a big sale every year then there is no evidence they can spend the same amount every year...
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
at least we can all agree that Liverpool have spent way more than both of them!
Yep. It's great isn't it.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But the first one we spent moreSo two years wherein Everton made a massive sale. Unless they can find a big sale every year then there is no evidence they can spend the same amount every year...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar amounts DJ. No need to be so butt hurt because Arsenal are rammal and demonstrably slipping down the league. You sound like Sandy but more čunty right now tbh.
So we have to ignore any influence on a clubs spending, like selling over £110m worth of players, and take their spending as what they will do every season? Doesn't seem right to me, in fact it seems very, very wrong.
I'm sorry if logic and reason makes me butt hurt, but a statement that basically said Arsenal are lucky they are better than Everton otherwise they would be worse doesn't really have much strength to it.
Take out the Lukaku sale and there is an average £5m per season differential.
Sort yourself out ffs.
Put differently, in the time of a few days, Arsenal's triumvirate (Gazidis, Sanllehi and Mislintat) committed more than $150 million over the next three-and-a-half years in wages to three players. Annually, these players' deals represent roughly one-fifth of the club's total wage bill. What's more, the three players in question were 28, 29 and 29 years old at the time they signed, which means they would have very little resale value, particularly given their salaries.
Sign in if you want to comment
Reasons why we can’t buy players
Page 1 of 2
posted on 16/1/19
It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
posted on 16/1/19
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a nonsensical comment.
posted on 16/1/19
Don't buy it, you can't buy players because the owner doesn't have the will to invest.
posted on 16/1/19
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a nonsensical comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. You both spend money badly and at similar amounts but if you continue to do so while they start to get it right theyll be on you.
posted on 16/1/19
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's a good job Everton are utter shiiiiiiiiiiit really otherwise their spending would take them past you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a nonsensical comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really. You both spend money badly and at similar amounts but if you continue to do so while they start to get it right theyll be on you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what you are saying is if Everton were better than us they would be better than us but they are not better than us. Okay
posted on 16/1/19
No what I'm saying is that for the first time teams outside the top six can rival Arsenal's spending and as such there is a far higher opportunity for them to overtake Arsenal than there was before. The new variable being financial backing.
It's pretty simple stuff.
posted on 16/1/19
What happens to the money generated from sales over the last 3 seasons. We sold a lot of players. Yes it's probably not a lot but must be in excess of £150M?
posted on 16/1/19
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 39 seconds ago
No what I'm saying is that for the first time teams outside the top six can rival Arsenal's spending and as such there is a far higher opportunity for them to overtake Arsenal than there was before. The new variable being financial backing.
It's pretty simple stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can't though. We have spent a lot more than them over a substantial period
posted on 16/1/19
comment by Castor Troy (U8700)
posted 1 minute ago
What happens to the money generated from sales over the last 3 seasons. We sold a lot of players. Yes it's probably not a lot but must be in excess of £150M?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have spent far more than that
posted on 16/1/19
Everton spend past three seasons: circa £330m
Arsenal spending past three seasons: circa £270m
If you're going to be contrary at least try and be accurate.
posted on 16/1/19
They had one season where they made a lot of money in sales and spent it (largely on the back of the Lukaku sale). One season doesn't make a substantial period
posted on 16/1/19
They've spent more than you in the past three seasons. This is not up for debate as it is simply a fact.
posted on 16/1/19
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 36 seconds ago
They've spent more than you in the past three seasons. This is not up for debate as it is simply a fact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, that is on one season where they made a lot of money. That doesn't happen very often, they will struggle to get £75m for a player in their current squad in order to repeat that. And that is what you are suggesting, a regular outspending of Arsenal by Everton.
posted on 16/1/19
Sigh.
Everton spend:
16/17 - £76m
17/18 - £168m
18/19 - £80m
Arsenal spend:
16/17 - £91m
17/18 - £110m
18/19 - £71m
You're just wrong so I'll leave it. Think you need to accept that Everton, regardless of the Lukaku sale, have similar spend since their takeover. Sorry.
posted on 16/1/19
Arsenal's massive failure was to not bite the bullet with Sanchez & Ozil in the summer of 2017.
Wenger had blind faith they'd sign and went into the season with both with 1 year on their contracts.
They should have been sold at that point.
They were not. It forced them into bad decisions made in the January in taking Mhiki in a swap from Utd. With Sanchez gone it would have looked awful if Ozil had then left, and they gave him a mega deal.
Made worse as Wenger was to retire, this left his successor with a massively paid Ozil, who had under-performed for seasons and who now had little incentive to try any harder.
real lack of succession planning both in terms of manager, squad and individuals which has made Arsenal transition much harder and lumbered the new man with some expensive deadwood.
posted on 16/1/19
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
posted on 16/1/19
Shouldn’t be a problem for Arsenal in the summer due to reduction of the wage bill and increased commercial revenues. Though it’ll make things more difficult attracting the highest calibre of players without CL football.
posted on 16/1/19
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
posted on 16/1/19
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But the first one we spent more So two years wherein Everton made a massive sale. Unless they can find a big sale every year then there is no evidence they can spend the same amount every year...
posted on 16/1/19
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
at least we can all agree that Liverpool have spent way more than both of them!
posted on 16/1/19
Yep. It's great isn't it.
posted on 16/1/19
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a... (U6374)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 29 seconds ago
So 2 years is a substantial period, wherein there has been a very relevant factor
Okay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's three years and since they've been taken over. As said if you're going to be needlessly contrary at least try and be accurate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But the first one we spent moreSo two years wherein Everton made a massive sale. Unless they can find a big sale every year then there is no evidence they can spend the same amount every year...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar amounts DJ. No need to be so butt hurt because Arsenal are rammal and demonstrably slipping down the league. You sound like Sandy but more čunty right now tbh.
posted on 16/1/19
So we have to ignore any influence on a clubs spending, like selling over £110m worth of players, and take their spending as what they will do every season? Doesn't seem right to me, in fact it seems very, very wrong.
I'm sorry if logic and reason makes me butt hurt, but a statement that basically said Arsenal are lucky they are better than Everton otherwise they would be worse doesn't really have much strength to it.
posted on 16/1/19
Take out the Lukaku sale and there is an average £5m per season differential.
Sort yourself out ffs.
posted on 16/1/19
Put differently, in the time of a few days, Arsenal's triumvirate (Gazidis, Sanllehi and Mislintat) committed more than $150 million over the next three-and-a-half years in wages to three players. Annually, these players' deals represent roughly one-fifth of the club's total wage bill. What's more, the three players in question were 28, 29 and 29 years old at the time they signed, which means they would have very little resale value, particularly given their salaries.
Page 1 of 2