Liverpool FC Forum

[Kharhaz]

Moyes seemed to find Lescott for around 5 million, Ferdinand costs United 30 million. In my personal opinion it's better buisness by Moyes. Truth is, doesn't matter how you dress it up. Money doesn't win/lose a title. You can have all the money in the world doesn't mean you'll win the league

Lescott hasnt won the league title Ferdinand has. Money does matter, Chelsea needed a lot to get the title and no one here is denying the simple fact that chelsea are a force because they have the money to buy what they need. Utd have signed quality players but they also needed to replace there team of the nineties, they still havent done that, when scholes retires they have to replace him and it will take a massive amount to do that, just like it will us to replace Gerrard.

[god_bless_john_houlding]

Moyes seemed to find Lescott for around 5 million, Ferdinand costs United 30 million. In my personal opinion it's better buisness by Moyes. Truth is, doesn't matter how you dress it up. Money doesn't win/lose a title. You can have all the money in the world doesn't mean you'll win the league

Lescott hasnt won the league title Ferdinand has. Money does matter, Chelsea needed a lot to get the title and no one here is denying the simple fact that chelsea are a force because they have the money to buy what they need. Utd have signed quality players but they also needed to replace there team of the nineties, they still havent done that, when scholes retires they have to replace him and it will take a massive amount to do that, just like it will us to replace Gerrard.

Carragher hasn't won the league, so is Ferdinand a better player than him? Jan Kromkamp won the FA Cup, does that make him a better right back than Phil Neal (who never won the FA Cup)

I've said if people are prepared to read all, rather than little snipets. Money makes a difference in the callibire of player you can go after. Yet it doesn't make a difference on the pitch. It's still 11 against 11. Prime example, Newcastle one of the biggest spenders in the Prermiership, Derby haven't spent more than 10 million. Derby 1-0 Newcastle. Newcastle 2-2 Derby were the results at Pride Park and St James' Park this season. So I suppose money only counts for us, because it's a good excuse to explain us being a million miles behind the top three? Money isn't a good excuse, at all. We've spent nearly a 100 million more than Villa, yet are on level points. United spend a 100 million more than us and are around 15 points ahead of us. Where's the difference?

Money again makes a difference on WHO you can buy. It doesn't make a blind bit of difference, if you go out and buy the wrong players (something we've done for many a year.) My examples were Forlan and Veron (just so people don't assume this is me slaughtering Benitez, because it isn't) so yeah, Forlan and Veron. Both cost millions yet were useless. So money doesn't matter if you don't buy the right player or play them correctly.

Take Everton for example who haven't spent anywhere near as much as us. They bring in Yakubu for around 11 million, a proven Premiership scorer. We buy Kuyt for a similar price maybe just a bit less. Yakubu banging goals in left right and centre. Kuyt struggling. Same price or so, now tell me that if they cost the same they should be as good a player as the other, but they're not. Why? Because a price tag isn't a fair reflection of a players ability. You can have all the money in the world, but if you buy badly or play them badly then it's pointless having an open cheque book. Which is why when it comes down to it, money isn't a good excuse.

[maguskwt]

We've spent nearly 150 million in the same time Chelsea have spent 300 million. In the same time Everton have spent 50 million or so, Villa around the same, City around 40 million. So spending practically 100 million more than those four, why are we still fighting with them? This is why money isn't an excuse for why we're so far behind.

money isn't an excuse if you're a mid-table team... money however plays a bigger part if you're a relegation team trying to stay in the PL regularly OR if you're trying to break into the top 3 and consistently challenge for the title or even win it... don't kid yourself

4th place isn't mid table. That's the position we're fighting for. Plus why doesn't money matter for mid table? How is it one rule for some but not for others?

Sunderland have spent a fair amount this season, 9 million alone on a keeper. Yet still find themselves fighting relegation. Newcastle who've outspent us year after year are only six points off the drop. So it isn't down to money is it?

fair enough... money might not prevent a team from going down... but money becomes a big factor breaking into the current top 3... because the gulf between the top 3 and the rest is wider than the gulf between all the other clubs sadly including us... money makes everything easier... money makes the world go round...

Money bought Deigo Forlan and Jaun Sebastian Veron for United, for huge amounts. Money doens't make it easier. Money makes it more difficult because expectations are that much higher because you've got the millions, it's made easier that you can buy pretty much who you want, but with that money success is demanded. That's why Newcastle sack their manager every other week. Because they're given plenty of bread to spend and come home potless.

Mourinho was sacked because he couldn't deliver the European Cup despite having more money than the bank of england.

That's why it's such a disappointment to me, because we've had a lot of money, a lot more than the teams we are fighting for fourth with. So we should be up there challenging. With 150 million Benitez should of been able to sign a world class left back and left winger. The money we've spent and the players we have are good enough to challenge.

so benitez can buy a world class left back and left winger with 150 million... sure... simple enough...not disputing that... but are we suppose to continue playing with Cisse, Baros, ageing Henchoz and Hyppia, Diouf and Biscan?

I'm just saying Benitez has to completely overhaul a squad half made up of good but ageing players and half totally players like Biscan, Traore, Diao... look what we have now... Torres, Reina, Mascherano, Agger, Alonso...and future prospects in Babel, Lucas, Nemeth, El Zhar... I say that's a progress mate and that costs money... you highlight the 2 weak positions that REMAINS weak and say rafa didn't buy for those with the total money, ignoring all the other areas benitez has improved... doesn't make sense... I do think though that benitez might have looked too much into the long run rather than the short run by investing in those prospects because he might not have that much time anymore... and that's a shame...

and that 150 million keeps coming up... well i'm not disputing or supporting it but can i see the source and break down of it? from which period to which period is it? is it the NET spent or gross?

[66-1112520797]

Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can see the debate for what it is, it's all there.

Yep. 

[66-1112520797]

Moyes seemed to find Lescott for around 5 million, Ferdinand costs United 30 million. In my personal opinion it's better buisness by Moyes. Truth is, doesn't matter how you dress it up. Money doesn't win/lose a title. You can have all the money in the world doesn't mean you'll win the league

Lescott hasnt won the league title Ferdinand has. Money does matter, Chelsea needed a lot to get the title and no one here is denying the simple fact that chelsea are a force because they have the money to buy what they need. Utd have signed quality players but they also needed to replace there team of the nineties, they still havent done that, when scholes retires they have to replace him and it will take a massive amount to do that, just like it will us to replace Gerrard.

Carragher hasn't won the league, so is Ferdinand a better player than him? Jan Kromkamp won the FA Cup, does that make him a better right back than Phil Neal (who never won the FA Cup)

I've said if people are prepared to read all, rather than little snipets. Money makes a difference in the callibire of player you can go after. Yet it doesn't make a difference on the pitch. It's still 11 against 11. Prime example, Newcastle one of the biggest spenders in the Prermiership, Derby haven't spent more than 10 million. Derby 1-0 Newcastle. Newcastle 2-2 Derby were the results at Pride Park and St James' Park this season. So I suppose money only counts for us, because it's a good excuse to explain us being a million miles behind the top three? Money isn't a good excuse, at all. We've spent nearly a 100 million more than Villa, yet are on level points. United spend a 100 million more than us and are around 15 points ahead of us. Where's the difference?

Money again makes a difference on WHO you can buy. It doesn't make a blind bit of difference, if you go out and buy the wrong players (something we've done for many a year.) My examples were Forlan and Veron (just so people don't assume this is me slaughtering Benitez, because it isn't) so yeah, Forlan and Veron. Both cost millions yet were useless. So money doesn't matter if you don't buy the right player or play them correctly.

Take Everton for example who haven't spent anywhere near as much as us. They bring in Yakubu for around 11 million, a proven Premiership scorer. We buy Kuyt for a similar price maybe just a bit less. Yakubu banging goals in left right and centre. Kuyt struggling. Same price or so, now tell me that if they cost the same they should be as good a player as the other, but they're not. Why? Because a price tag isn't a fair reflection of a players ability. You can have all the money in the world, but if you buy badly or play them badly then it's pointless having an open cheque book. Which is why when it comes down to it, money isn't a good excuse.

I can see what your saying.

Its that some people around here do nothing but snipe at people on these boards fella, what sorry little lives they must have. 

[bigmick]

Money makes a difference. It makes a huge difference because it means you can compete for better players, and crucially ditch 'em at a loss if they turn out to be sh!t. No argument about it, money makes a difference. For this reason, it would be unreasonable to be a Watford fan and write to the club telling them you are not going to renew your season ticket on the grounds the club don't look like winning the Premiership. If you are a Watford fan, or support Ipswich or West Brom, barring a nuclear strike by a distant dictator which wipes out all but a smattering of the Uk's population, you will never see your team win the Premier League.

For this reason and this reason alone there are only a very select number of teams which can win the League, regardless of who is the manager. What John is saying though, and I must say I agree with him in this respect, is that we are in that group who can possibly win it. The manager said himself at the start of the season that we were going all out for the League title. He said that we were now good enough to launch a challenge. Either he felt he was going to be given 100 mill to spend in the transfer window, or he felt the squad with which we started the season was ood enough to compete. He was either wrong, or we have massively underperformed. If we have massively underperformed, it's not because we aren't as rich as Chelsea. I think that's where John is coming from.

[ruskiy playmaker]

One other thing that affected our style this year is the injury to Agger.  We've started playing way too defensively since he's been gone, even Rafa admitted this.  I hope he does well in the reserves game.

[maguskwt]

Moyes seemed to find Lescott for around 5 million, Ferdinand costs United 30 million. In my personal opinion it's better buisness by Moyes. Truth is, doesn't matter how you dress it up. Money doesn't win/lose a title. You can have all the money in the world doesn't mean you'll win the league

Lescott hasnt won the league title Ferdinand has. Money does matter, Chelsea needed a lot to get the title and no one here is denying the simple fact that chelsea are a force because they have the money to buy what they need. Utd have signed quality players but they also needed to replace there team of the nineties, they still havent done that, when scholes retires they have to replace him and it will take a massive amount to do that, just like it will us to replace Gerrard.

Carragher hasn't won the league, so is Ferdinand a better player than him? Jan Kromkamp won the FA Cup, does that make him a better right back than Phil Neal (who never won the FA Cup)

I've said if people are prepared to read all, rather than little snipets. Money makes a difference in the callibire of player you can go after. Yet it doesn't make a difference on the pitch. It's still 11 against 11. Prime example, Newcastle one of the biggest spenders in the Prermiership, Derby haven't spent more than 10 million. Derby 1-0 Newcastle. Newcastle 2-2 Derby were the results at Pride Park and St James' Park this season. So I suppose money only counts for us, because it's a good excuse to explain us being a million miles behind the top three? Money isn't a good excuse, at all. We've spent nearly a 100 million more than Villa, yet are on level points. United spend a 100 million more than us and are around 15 points ahead of us. Where's the difference?

Money again makes a difference on WHO you can buy. It doesn't make a blind bit of difference, if you go out and buy the wrong players (something we've done for many a year.) My examples were Forlan and Veron (just so people don't assume this is me slaughtering Benitez, because it isn't) so yeah, Forlan and Veron. Both cost millions yet were useless. So money doesn't matter if you don't buy the right player or play them correctly.

Take Everton for example who haven't spent anywhere near as much as us. They bring in Yakubu for around 11 million, a proven Premiership scorer. We buy Kuyt for a similar price maybe just a bit less. Yakubu banging goals in left right and centre. Kuyt struggling. Same price or so, now tell me that if they cost the same they should be as good a player as the other, but they're not. Why? Because a price tag isn't a fair reflection of a players ability. You can have all the money in the world, but if you buy badly or play them badly then it's pointless having an open cheque book. Which is why when it comes down to it, money isn't a good excuse.

geez john... you're very tedious... I know what you're saying... but you replied to my post money doesn't make it easier. It does. You give examples of how certain players didn't succeed in the premier league and argue that even though you spend lots of money on said players it doesn't guarantee you success. agreed. But there are also tons of examples of how money fetched you indispensible quality players... don't look far... just look at our very own torres... and if our owners will dish out, masherano. And how bout rooney, ferdinand? all top quality money... how bout nani, anderson, hargreaves, carrick? they're not world class players but good prospects and fit the team and were relatively expensive as well... later on they will need to dish out 20-25 million for tevez I presume. And look at chelsea, all quality players assembled with abramovich's money... so yeah money makes it easier... easier to win the league that is... not talking about need to handle expectations or whatsoever... ask any top manager whether want to have 200 million transfer budget + lots of expectations or 50 million + very little expectation. They will choose the former, only scrub managers will choose the latter option. At the end of the day it's like climbing the mountain from the base and climbing it from midway... even if you climb it from midway you can of course still falter... but you have a clear advantage in the beginning... it's as simple as that...

now if it pleases you, we could go on argueing whether a straight line is the shortest distance between two points OR the shortest distance between two points is the straight line...

[LFC2007]

Money makes a difference. It makes a huge difference because it means you can compete for better players, and crucially ditch 'em at a loss if they turn out to be sh!t. No argument about it, money makes a difference. For this reason, it would be unreasonable to be a Watford fan and write to the club telling them you are not going to renew your season ticket on the grounds the club don't look like winning the Premiership. If you are a Watford fan, or support Ipswich or West Brom, barring a nuclear strike by a distant dictator which wipes out all but a smattering of the Uk's population, you will never see your team win the Premier League.

For this reason and this reason alone there are only a very select number of teams which can win the League, regardless of who is the manager. What John is saying though, and I must say I agree with him in this respect, is that we are in that group who can possibly win it. The manager said himself at the start of the season that we were going all out for the League title. He said that we were now good enough to launch a challenge. Either he felt he was going to be given 100 mill to spend in the transfer window, or he felt the squad with which we started the season was ood enough to compete. He was either wrong, or we have massively underperformed. If we have massively underperformed, it's not because we aren't as rich as Chelsea. I think that's where John is coming from.

Obviously mate, but that wasn't really the point I was addressing;

Money doens't make it easier. Money makes it more difficult because expectations are that much higher because you've got the millions, it's made easier that you can buy pretty much who you want, but with that money success is demanded.

Somehow, he believes that money to spend makes it more difficult due to added pressure and expectation. The money that enables you the capacity to go for players of much higher quality, is overrided by that 'pressure' and increase in level of expectation as a factor pertaining to the difficulty of the job.

That's why it's such a disappointment to me, because we've had a lot of money, a lot more than the teams we are fighting for fourth with. So we should be up there challenging. With 150 million Benitez should of been able to sign a world class left back and left winger. The money we've spent and the players we have are good enough to challenge.

Yes, with that money came greater expectation and pressure apparently, so it must have been more difficult than without having that money, right?

It doesn't matter at this club how much you are or not given. The expectation is the league title, minimum.

Ah, so the expectation level doesn't vary, it's constant. League title minimum every year. Therefore that 'expectation' level will not change no matter how much is spent, so it can't be argued that any pressure that comes with spending big affects the difficulty of the job. It's a uniform level for every manager.

[account deleted by request]

geez john... you're very tedious... I know what you're saying... but you replied to my post money doesn't make it easier. It does. You give examples of how certain players didn't succeed in the premier league and argue that even though you spend lots of money on said players it doesn't guarantee you success. agreed. But there are also tons of examples of how money fetched you indispensible quality players... don't look far... just look at our very own torres... and if our owners will dish out, masherano.

I think you are helping to prove John's point with the examples of Torres and Mascherano. Two top class and very expensive additions to our squad, yet we are doing no better than we were BEFORE they arrived.

Around 100Million pounds spent on players since 2006 and we are no better (worse) than we were in 2006 both points and positionally.

While you obviously need money to help build a team, money doesn't guarantee success , its just one of the many requirements necessary to be successful.

[puroresu]

geez john... you're very tedious... I know what you're saying... but you replied to my post money doesn't make it easier. It does. You give examples of how certain players didn't succeed in the premier league and argue that even though you spend lots of money on said players it doesn't guarantee you success. agreed. But there are also tons of examples of how money fetched you indispensible quality players... don't look far... just look at our very own torres... and if our owners will dish out, masherano.

I think you are helping to prove John's point with the examples of Torres and Mascherano. Two top class and very expensive additions to our squad, yet we are doing no better than we were BEFORE they arrived.

Around 100Million pounds spent on players since 2006 and we are no better (worse) than we were in 2006 both points and positionally.

While you obviously need money to help build a team, money doesn't guarantee success , its just one of the many requirements necessary to be successful.

Does not guarantee success at all.  The way some people speak it as simple as giving the Manager a whole heap of money to spend and then watch the good times roll.

[maguskwt]

geez john... you're very tedious... I know what you're saying... but you replied to my post money doesn't make it easier. It does. You give examples of how certain players didn't succeed in the premier league and argue that even though you spend lots of money on said players it doesn't guarantee you success. agreed. But there are also tons of examples of how money fetched you indispensible quality players... don't look far... just look at our very own torres... and if our owners will dish out, masherano.

I think you are helping to prove John's point with the examples of Torres and Mascherano. Two top class and very expensive additions to our squad, yet we are doing no better than we were BEFORE they arrived.

Around 100Million pounds spent on players since 2006 and we are no better (worse) than we were in 2006 both points and positionally.

While you obviously need money to help build a team, money doesn't guarantee success , its just one of the many requirements necessary to be successful.

well... when we talk about money... obviously we're talking about squad building which is the 'basic foundation' to challenge for the title...I know money is not the only factor but my point was that money makes it easier... so money matters... whereas john was saying that money doesn't make it easier because with money brings greater expectations...torres and mascherano are 2 great additions to the team... imagine if we didn't get them... what then? having said that it is obvious that the addition of torres and masherano wasn't enough... we needed 2 wingers... there were a few top class candidates in the market... did we get them? no... because we couldn't compete for them...

and YES a team could become champions without spending alot of money if it manages to get the right players for cheap (that means you would also need a very good scout system) or if the academy produces talented youngsters... but that needs patience and to a certain extent luck... do we have patience? no... we want benitez to quit after 4 years and this is after he brought in promising youngsters from across the world because our academy wasn't producing much talent...

of course I am fully aware that the 'anti-rafa' club would wanna stress that money doesn't matter because of obvious reasons...

[account deleted by request]

I think there are a few points to consider.

1/ Would Rafa be under the same pressure if he had been given no transfer funds this season? - no (imo), so money does bring some additional pressures even when in the main its been spent on good players.

2/ Surely the anti -Rafa's have been using the huge amount of money Rafa has spent as the main whipping post for our failure to rise above our immediate rivals (Everton, Villa) rather than saying money doesn't matter?

3/ Tevez kept West Ham up last season, but they also did much worse as a team last year than the previous season or even this one. So even top quality players like Tevez and Mascherano need to be part of a team, and can't guarantee success just because they are worth x - millions of pounds.

4/ Sometimes you can get a better team without the huge star, as other players up their game rather than looking to the star player to carry the team. (Henry at Arsenal)

As I said Money is just one part of a more complex equation. I don't think its coincidence that the top clubs are usually the ones that spend the most money, but neither is it the answer to every problem.

[bigmick]

of course I am fully aware that the 'anti-rafa' club would wanna stress that money doesn't matter because of obvious reasons...

Sorry, couldn't let this one go.

Practically nobody has said on the "in Rafa I don't actually totally trust all the time to be totally honest" camp that money doesn't matter. What some of us have consistently asked for is some objectivity when talking about transfer funds.

How for instance is it Ok to use the excuse of lack of transfer funds for our abject display in the League this season (even though absolutely none of the "In Rafa we trust"ers mentioned it when we were top of the league after five games) but then to simply discount Arsenal as an exception to the rule? I do assume that by now we've all accepted that in Rafa's time as Liverpool manager Wenger has rebuilt Arsenals whole team, the whole eleven players (although somebody did point out in the interests of accuracy that a couple of the youngsters actually arrived a few months earlier than Rafa's appointment). The fact that he has done so at a cost which is dwarfed by our spending in the same period cannot be simply dismissed if we must get involved in the transfer fund comparison.


Then we use the lack of funds as on of the main reasons we haven't challenged, but baulk at the comparison between what we've spent and what Everton/Man City/Aston Villa/Portsmouth have spent. None of these clubs have spent anywhere near what we have, and yet you could throw a coat over all of them and us in the race so far.


Money matters, of course it does. It may even explain why we haven't won the league for the past five or six years, or at least be one of the main contributing factors. It is not though, and never will be a valid excuse for how far behind the leading group of clubs we currently are.

[maguskwt]

of course I am fully aware that the 'anti-rafa' club would wanna stress that money doesn't matter because of obvious reasons...

Sorry, couldn't let this one go.

Practically nobody has said on the "in Rafa I don't actually totally trust all the time to be totally honest" camp that money doesn't matter. What some of us have consistently asked for is some objectivity when talking about transfer funds.

How for instance is it Ok to use the excuse of lack of transfer funds for our abject display in the League this season (even though absolutely none of the "In Rafa we trust"ers mentioned it when we were top of the league after five games) but then to simply discount Arsenal as an exception to the rule? I do assume that by now we've all accepted that in Rafa's time as Liverpool manager Wenger has rebuilt Arsenals whole team, the whole eleven players (although somebody did point out in the interests of accuracy that a couple of the youngsters actually arrived a few months earlier than Rafa's appointment).

Then we use the lack of funds as on of the main reasons we haven't challenged, but baulk at the comparison between what we've spent and what Everton/Man City/Aston Villa/Portsmouth have spent.


Money matters, of course it does. It may even explain why we haven't won the league for the past five or six years, or at least be one of the main contributing factors. It is not though, and never will be a valid excuse for how far behind the leading group of clubs we currently are.

fair enough bigmick... but we all are guilty of over-generalizing the other camp at one point or another aren't we...