Liverpool FC Forum

[Lando_Griffin]

Tell you what - let's look at the cost of each "starting 11":

Liverpool:

Reina -£6m

Carragher - Free

Agger - £5.8m

Finnan - £3.5m

Arbeloa - £2.6m

Gerrard - Free

Pennant - £8m

Mascherano - £18m

Babel - £11.5m

Kuyt - £9m

Torres - £20.2m

Total cost: £86.6m


The scum:

Van Der Sar - £2m

Evra - £5.5m

Ferdinand - £33m

Vidic - £7m

Brown/Neville - Free

Giggs - Free

Carrick - £18.6m

Scholes - Free

Ronaldo - £12.24m

Tevez - £20m

Rooney - £31m.

Total cost: £129.34m.

Sh*tski:

Cech - £7m

A. Cole - c.£16m

Terry - Free.

Carvalho - £19.85m

Ferreira - £13.2m

Malouda - £13.5m

Essien - £24.4m

Fat Frank - £11m

Wright-Phillips - £21m

Drogba - £24m

Shevchenko - £30m.

Total cost: £179.95m



Arsenal:

Almunia - Undisclosed. (Say £1m, then.)

Sagna - £7.45m

Gallas - £11m (part of swap-deal for Cole.)

Toure - £150,000

Clichy - £250,000

Fabregas - Free

Flamini - Free

Diaby - £2m

Hleb - £11.2m

Eduardo - £8.5m

Adebayor - £3m.

Total: £44.55m.

Arsenal have by far the cheapest squad, but some of their best acquisitions were signed as children, and so cost nothing. (A luxury only a long-term manager can benefit from.)

But please, go on - tell us that we should be beating Man U and Chelsea to a league title.

Flawed argument......Rafa doesn't have a starting 11...he has a starting/rotating 65....... 

Dear me.

[112-1077774096]

mate for many years utd outspent us on transfers but we still won the league nearly every season while they floundered, the cost of the team is not always consistent with the performance.

Is it not the exception which proves the rule?

It CAN happen - but it's highly unusual, and very difficult.

well its does happen mate, its happened before and probably will happen again. personally i think we have a good enough first 11 to compete, but they are not given the chance to compete, added to our poor performances agaisnt the other top 4 teams, this shows the fault has to lie somewhere and i think its not the money thats at fault.

i think it wont matter if we outspend all the other clubs, the manager then has to put those players together with tactics that work, and all that will happen is when we play the smaller clubs rafa will level the playing field by putting out a weakened team.

[Owzat]

What has happened this season DEMANDS scrutiny of the Benitez regime, to do otherwise would be scandalously negligent.

Precisely. Blindly supporting the manager is worse than calling for his head, there is evidence to suggest he should go and those who defend him are burying their heads in the sand not looking at the evidence before them and analysing. That's not to say I'm calling for his head, but I think the club should take a good long look at (some of) Rafa's signings, his tactics, his record and the direction the club is going.

As with Houllier, those opening their eyes to what is happening will increase in number. Those who shout down anyone who dares speak against them may like to live in ignorance, but to blame the yanks or injuries is like blaming a speck of rain landing on your windscreen as you knock someone down at a pelican crossing ie looking for something or someone to blame other than the obvious

[Owzat]

Bollox mate, your entire arguement is we can't compete because we don't have the same amount of funds. Well there's 3 incidents that prove money doesn't really come into it.

As for the fella above who thinks the same way and we sell our left back/left winger and forward to fund a transfer and how do we replace these players, well there's one obvious solution, try the youth team. Also United sign Ferdinand for 30 million in 02, how do they bring that money back? Answer by selling Beckham the following season. Every club sells players to refund huge transfers, we're no different, but we don't HAVE to sell to fund our transfers.

So your answer to united spending 60 or 70 million on 3 players is the youth team get real do you really think that 3 youth team players could just come straight in and be as effective as 3 world class proven players __dont think so they have to be gradually eased in.

united buy ferdinand for 30 million and didnt have to sell beckham THAT season this says alot to me and when they did sell him the following season did they not buy more players ?

yet in order for us to buy one of the few world class players (on loan ) at the club macha for 4 million down now and the rest in wages ect over five years and also the purchase of skrtel, we HAVE to sell sissoko.

This is a response to GBJH's comments, I'm sure peewee doesn't think I'm aiming it at him specifically

Funny how Arsene Wenger can compete without the funds and has won three league titles and is in line for a fourth in that fashion, funny how the mancs have less funds than Chelsea and finished above them last season.

It's excuses, plain and simple. We managed 82 points with less money invested in only Rafa's second season and that was without beating the mancs or Chelski. IF we win all our remaining games then we could surpass that, but the likelihood is we'll fall well short again. We should stop worrying about what the other teams are doing, we only play THEM six games a season (combined) and we have MORE FUNDS than the rest.

2007/8

vs top three...P3 W0 D2 L1 F2 A3 PTS 2 (ave 0.67)
vs rest..........P21 W11 D8 L2 F37 A14 PTS 41 (ave 1.95

Well what do you know, the teams who have spent less have managed to draw EIGHT times against us and beat us twice - include draws for little brum and Wigan at Anfield. Reading beat us with a squad that COST LESS THAN TORRES, we only just scraped past bottom of the table Derby. We should be winning a much bigger percentage of games against the rest, we've lost too many games against bottom half sides under Rafa and we only score a goal a game against top half sides which simply isn't good enough. That's top half not top three, the sides nowhere near good enough to finish in the Champions League

vs 4-10 : P48 W24 D13 L11 F60 A39 PTS 85 (won 50%)

To win only 50% is pretty poor given near half those games are at home and it goes down to midtable sides

vs 4-10 (home) : P22 W16 D6 L0 F40 A11 PTS 44 (ave 2.00)
vs 4-10 (away) : P26 W8 D7 L11 F20 A28 PTS 31 (ave 1.19)

We've no hope of winning the league if we can't win (consistently) away to teams in the top half of the Premiership - the likes of villa, pompey, spudz, West Ham, Man City, Blackburn - none of them spend more than us, spudz are about the closest and maybe Man City will be joining us soon.

[dawson99]

All this first squad cost thing is stupid. its that we buy too many players who dont cut it and get sold on after too little a time. we need a better scouting method and we need to buy the right players.

Its not about the cost of a starting 11 that wins the others (mancs arsenal cheatski) games, its having more stability in players. and i dont just mean game by game, i mean year by year.

We'll never get anywhere if we just keep selling and buying new players, this isnt championship manager

[112-1077774096]

Bollox mate, your entire arguement is we can't compete because we don't have the same amount of funds. Well there's 3 incidents that prove money doesn't really come into it.

As for the fella above who thinks the same way and we sell our left back/left winger and forward to fund a transfer and how do we replace these players, well there's one obvious solution, try the youth team. Also United sign Ferdinand for 30 million in 02, how do they bring that money back? Answer by selling Beckham the following season. Every club sells players to refund huge transfers, we're no different, but we don't HAVE to sell to fund our transfers.

So your answer to united spending 60 or 70 million on 3 players is the youth team get real do you really think that 3 youth team players could just come straight in and be as effective as 3 world class proven players __dont think so they have to be gradually eased in.

united buy ferdinand for 30 million and didnt have to sell beckham THAT season this says alot to me and when they did sell him the following season did they not buy more players ?

yet in order for us to buy one of the few world class players (on loan ) at the club macha for 4 million down now and the rest in wages ect over five years and also the purchase of skrtel, we HAVE to sell sissoko.

This is a response to GBJH's comments, I'm sure peewee doesn't think I'm aiming it at him specifically

Funny how Arsene Wenger can compete without the funds and has won four league titles in that fashion, funny how the mancs have less funds than Chelsea and finished above them last season.

It's excuses, plain and simple. We managed 82 points with less money invested in only Rafa's second season and that was without beating the mancs or Chelski. IF we win all our remaining games then we could surpass that, but the likelihood is we'll fall well short again. We should stop worrying about what the other teams are doing, we only play THEM six games a season (combined) and we have MORE FUNDS than the rest.

2007/8

vs top three...P3 W0 D2 L1 F2 A3 PTS 2 (ave 0.67)
vs rest..........P21 W11 D8 L2 F37 A14 PTS 41 (ave 1.95

Well what do you know, the teams who have spent less have managed to draw EIGHT times against us and beat us twice - include draws for little brum and Wigan at Anfield. Reading beat us with a squad that COST LESS THAN TORRES, we only just scraped past bottom of the table Derby. We should be winning a much bigger percentage of games against the rest, we've lost too many games against bottom half sides under Rafa and we only score a goal a game against top half sides which simply isn't good enough. That's top half not top three, the sides nowhere near good enough to finish in the Champions League

vs 4-10 : P48 W24 D13 L11 F60 A39 PTS 85 (won 50%)

To win only 50% is pretty poor given near half those games are at home and it goes down to midtable sides

vs 4-10 (home) : P22 W16 D6 L0 F40 A11 PTS 44 (ave 2.00)
vs 4-10 (away) : P26 W8 D7 L11 F20 A28 PTS 31 (ave 1.19)

We've no hope of winning the league if we can't win (consistently) away to teams in the top half of the Premiership - the likes of villa, pompey, spudz, West Ham, Man City, Blackburn - none of them spend more than us, spudz are about the closest and maybe Man City will be joining us soon.

well you have raised a good point there mate, (but remember i am of the opinion that money does not buy you titles also, i think its just another excuse as to why rafa is failing).

the point you are raising about the cost of squads is valid to a point, the 4 most expensive squads finish in the top 4, but also the cheaper squads still manage to compete in individual games and beat the wealth clubs so the actual team value in one of games is not always relevant

[RedBlood]

Tell you what - let's look at the cost of each "starting 11":

Liverpool:

Reina -£6m

Carragher - Free

Agger - £5.8m

Finnan - £3.5m

Arbeloa - £2.6m

Gerrard - Free

Pennant - £8m

Mascherano - £18m

Babel - £11.5m

Kuyt - £9m

Torres - £20.2m

Total cost: £86.6m


The scum:

Van Der Sar - £2m

Evra - £5.5m

Ferdinand - £33m

Vidic - £7m

Brown/Neville - Free

Giggs - Free

Carrick - £18.6m

Scholes - Free

Ronaldo - £12.24m

Tevez - £20m

Rooney - £31m.

Total cost: £129.34m.

Sh*tski:

Cech - £7m

A. Cole - c.£16m

Terry - Free.

Carvalho - £19.85m

Ferreira - £13.2m

Malouda - £13.5m

Essien - £24.4m

Fat Frank - £11m

Wright-Phillips - £21m

Drogba - £24m

Shevchenko - £30m.

Total cost: £179.95m



Arsenal:

Almunia - Undisclosed. (Say £1m, then.)

Sagna - £7.45m

Gallas - £11m (part of swap-deal for Cole.)

Toure - £150,000

Clichy - £250,000

Fabregas - Free

Flamini - Free

Diaby - £2m

Hleb - £11.2m

Eduardo - £8.5m

Adebayor - £3m.

Total: £44.55m.

Arsenal have by far the cheapest squad, but some of their best acquisitions were signed as children, and so cost nothing. (A luxury only a long-term manager can benefit from.)

But please, go on - tell us that we should be beating Man U and Chelsea to a league title.

thats not to mention the subs bench

and as far as arsenal are concerned they have been able to buy top quality youngsters and bring them through because at the time the team of henry bergkamp pires and before them overmars petit etc whitch came before them were succesful and all thoses players cost big money at the time they were bought

[big al]

The last few dozen posts have been interesting.  However looking at how much is spent is irrelevant.  The issue is how you've spent.  I think its important to be fair and therefore before anyone goes digging for Liverpools total spend we must recognise the number of kids Rafa has bought from overseas.  We won't see how successful these buys are until a few years time.  It may appear to many that I don't support Rafa, the fact is I do. I just stopped believing in him at the minute.  He has exceptional skills which I don't need to remind you off.  The problems with not challenging for the premiership may well not be due to the rotation system but at the moment it this that is the most glaringly obvious.  Rafa has this uncanny knack of bringing things upon himself.  The comment about being England manager for one.  His demeanour is so laid back at times when all the fans want to hear is that he kicked a boot at someone.  He has had many successes and he has learnt so much about English football and whilst I don't believe in him at the minute I do believe he has the ability to make me believe.

[LittleHobo]

facts are these

valencia under rafa didnt spend as much as real madrid or barcelona

yet he won the title twice because in spain he understands how to outwit the top teams in the big games

its not about money its about the fact he hasnt worked out how to win the big premiership games vs the rivals....man utd, arsenal, chelsea

[Scottbot]

we can not compete because we have a manager who does not know his *rse from his elbow.

While you make good points at times mate you undermine them (for me) with a complete lack of respect for our manager. I don't deny he's fooked it up this year, I don't deny he may not be able to turn things around and i don't deny it may well be time for a change in the summer. And so do many others on here it seems BUT they (we) don't resort to the cheap shots, criticisms and name-calling that you have resorted to over the past 3-4 months. You are a scouser and you know your football, but (for me) you lack the class and humility of the majority of your fellow scousers who post on here. They are more in keeping with the kopites Big Al refers to in his post a couple of pages back.

Rafa might have messed it up this season, it could all be heading down the toilet this year but he deserves some respect, recognition (not the veiled sort you occasionally give him) and appreciation for what he has achieved in his first three seasons at the club.

[puroresu]

I am pretty sure Spurs have spent more than us in recent years but still not broke the top 4.  There are always going to be sides spending more than others.  Its always been this way so why now is that the ultimate excuse people look for when defending our failures in the league? I dont think Rafa can be shocked or surprised that his budget is not as high as Man Utd's.  He knew the score when he came here.  We have not been good enough, simple as that.

[big al]

Little hobo in many ways you have a point but the real problem for Rafa's team has been to beat the leser teams or hang on to points.  IE Wigan, Birmingham, Reading,Middlesbrough, Portsmouth ETC.  We've drawn with Chelsea (CHEATED) drawn with Arsenal and been beat by the S***e.  Take them out of the equation and the problem has been the same one going back 17 years not beating the also rans.  Beating Reading is 3 pts Beating Chelsea is 3pts beating Wigan is 3 pts beating Everton is 3pts there is no difference 3pts is 3 pts and you should put the best team out to get those three points not rotate world class players with journeymen.

[The_Rock]

Dear me.

The point is rafa does not even have a starting 11 .....

Defination from the Rock's football dictionary. Starting 11 means playing your strongest 11 for most of your games..(ie..more than 50% of your games).....Does rafa do that ? 

[god_bless_john_houlding]

Bollox mate, your entire arguement is we can't compete because we don't have the same amount of funds. Well there's 3 incidents that prove money doesn't really come into it.

As for the fella above who thinks the same way and we sell our left back/left winger and forward to fund a transfer and how do we replace these players, well there's one obvious solution, try the youth team. Also United sign Ferdinand for 30 million in 02, how do they bring that money back? Answer by selling Beckham the following season. Every club sells players to refund huge transfers, we're no different, but we don't HAVE to sell to fund our transfers.

have you ever read any of my posts, I have NEVER said on this forum or anywhere else that we can not compete because of lack of funds, NEVER. that is a cr*p argument.

we can not compete because we have a manager who does not know his *rse from his elbow.

I am all for having a discussion with you mate but don't attribute things to me that i have never said. it doesn't matter if we are the richest club in the world with the most expensive players while we have a manager who is clueless how to play them.

my argument is a team worth 100 million quid is worth 100 million quid, it has no relevance how much we have offloaded, a 20 million player is worth 20 million, its not important how much money we recouped or are you suggesting that the 20 million player an suddenly play like a 2 million quid player because we recouped 18 million in other sales

ludicrous argument, if i buy a car for 50 million and sell my old one for 20 million, does that make my 50 million car worth 30 million, and then my car breaks down etc or stops performing because its now worth less, bollox its still worth 50 million

peewee, I was agreeing with you, my post was addressed to another fella, who says we have knowledgeable fans 

peewee, me and you seem to have the same opinion of the fact that just because teams outspend us, that somehow means we can't compete. But as I've stated elsewhere, Spurs and Newcastle outspend us but we can finish above them, so where's the difference?

[ruskiy playmaker]

Bollox mate, your entire arguement is we can't compete because we don't have the same amount of funds. Well there's 3 incidents that prove money doesn't really come into it.

As for the fella above who thinks the same way and we sell our left back/left winger and forward to fund a transfer and how do we replace these players, well there's one obvious solution, try the youth team. Also United sign Ferdinand for 30 million in 02, how do they bring that money back? Answer by selling Beckham the following season. Every club sells players to refund huge transfers, we're no different, but we don't HAVE to sell to fund our transfers.

have you ever read any of my posts, I have NEVER said on this forum or anywhere else that we can not compete because of lack of funds, NEVER. that is a cr*p argument.

we can not compete because we have a manager who does not know his *rse from his elbow.

I am all for having a discussion with you mate but don't attribute things to me that i have never said. it doesn't matter if we are the richest club in the world with the most expensive players while we have a manager who is clueless how to play them.

my argument is a team worth 100 million quid is worth 100 million quid, it has no relevance how much we have offloaded, a 20 million player is worth 20 million, its not important how much money we recouped or are you suggesting that the 20 million player an suddenly play like a 2 million quid player because we recouped 18 million in other sales

ludicrous argument, if i buy a car for 50 million and sell my old one for 20 million, does that make my 50 million car worth 30 million, and then my car breaks down etc or stops performing because its now worth less, bollox its still worth 50 million

peewee, I was agreeing with you, my post was addressed to another fella, who says we have knowledgeable fans 

peewee, me and you seem to have the same opinion of the fact that just because teams outspend us, that somehow means we can't compete. But as I've stated elsewhere, Spurs and Newcastle outspend us but we can finish above them, so where's the difference?

gbjh- You really don't know a lot about football.