Liverpool FC Forum

[Homebooby]

Chelsea has bought instant success with Abramovic's riches...that's true. Chelsea are also spending way over their turnover and has incurred a whopping 140 million loss compared to 80 million in the previous year (just like you and me spending 1,000 pounds a week when the take home salary is only 600 pounds, the remaining 400 pounds coming from a sugar daddy)..that's another fact.

How long can this last? How long will it last? They can't generate super turnover in a short time ala Real Madrid by stepping up merchandising because they are not really an "international brand name" to borrow an American phrase limje Real Madrid, Manure, Milan, Juve and Liverpool.

It will take them that much longer unless they buy David Beckham this summer (he is a marketing phenomenon in football but at 30, time is running out) and start touting anything related to him for money. They have to build some tradition ot history first, by collecting silverware every season. They have the strongest squad in England and can rule the roost at least for the next foreseeable 2 seasons. But they'd have a much tougher time to win the biggest of them all (at this moment), the CL.

With the change of format and the introduction of the knock-out phase by UEFA, it is not necessarily the strongest squad that wins, partly is doen to the luck of the draw and partly down to how well the coach and the team square up against more illustrious opposition, apart from pure squad strength.

How long can Abramovic wait and still spend a stupendous amount of money? When he gets tired of Chelsea and finds other "passion", Chelsea will be staring at financial ruin. Peter kenyon has been talking about Chelsea breaking even by 2010, and for that to happen, they'd have to increase their ticket prices and going by the "pragmatic football" preached by Mourinho, this will only drive some of their fans away.

For us, we will always have loyal and passionate support, and Anfield of the new stadium will always be filled by the red half of Liverpool. Our turnover, if not augmented by merciless merchandising, would still be in the top 10 if we qualify for the CL every season (incidently we are at no 8 with 182 million compares to Newcastle who only collected in 128 million as a comparison to a forum member who said that we can't compete with Newcastle in the transfer market, we are more prudent not poorer).

If it takes another season or two for Liverpool to wing th EPL by carrying on like this, I'd be happy as long as we finish near Chelsea, qualify for the CL with a good run every season and play football like we used to play and win the odd cup or two. We can't compete financially with Chelsea who can dish out 21 million pounds for a squad player, thus we will never have their strength in depth in the EPL, and I can live with that until the playing field is level again, and this will happen. However, football is a game of human endeavours and while it is unlikely that Chelsea can collapse anytime soon, it may happen in the future and this gives me hope.

more eloquently put than my version 

[inglis5]

(incidently we are at no 8 with 182 million compares to Newcastle who only collected in 128 million as a comparison to a forum member who said that we can't compete with Newcastle in the transfer market, we are more prudent not poorer).

I completely agree, we are far more prudent (less reckless) with our money than Newcastle.

However, what I was stating was that if it came to a bidding war with Newcastle on a player that we both wanted, Newcastle would more than likely win (as happened with Owen). I'm sure Liverpool could have paid £16 million for Owen but it would have had an extremely detremental effect on the clubs ability to secure future targets. The difference between ourselves and Newcastle is that a lot of the transfers are privately funded by Freddie Shephard (as they are at Chelsea by Abramovich...)

What I don't agree with is your use of the Income figures as a gauge on how much money a club has to be spend on transfers. These figures represent the income coming into the club, not how much they have at their disposal to spend on players. If that was the case then surely Chelsea would not be as strong in the transfer market as the 4 teams above them in the list.

[maximus]

Rafa is in the process of BUILDING, not BUYING a great team. Rafa is also investing heavily in the future with the acquisition of some fine young players.

We are in the last 16 of the Champions league, of which I am very confident we will make the Quarter finals (of which we are the HOLDERS by the way) We are BUILDING on our below par performance last season in the league by hopefully finishing second this season ("second is the new first, because first has already been bought and paid for") I be lieve we are the most genuine challengers to Chelsea over the next 5 years, i am in no doubt about that.

On the spending front, I genuinely believe that if RAFA WANTED to buy, say Joaquin from Betis in the summer for £17 million, the board would back him.

We are here for the long haul, and I for one am enjoying every minute of it..............YNWA

[Leonmc0708]

i think eventually football teams will have to be given  a salary cap, like basketball teams in America. The league is way more exciting when clubs that get promoted actually have a chance to win and all all the best players aren't at a few clubs. The reason why people hope Chelsea and to a lesser extent Real Madrid lose is becuase they buy players so other clubs can't have them, hence you never get to see the best players compete against ech other. Imagine arseanl with cudcini (spelling) or man city with SWP or liverpool with Wayne Bridges?

I agree with that the EPL should eventually adopt the NBA system.

If a team goes 2m over the salery cap then they have to donate 2m to a fund that gets divided equally amounsgt all other teams. This gives teams the option of going over, but only for short periods.

Why do people say we should adopt the structures and regimes of a sport restricted to one counrty ?

Get A grip !

[dawson99]

who is saying we should buy the league? the great thing about liverpool (ok one of many many great things) is that altho we are a rich club, and buy a lot of players, we would never sink to the level of cheatski. we have our pride and we will win the league our way...soon

as for taking an nba approach, why would we do that? the uniforms wouldnt look good and the courts aren't big enough

[al fan since sixties]

I get the feeling that it wouldn't matter if Rafa had any number of Russian billionaires to tap into, he would still assess the value of a player and makes his pitch and only negotiate to a small degree to get the player.

Then like all our previous great Liverpool Managers Rafa would sell the Club to the player; if he did not appear interested, Rafa would drop the deal instantly.

Maureen could not use the same approach because they have no history; he would just throw money at the player and say sign on the dotted line.

Liverpool is top quality material; Chelsea are sacking cloth by comparison.

Chelsea are £140m in debt and are still trading due to being underwritten by a spurious Russians funds. At least our funding and investments have always been proper.

[johnny b the great]

[Quote (johnny b the great @ Feb. 17 2006,07:15)
i think eventually football teams will have to be given  a salary cap, like basketball teams in America. The league is way more exciting when clubs that get promoted actually have a chance to win and all all the best players aren't at a few clubs. The reason why people hope Chelsea and to a lesser extent Real Madrid lose is becuase they buy players so other clubs can't have them, hence you never get to see the best players compete against ech other. Imagine arseanl with cudcini (spelling) or man city with SWP or liverpool with Wayne Bridges?

I agree with that the EPL should eventually adopt the NBA system.

If a team goes 2m over the salery cap then they have to donate 2m to a fund that gets divided equally amounsgt all other teams. This gives teams the option of going over, but only for short periods.

Why do people say we should adopt the structures and regimes of a sport restricted to one counrty ?

Get A grip !]

It's not adopting the structure of a sport restrictred to one country, it's looking at a system that works and replicating it. In the NBA the team with the richest onwers don't win. It's the team with the best management team. If the EPL had a cap then it would be easier to compare Rafa to Jose. We would be able to see who as a better eye for talent and who can best develop a great team starting with the same resources.

[115-1073096938]

It's not adopting the structure of a sport restrictred to one country, it's looking at a system that works and replicating it. In the NBA the team with the richest onwers don't win. It's the team with the best management team. If the EPL had a cap then it would be easier to compare Rafa to Jose. We would be able to see who as a better eye for talent and who can best develop a great team starting with the same resources.

Thus taking all the fun out of football.

The idea of the game is so big teams can be beaten by smaller teams. Its a great game as it is. It doesn't need stupid tamperings like certain people are suggesting.

With a salary cap Boro ***** ing Chelsea wouldn't be as good, knocking them out of the champions league wouldn't be as good. etc etc.

[johnny b the great]

Yea but it wouldn't be such a special event. Chelsea would probably get beaten by any manager who could out coach Jose. The league would be more competitive and not decided after 20 flipping games and we'd get a chance to really assess how good Big Sam and Harry are compared to foreign managers.

[Small John]

Chelsea's 140m debt is going to be wiped out next year, apparently they have large sponsorship deals coming up.

Then it will be spend spend spend again.

Im expecting another highly rated 20m player to arrive in the summer for them.

[maximus]

Im expecting another highly rated 20m player to arrive in the summer for them.

What Like Drogba??

[banana]

No we don't need a russian investor. We need to preserve LFC as it is or rather keep going in the same direction. We have tradition and get respect from all over the world. Chelsea is hated by most REAL football fans. Chelsea will fade away and die just like Wimbledon.

[tubby]

I don't care how much money anyone costs, money doesn't buy you good players. Money buys you expensive ones. Not all expensive players are great players.

There are players out there like Pennant, Dunn, Ashton, Bullard and Barton who could get into almost if not every side in the country yet managers don't gamble on these players down to fear of getting it wrong.

You say players like Crouch don't win you tournements, correct, neither do players like Gerrard. Team's win you tournements. Everton last year being a good example of a team, hardly any individual could get into our side, yet they finished above us in the league...

You don't need money to be successful.

That is so untrue.

If so many Chelsea players are overated, How come I'd take Essien, Duff, Robben, Drogba and Crespo  any day of the week, to make our team one hell of a lot stronger.

Everton only finished above LFc last season in the league, as LFC's overall performance was woeful. Every time Everton got beat, so did we!

Blackburn won the Premiership with Jack walkers money, Chelsea won it once, and soon to be twice.

Money DOES buy you success, as you can bid for the best players on the market. Essien was one of the reasons Lyon were so strong before he left.

When was the last time, LFC bought a player, and you thought "WOW" ...top class player, that will dramatically improve the squad? ? ???
Crouch....No! Cisse.....No!...Morientes...No!....Sissoko..No! Zenden.
Garcia you could argue yes, but i'd never heard of him before, and he's been slated by many fans. ALonso, unkn own before arriving from Real Sociedad.

The difference in the quality signings there, I have to say is massive.

Truth is, Rafa is trying to do things on the cheap, but until he wins the EPL doing that, then you have to say money talks.
Like Agger, only been a pro for 2 years, unproven, Kromkamp, unrated and looks shaky. Paletta, only 20 and unproven.

Well can anyone tell me.....if you guys don't think that chelsea are not that much stronger than LFC with thier money, then how come every top club and manager in Europe rates Chelsea as being better than LFC?, and they are one of the favorites to win the CL, and are more feared than us at home and in Europe? In last seasons CL semi final , both managers in the other leg, AC milan and the other team, thought Chelsea would beat LFC. How come if Chelsea hadnt even won 1 league title at that point? It's about buying class and feared players.

They werent even title contenders before Roman Abromovich came along, and now look.

Its because of the players they have signed.

Doesn't say much for our history and european cup win that does it?

I bet half of you were biting Steve Morgans arm off for his 70m investment, money is important.

BavLondon, I agree with what you say, more investment for bigger names is required.

Thankyou, Im sure if we had major investmant now none of you would be moaning. Instead youd all be drooling over the next player we are set to get.

[tubby]

bavlondon, you sir are a tool of the highest order.

And you my friend are not willing to accept that Chelsea have the mean to dominate the game domestically and quite frankly on a European level for quite some time and you can moan about how we a traditional club al you want beacsue yes we did win the Euro cup last season but can you see us doing it year in year out with consistensy. The same consistensy that enabled Chelsea to seta new record in England No !!!!!

The fact is that if RP turned around tommorrow and said to all the fans the club now has the means to compete with the best teams in the world on financial level would you complain no you wouldnt. If you have the money spend it!!!!!!

Do you class Real Madrid as a side like Chelsea. How much did they spend on players in the last 4 years!!!! But many people consider them one of the world most elite sides. Similarly to us they have won the European cup many times and the money has helped them establish and maintain themselves so investment would not eliminate all th work weve put in but instead preserve it and build on it.

[gato_busta]

People consider Real Madrid as an elite side not because of their millions. They are considered an elite side because they are probably the most succesful club in the world (not recently though) and they know how to advertise themselves. They don't buy players just to have a good team, they buy players that can play well and sell their image. They are considered the biggest club world-wide because of how they sell the image of the team. Plus, they dont get their millions out of a Russian Multimillionaire.

Now how can Abramovichs millions (how ever you spell his name) be considered investment? The club has record losses for two years in a row. They won the premier league at what expense? 140 million pounds? I think they really ripped him off with that deal. What would happen if he pulled the plug on Chelsea, stopped giving them money? They would have to sell their entire squad, fill it with mediocre players and then vanish into nothing. It is a HUGE risk to accept millions just like that.

What Benitez and Parry are doing is the smart thing. They are not just throwing away money, they are planing, building a better team. Of course it may take time, success does not come over night but we already have a better, stronger team than last year and don't know if you remember, we won the CL last year . We are just a coupe of players short of a squad that can win the premiership so I really doubt that all those millions would be even necesary.