*Official* English Football Season 2009-2010

[Jarquis]

I do get it, it's just a shaky argument at best.

If you buy Bellamy for £7m, sell him and buy Riera for £7m, that's £14m you've spent on players, regardless of what you've brought in. Liverpool have spent £250m on transfers since Benitez came to the club. If you're constantly selling players you've bought, your judgement is seriously wrong.

Yeah, I don't see why selling crap players he bought should count in Benitez's favour.

 

[GIMH]

Revamped the youth system to be slightly less ****, or what?

Liverpool's youth definitely gets a thumbs up tbf, they loaned us two keepers this season and both helped us stay up

 

[Furball]

Yeah, I don't see why selling crap players he bought should count in Benitez's favour.

And if you want to use the net spend argument, Benitez's net spend is equivelant to Arsenal's gross spend.

It does him no favours whichever way you look at it.

 

[Ikki]

I do get it, it's just a shaky argument at best.

If you buy Bellamy for £7m, sell him and buy Riera for £7m, that's £14m you've spent on players, regardless of what you've brought in. Liverpool have spent £250m on transfers since Benitez came to the club. If you're constantly selling players you've bought, your judgement is seriously wrong.

No, it's a strong argument. For Benitez never had a ****load of money at any one time to spend on great players. He had to buy cheap players and take punts. He'd manage some success (CL, FA, whatever) and then sell those players for slightly more and try to get a slightly better player. That kind of team enhancement not only takes years it means such a figure as simple net spend will grow to a big number without the fact that we've ever had the spending power it suggests.

And people don't realise that Benitez/Liverpool compete with the teams that exist now, not only the players that were bought by United/Chelsea/etc since he joined Liverpool. And none of those teams spent that kind of money on that many players. None of them have overhauled themselves to the extent we have. I repeat, we only have 2 players left from when Benitez originally joined.

You have to give him credit for the incremental improvements. Our spending is more comparable with Tottenham, yet we've won a CL, gone to another CL final, won the FA cup, have been regularly in the top 4 and challenged for the title last year. We are not spending like Chelsea/United/City on players and do not have squads as strong as theirs. We buy a player like Aquilani for 17 million and are on our knees praying it works out. Meanwhile United have spent that figure several times on players like Nani, Anderson, Carrick, Hargraeves, Valencia, etc.

 

[Furball]

No, it's a strong argument. For Benitez never had a ****load of money at any one time to spend on great players. He had to buy cheap players and take punts. He'd manage some success (CL, FA, whatever) and then sell those players for slightly more and try to get a slightly better player. That kind of team enhancement not only takes years it means such a figure as simple net spend will grow to a big number without the fact that we've ever had the spending power it suggests.

And people don't realise that Benitez/Liverpool compete with the teams that exist now, not only the players that were bought by United/Chelsea/etc since he joined Liverpool. And none of those teams spent that kind of money on that many players. None of them have overhauled themselves to the extent we have. I repeat, we only have 2 players left from when Benitez originally joined.

You have to give him credit for the incremental improvements. Our spending is more comparable with Tottenham, yet we've won a CL, gone to another CL final, won the FA cup, have been regularly in the top 4 and challenged for the title last year. We are not spending like Chelsea/United/City on players and do not have squads as strong as theirs. We buy a player like Aquilani for 17 million and are on our knees praying it works out. Meanwhile United have spent that figure several times on players like Nani, Anderson, Carrick, Hargraeves, Valencia, etc.

It's a piss weak argument. He's had £20m net per season to sign players with.

How much have Chelsea spent since Mourinho left?

 

[Uppercut]

It's not a fact. We were poo this year and with basically the same squad almost won the title last year. The 110 million he has spent is in the squad. It's not gone. All bar Carra and Gerrard were brought by him. Are you seriously suggesting that he couldn't make up that 110 mill if he were to sell? He could make up half of that off 1 player alone.

When Benitez arrived there was already a squad capable of finishing 7th in the league, so you can't give him credit for value that's in the squad at the moment.

Also, the fact that United sold Ronaldo for a ridiculous fee hides the fact that we have been regularly been outspent by them; and also the fact that United bought many of her expensive players before Benitez even stepped foot into Liverpool hides just how much again he has been competing against.

What the hell have United got to do with anything? Benitez has barely got near United in any of his seasons in charge so I suggest you start comparing yourself with Aston Villa instead.

 

[Ikki]

It's a piss weak argument. He's had £20m net per season to sign players with.

How much have Chelsea spent since Mourinho left?

Actually, that figure is more like 18 and will be even less once it takes into account the last 3 transfer windows where we've had a net spend of 0. And we used 18 million on SEVERAL players. Not ONE. That is the WHOLE point. Also, that figure of spending doesn't take into account the fact that we still have many of those players that spending suggests. If we were to sell Torres we could effectively half that figure on 1 player alone.

What kind of quality can you possibly hope to get when you are regularly spending <10 million on players when your competition buys Shevchenko for 30 million and doesn't even use him?

Also, you're forgetting the wages these teams pay. Even though Deco and Ballack were free transfers, there is no way they are joining without some ridiculous weekly money.

Also, what more could they possibly spend on? They've spent like half a billion pounds worth (if not more) on players since Abramovich bought Chelsea. Sorry to sound patronising, but you need to think this out a bit more.

 

[Ikki]

When Benitez arrived there was already a squad capable of finishing 7th in the league, so you can't give him credit for value that's in the squad at the moment.

Geezus...again. You can't **** on his whole tenure because of 1 bad season. The squad we had was not capable of coming 2nd and creating a record high number of points won without winning the title, or the least losses without winning the title. It was not capable of winning the CL either without Rafa. The squad now is many times better than it was when he arrived. That's also reflected value wise. None of the players he inherited were sold for any big fee.

What the hell have United got to do with anything? Benitez has barely got near United in any of his seasons in charge so I suggest you start comparing yourself with Aston Villa instead.

You mean, except for last year when we almost won the title? Yes, in terms of spending we should realistically only hope to get above the likes of Villa and Tottenham. But being Liverpool we are expected to challenge for the title. However, we'll never do that because more often that not the team with the most money spent on it is the team that is usually the most capable of winning titles.

However, withstanding that, we've positioned well in the league in Benitez's tenure and have been just as successful as United in the CL. If Villa or Tottenham did that, we'd be lauding O'Neill or Redknapp to the high heavens. Because that's what it's like - expecting Tottenham to win the league. We're no more financially stronger than them.

 

[roseboy64]

Benitez has done crap in the league with Liverpool. End of.

 

[cpr]

Very few transfer fees (in fact, most except the ones we play) are paid in one payment, nearly all are paid in several payments over 5 year periods. So yes, you're probably still paying for Carrick (and Anderson, and Nani, and Berbatov, and Veron, and Forlan )

Wish we were still paying, and playing, Forlan.

Other points well made though

 

[cpr]

You don't get it; if I buy Bellamy for 7 million and then sell him for the same amount and buy Riera for 7 million I am recycling the same 7 million. Yet that figure goes to 14 million spent in total...when in reality it was the same initial investment being reinvested. Nothing more.

the fact that United sold Ronaldo for a ridiculous fee hides the fact that we have been regularly been outspent by them;

If I buy Ronaldo for 12.5 million, then sell him for 80 million, then we arn't outspending you, as its the same initial investment being reinvested.... Only difference is our investment was far wiser and in the interest was far higher..... You dont work for Lehman Bros do you?


In other news, cmaaarrrn Fulham

 

[The Sean]

We buy a player like Aquilani for 17 million and are on our knees praying it works out. Meanwhile United have spent that figure several times on players like Nani, Anderson, Carrick, Hargraeves, Valencia, etc.

Mascherano and Johnson both cost about that much too.

 

[GIMH]

 

[Uppercut]

Gotta feel for Fulham. Hard to take anything away from Atletico though, better team on the night for mine.

 

[grecian]

Not a good day for football, this with Cardiff going through, One of the worse pens of all time, never seen a goal-keeper able to recover from a dive and still save it. Great save for the second miss though.

 

[GIMH]

Cardiff in the Prem would be a sad day for football

 

[BoyBrumby]

Cardiff in the Prem would be a sad day for football

Cardiff or Blackpool tho; what an effing choice.

Holloway's a one note joke that wore thin about five years ago and Cardiff are Welsh and have ****s for fans.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah, not looking forward to that at all.

Blackpool would be fun though.

 

[sledger]

Poor old Fulham. Couldn't really say they weren't second best throughout the match but it's a bit gutting all the same.

 

[cpr]

Blackpool would be fun though.

As a geordie mate of mine stated, he'd like Blackpool to make it as it'd guarantee his lot 19th