| The Prem as it stands 21:56 - May 4 with 5169 views | 2Thomas2Bowles |
Top 94 points
Bottom 14 points
80 points difference!
Even top to 3rd 24 points gap
so fecked up
|  |
| |  |
| The Prem as it stands on 11:35 - May 8 with 1088 views | stowmarketrange |
| The Prem as it stands on 07:33 - May 8 by traininvain |
All clubs spend money but surely it’s not right if the top club have a net spend nearly 3x that of second place over a five year period. |
It’s only you who choose a 5 year span.Why not 10 or 20 years?Or even only 1 or 2?
It also happens in most major leagues in Europe too.How much more have PSG,juventus,Bayern and Celtic spent than their nearest rivals in their leagues?
Modern football is all about spending more than other teams to get where you want to be.That is why it’s crap,but you can’t blame 1 club for doing it to the best of their abilities.Liverpool will do exactly the same if they could. |  | | |
| The Prem as it stands on 11:43 - May 8 with 1058 views | flynnbo |
Forgive me if I'm wrong but haven't many of these case of clubs going onto administration occurred since the dawn of the Premier league? I know there were teams like Accrington Stanley, Workington, Barrow, Southport etc but weren't they over a greater number of years? I also realise that clubs merge like Rushden and Diamomds and franchises occur like MK Dons. |  | | |
| The Prem as it stands on 15:22 - May 8 with 1001 views | terryb |
| The Prem as it stands on 11:43 - May 8 by flynnbo |
Forgive me if I'm wrong but haven't many of these case of clubs going onto administration occurred since the dawn of the Premier league? I know there were teams like Accrington Stanley, Workington, Barrow, Southport etc but weren't they over a greater number of years? I also realise that clubs merge like Rushden and Diamomds and franchises occur like MK Dons. |
I'm not sure about Southport, but Barrow & Workington didn't enter administration.
They left the FL as they were voted out when applying for re-election.
I think a lot more clubs went bust than you realise - Aberdare, Thames Ironworks, Leeds City & Gateshead come to my mind, but I would say that the period between 1995 & 2005 was possibly the "golden admimnistration time".
Ourselves, Ipswich, Leicester, Leeds, Luton & Southampton all met that fate with Portsmouth joining a little later. I'm sure there were others that I've forgotten. Clubs reaching that stage seem to have decreased since they introduced points deductions. |  | | |
| The Prem as it stands on 15:33 - May 8 with 987 views | traininvain |
| The Prem as it stands on 11:35 - May 8 by stowmarketrange |
It’s only you who choose a 5 year span.Why not 10 or 20 years?Or even only 1 or 2?
It also happens in most major leagues in Europe too.How much more have PSG,juventus,Bayern and Celtic spent than their nearest rivals in their leagues?
Modern football is all about spending more than other teams to get where you want to be.That is why it’s crap,but you can’t blame 1 club for doing it to the best of their abilities.Liverpool will do exactly the same if they could. |
Five years seems to be the generally accepted measure. I'm assuming this is because 10 / 20 years is too historic and 1 / 2 years can provide anomalies (for example: Liverpool spent c£150m over the last couple of seasons but they still have the £200m from Coutinho sale a few seasons ago to spend).
https://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier-league-last-five-seasons/transfer-leagu
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/G
Modern football is about spending money to an extent. But that's not all that matters. As demonstrated by Liverpool who have pushed City all season in the league and a second Champions League final in as many seasons despite having a net spend of nearly 1/3 of Man City's over the last five seasons.
PSG have tried to buy the Champions League but they cannot seem to do so which is reassuring. They'll probably buy one eventually but it's good to see teams like Liverpool, Ajax and Spurs preventing them for now.
That's why clubs like Liverpool, Ajax, Dortmund, A.Madrid and Spurs should be applauded in my opinion. They spend big but not anywhere near the same level as the likes of PSG and Man City.
Ultimately, it's all relative and the money in football is ridiculous. But there's a big difference in the net spend of PSG, and Man City in comparison to some of the other teams I have mentioned above. |  | | |
| The Prem as it stands on 16:03 - May 8 with 945 views | stowmarketrange |
| The Prem as it stands on 15:33 - May 8 by traininvain |
Five years seems to be the generally accepted measure. I'm assuming this is because 10 / 20 years is too historic and 1 / 2 years can provide anomalies (for example: Liverpool spent c£150m over the last couple of seasons but they still have the £200m from Coutinho sale a few seasons ago to spend).
https://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier-league-last-five-seasons/transfer-leagu
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/G
Modern football is about spending money to an extent. But that's not all that matters. As demonstrated by Liverpool who have pushed City all season in the league and a second Champions League final in as many seasons despite having a net spend of nearly 1/3 of Man City's over the last five seasons.
PSG have tried to buy the Champions League but they cannot seem to do so which is reassuring. They'll probably buy one eventually but it's good to see teams like Liverpool, Ajax and Spurs preventing them for now.
That's why clubs like Liverpool, Ajax, Dortmund, A.Madrid and Spurs should be applauded in my opinion. They spend big but not anywhere near the same level as the likes of PSG and Man City.
Ultimately, it's all relative and the money in football is ridiculous. But there's a big difference in the net spend of PSG, and Man City in comparison to some of the other teams I have mentioned above. |
I wouldn’t put Liverpool in the same bracket as Ajax.They still spend money that Ajax could only dream of.And do you think that Klopp wouldn’t spend as much as City Do Now given the chance?
Because they lost the final last year they went and bought a top class keeper for megabucks,and how much did van dyke cost?£75 million is still more than City have spent on one player.
It’s all a big game of monopoly where the biggest clubs fight over park lane and Mayfair while the rest of the efl struggle on trying to keep up with only owning old Kent road and Whitechapel. | | | |
| The Prem as it stands on 16:50 - May 8 with 882 views | traininvain |
| The Prem as it stands on 16:03 - May 8 by stowmarketrange |
I wouldn’t put Liverpool in the same bracket as Ajax.They still spend money that Ajax could only dream of.And do you think that Klopp wouldn’t spend as much as City Do Now given the chance?
Because they lost the final last year they went and bought a top class keeper for megabucks,and how much did van dyke cost?£75 million is still more than City have spent on one player.
It’s all a big game of monopoly where the biggest clubs fight over park lane and Mayfair while the rest of the efl struggle on trying to keep up with only owning old Kent road and Whitechapel. |
Agree that the Ajax story is even more impressive than Liverpool. They have a far lower net spend and it's brilliant for football that they are on the verge of a Champions League final.
I'm not sure Klopp would have spent as much as City given the chance. He's always been manager of an underdog (comparatively speaking) and seems to relish this role.
You seem to be missing the point, Liverpool have a net spend 1/3 of Man City's over the last five years. That's including Van Dijk, Allison etc.
City might not have spent £75m on one player but they have a net spend nearly 3x that of their nearest rival in the league. | | | |
| The Prem as it stands on 17:05 - May 8 with 868 views | stowmarketrange |
| The Prem as it stands on 16:50 - May 8 by traininvain |
Agree that the Ajax story is even more impressive than Liverpool. They have a far lower net spend and it's brilliant for football that they are on the verge of a Champions League final.
I'm not sure Klopp would have spent as much as City given the chance. He's always been manager of an underdog (comparatively speaking) and seems to relish this role.
You seem to be missing the point, Liverpool have a net spend 1/3 of Man City's over the last five years. That's including Van Dijk, Allison etc.
City might not have spent £75m on one player but they have a net spend nearly 3x that of their nearest rival in the league. |
And how much would Liverpool’s net spend be if they hadn’t recouped the money on sterling,Suarez and coutinho?I bet that would’ve evened it out a bit.
It’s all relative anyway.It depends on what division you pick as too how much more is spent by the bigger clubs to the smaller ones.Chelshite have spent x amount more than City have overall and it bought them titles for years.Everybody does it these days and I fail to see how spending over £100 million on 2 players makes you more of an underdog manager than someone like some of the other managers in the league.We will see how much he spends this summer and the one after.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. | | | |
| The Prem as it stands on 17:18 - May 8 with 859 views | traininvain |
| The Prem as it stands on 17:05 - May 8 by stowmarketrange |
And how much would Liverpool’s net spend be if they hadn’t recouped the money on sterling,Suarez and coutinho?I bet that would’ve evened it out a bit.
It’s all relative anyway.It depends on what division you pick as too how much more is spent by the bigger clubs to the smaller ones.Chelshite have spent x amount more than City have overall and it bought them titles for years.Everybody does it these days and I fail to see how spending over £100 million on 2 players makes you more of an underdog manager than someone like some of the other managers in the league.We will see how much he spends this summer and the one after.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. |
Re the first paragraph, I’m not sure you’ve quite grasped the concept of net spend. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Prem as it stands on 23:09 - May 8 with 810 views | stowmarketrange |
| The Prem as it stands on 17:18 - May 8 by traininvain |
Re the first paragraph, I’m not sure you’ve quite grasped the concept of net spend. |
Does it not include taking off what you made from transfers out from what you’ve spent? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
