Liverpool FC Forum

by **puroresu** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:00 pm

Does anyone else find it depressing that Tottenham can spend over £25 million on three players yet we the bigger club have to penny pinch and look for 'bargains'. i.e if Bellamy never had the clause, would we of really been able to sign him?

by **Cool Hand Luke** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:01 pm

puroresu wrote:Does anyone else find it depressing that Tottenham can spend over £25 million on three players yet we the bigger club have to penny pinch and look for 'bargains'. i.e if Bellamy never had the clause, would we of really been able to sign him?

by **babu** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:02 pm

dude, i haven't even read your post. sorry. but its not the the amount of money spent, its the value recieved. nuff said imo.

by **laurence_2k2** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:03 pm

crossed my mind this morning too because they are about to sign damien duff for 11mil£,but you have to be confident with benitez decisions cause most of the time he is spot on!

by **puroresu** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:06 pm

laurence_2k2 wrote:crossed my mind this morning too because they are about to sign damien duff for 11mil£,but you have to be confident with benitez decisions cause most of the time he is spot on!

It isnt that I dont trust Rafa or blame he for the lack of big name signings as he can only spend what the board give him.

I just wish the board could find more money for Benitez.

by **Rafa D** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:08 pm

Post Houlier era.

£10m on Diouf
£5m on Diao
£14m on Cisse

Spurs are minted because of Daniel Levy, chairman of Spurs and managing director of ENIC plc, sports, entertainment and media projects, very profitable business.

by **stmichael** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:09 pm

puroresu wrote:Does anyone else find it depressing that Tottenham can spend over £25 million on three players yet we the bigger club have to penny pinch and look for 'bargains'. i.e if Bellamy never had the clause, would we of really been able to sign him?

i agree. i'd love to spend millions upon millions and win f#ck all for it.

sack parry.

:sleep

by **JC_81** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:18 pm

It can sound great on paper the big names Spurs are bringing in, but by spending big money, managers are taking a huge risk imo. If those signings don't work out and those players have to be sold off cheaper, a manager can soon find himself out of a job.

Look at Houllier, it was his expensive mistakes that cost him his job.

If the likes of Berbatov and Duff don't work out for Spurs then Jol could be out of a job because of the money he is spending on them.

I think that's why some managers, like ours, prefer to look for cheaper options or bargains. Benitez is the most conservative manager I've ever seen in the transfer market. I'm sure we don't have massive amounts of money at the moment, but if Benitez asked the board to pay 12 million for Alves and the same for Kuyt, I believe they'd find the money somehow. I just think Benitez is a manager who will only pay what he thinks a player is worth and not a penny more and if we seem like we have no money at times, a lot of it is down to how he likes to play the transfer market rather than just being down to how much money the board are willing to release for players. Personally I think it's a good thing for the short and long term health of the club.

by **Mark 23** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:20 pm

It's not a case of spending millions and winning feck all. It's that clubs like Spurs and Newcastle seem to have shed loads of money.

I can see why people are disillusioned by what they are reading at the moment, but I have a feeling that Rafa has more money than he is cracking on about. With Kuyt being made to decide upon his future in the next week, it wouldn't surprise me if Rafa pulls one out the bag, and we get the players we want.

The board know, we know and Rafa knows where we need to strengthen. I would be angry if the board don't back him with the cash he needs. But if you reveal your hand too quick in the transfer market then it costs you dearly.

by **stmichael** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:27 pm

Mark 23 wrote:It's not a case of spending millions and winning feck all. It's that clubs like Spurs and Newcastle seem to have shed loads of money.

Newcastle don't have shed loads of money at all. They had to take out an overdraft to buy Owen ffs. Consequently they've got bugger all to spend this summer.

You know, this thread sums up exactly what is wrong with the mentality of some fans these days. I'm beginning to think that to some, the ability to outspend our rivals is becoming more important that the ability to outplay our rivals on the pitch. I also think that there is a habit to downgrade what we do and covet what others have.

We also forget that the size of the stadia generates a lot of cash differentials and also the cost of the season tickets. Sky recently ran a clip showing how much our season tickets are compared with others, our stadium isn't the biggest. Man U have approx 15 thousand more than us at say £30 a ticket on average which means nearly half a million a game, multiply that by a season (say 28 home games all comps) and they have potentially approx £12m more than us from gate receipts alone.

Tottenham have roughly what we have and do a lot of trading. They can afford to gamble and sell on a lot more than we can, we HAVE to be in the top 4 but the could list as low as 10th before anybody really starts to grumble and the board comes under pressure

So they are linked with a lot but it's also to 'big' the club up as well. Kenyon recently reported Madrid to FIFA for tapping up. He probably only did it for some free promotion, the more your name is in the headlines the more interest and therefore money coming your way. We are a little too understated, we're too much of a traditional club than say a rugby league side. Rugby league is now geared to bring bad families and for me it's a bit too bright and brash in its promotion like wrestling

Also when they have the makings of a settled side they can afford to spend a bigger proportion on one player rather than the several we've been bying recently to reshape the side.

At the end of the day, whatever Spurs spend, they'll still finish below us.

by **SouthCoastShankly** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:33 pm

FOr season after season when Alan Sugar was in charge Spurs spent next to nothing, its not like they've been spending money season after season. Every team has a season or two where they replenish at cost.

We have no problem, we're not chelsea we don't need 100m to win - as we've shown.

by **RUSHIE#9** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:04 pm

It comes down to plain old trophies in the cabinet and not how much money you waste in the transfer market, and waste is exactly what 'spurs have been doing for the past couple of years. They have probably spent somewhere close to what Houllier spent but haven't won anything apart from the carling cup back in georgie 'brown paper bag' graham's day.
I've said it before and i'll say it again; Rafa doesn't and probably won't spend massive sums of money on big name players unless they are 110% proven to deliver the goods and the championship and seeing as how spurs are buying big names and winning nothing proves big names don't equal success. Rafa seems to prefer a player who shows his committment to the shirt and is able to get on with a job for the team without having to have his name up in lights every week. I get the feeling that is why Michael Owen probably won't pull on the red shirt again - but thats a different discussion altogether.

by **puroresu** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:05 pm

stmichael wrote:
Mark 23 wrote:It's not a case of spending millions and winning feck all. It's that clubs like Spurs and Newcastle seem to have shed loads of money.

Newcastle don't have shed loads of money at all. They had to take out an overdraft to buy Owen ffs. Consequently they've got bugger all to spend this summer.

You know, this thread sums up exactly what is wrong with the mentality of some fans these days. I'm beginning to think that to some, the ability to outspend our rivals is becoming more important that the ability to outplay our rivals on the pitch. I also think that there is a habit to downgrade what we do and covet what others have.

We also forget that the size of the stadia generates a lot of cash differentials and also the cost of the season tickets. Sky recently ran a clip showing how much our season tickets are compared with others, our stadium isn't the biggest. Man U have approx 15 thousand more than us at say £30 a ticket on average which means nearly half a million a game, multiply that by a season (say 28 home games all comps) and they have potentially approx £12m more than us from gate receipts alone.

Tottenham have roughly what we have and do a lot of trading. They can afford to gamble and sell on a lot more than we can, we HAVE to be in the top 4 but the could list as low as 10th before anybody really starts to grumble and the board comes under pressure

So they are linked with a lot but it's also to 'big' the club up as well. Kenyon recently reported Madrid to FIFA for tapping up. He probably only did it for some free promotion, the more your name is in the headlines the more interest and therefore money coming your way. We are a little too understated, we're too much of a traditional club than say a rugby league side. Rugby league is now geared to bring bad families and for me it's a bit too bright and brash in its promotion like wrestling

Also when they have the makings of a settled side they can afford to spend a bigger proportion on one player rather than the several we've been bying recently to reshape the side.

At the end of the day, whatever Spurs spend, they'll still finish below us.

I agree. Arsenal were in the same position and did something about by building a new fantastic stadium which holds 60,000. We dont look anywhere near building a new bigger stadium even though it was mentioned ages ago.

I also agree its not just about big name signings however I cant fault Jol on his signings. Duff is injury prone yet is easily worth £11 million in todays market. Berbatov is easily worth £12 mil considering Andy Johnson is worth £8.5 and crouch £7.5. Zokoro is a fantastic player and again I think its money well spent by Jol. I dont think anyone can say his paid over the odds for these players.

by **puroresu** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:06 pm

RUSHIE#9 wrote:It comes down to plain old trophies in the cabinet and not how much money you waste in the transfer market, and waste is exactly what 'spurs have been doing for the past couple of years. They have probably spent somewhere close to what Houllier spent but haven't won anything apart from the carling cup back in georgie 'brown paper bag' graham's day.
I've said it before and i'll say it again; Rafa doesn't and probably won't spend massive sums of money on big name players unless they are 110% proven to deliver the goods and the championship and seeing as how spurs are buying big names and winning nothing proves big names don't equal success. Rafa seems to prefer a player who shows his committment to the shirt and is able to get on with a job for the team without having to have his name up in lights every week. I get the feeling that is why Michael Owen probably won't pull on the red shirt again - but thats a different discussion altogether.

Isnt that Harsh on Jol. His done a pretty decent job since he took over. Granted however the minimum he has to get this year is Champions League qualification considering the money he spent.

by **Mark 23** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:24 pm

stmichael wrote:
Mark 23 wrote:It's not a case of spending millions and winning feck all. It's that clubs like Spurs and Newcastle seem to have shed loads of money.

Newcastle don't have shed loads of money at all. They had to take out an overdraft to buy Owen ffs. Consequently they've got bugger all to spend this summer.

You know, this thread sums up exactly what is wrong with the mentality of some fans these days. I'm beginning to think that to some, the ability to outspend our rivals is becoming more important that the ability to outplay our rivals on the pitch. I also think that there is a habit to downgrade what we do and covet what others have.

We also forget that the size of the stadia generates a lot of cash differentials and also the cost of the season tickets. Sky recently ran a clip showing how much our season tickets are compared with others, our stadium isn't the biggest. Man U have approx 15 thousand more than us at say £30 a ticket on average which means nearly half a million a game, multiply that by a season (say 28 home games all comps) and they have potentially approx £12m more than us from gate receipts alone.

Tottenham have roughly what we have and do a lot of trading. They can afford to gamble and sell on a lot more than we can, we HAVE to be in the top 4 but the could list as low as 10th before anybody really starts to grumble and the board comes under pressure

So they are linked with a lot but it's also to 'big' the club up as well. Kenyon recently reported Madrid to FIFA for tapping up. He probably only did it for some free promotion, the more your name is in the headlines the more interest and therefore money coming your way. We are a little too understated, we're too much of a traditional club than say a rugby league side. Rugby league is now geared to bring bad families and for me it's a bit too bright and brash in its promotion like wrestling

Also when they have the makings of a settled side they can afford to spend a bigger proportion on one player rather than the several we've been bying recently to reshape the side.

At the end of the day, whatever Spurs spend, they'll still finish below us.

I was under the impression that Newcastle had a little bit of money going spare.

I am realistic in what I expect from Liverpool, the board and the manager, but what you said about Manchester United, they are meant to take an extra 2 million on a matchday compared to us.

Liverpool FC Forum

Lack of money! - Even tottenham spend more.

Who is online