Liverpool FC Forum

by **LFC2007** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:13 am

The cost of paying off Houllier and his backroom staff was very significant, was it not?

The other point I'd make is that if there is a threshold it more than likely will not be defined exactly, and secondly, if it is then I think it's likely to be set at a relatively low level i.e. 'A top four finish', which we still have a very realistic chance of achieving.

by **lakes10** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:16 am

Benny The Noon wrote:So basically its once again just specualtion and journo reports on the whole with no mention of "loopholes" as you suggest and as for the targets - no one will know what they are - for all we know they could be to reach the CL next season and Rafa isnt stupid as well so im pretty sure he would of made sure he would get a decent comp package if he was asked to leave

in truth mate i would not tell you anyway, there are lots of members i do tell stuff like that to and you are not one of them.

you seem to think that names can be given out like that and nothing happens, that shows that you dont know how things work.

there are members on here and RAWK that do hear stuff from time to time and none of them post the names from who it come.

by **bigmick** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:19 am

Penguins wrote:I just read one sentence on another forum and it tells a picture:

"We pay the 5th highest wages and have the 5th most valuable squad and are 5th in the league"

Supporters just doesn't care that Spurs pays more wages, has a
more expensive squad to assemble and Rafa has overachieved
with what he has been given.

But sorry we are big club no matter the finances cause we won the league 18 times....
Therefore we must win the league even if Sunderland will have a squad that is worth more just cause we are LFC.
That kind of reasoning is horse**** and outdated!

Why oh why do you persist with this nonsense? We have spent more money since Rafa has been manager than either Man Utd or Arsenal, and are only marginally behind Chelsea. Now you are saying that Sunderland have outspent us :laugh:

. Fecking hell.

by **Benny The Noon** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:21 am

Ah the old annoymous line - as Micheal has said i expect most of what you post is pure b@llocks and just posted to make yourself look like that person who is in the know . Im pretty sure there are people around who know stuff - i know someone in the club but im sure as hell not going to post stuff on the forum to make myself look like an insider .

The people that know are -

The owners , the management staff , the techinal staff ,the players the medical staff - do you know any of these - i very much doubt it - anything else that gets sprouted around the forums and internet and papers is all pure specualtion and utter rubbish .

by **Benny The Noon** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:25 am

bigmick wrote:
Penguins wrote:I just read one sentence on another forum and it tells a picture:

"We pay the 5th highest wages and have the 5th most valuable squad and are 5th in the league"

Supporters just doesn't care that Spurs pays more wages, has a
more expensive squad to assemble and Rafa has overachieved
with what he has been given.

But sorry we are big club no matter the finances cause we won the league 18 times....
Therefore we must win the league even if Sunderland will have a squad that is worth more just cause we are LFC.
That kind of reasoning is horse**** and outdated!

Why oh why do you persist with this nonsense? We have spent more money since Rafa has been manager than either Man Utd or Arsenal, and are only marginally behind Chelsea. Now you are saying that Sunderland have outspent us . Fecking hell.

# Net Spend 04 - 09 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season

1 Manchester City £292,750,000 £71,900,000 £220,850,000 £36,808,333
2 Chelsea £267,950,000 £123,300,000 £144,650,000 £24,108,333
3 Liverpool £247,730,000 £134,080,000 £113,650,000 £18,941,667
4 Tottenham £262,000,000 £163,550,000 £98,450,000 £16,408,333
5 Aston Villa £130,200,000 £37,255,000 £92,945,000 £15,490,833
6 Sunderland £154,080,000 £67,900,000 £86,180,000 £14,363,333
9 Stoke City £39,100,000 £10,095,000 £29,005,000 £4,834,167
7 Manchester United £188,650,000 £161,050,000 £27,600,000 £4,600,000
8 Everton £102,100,500 £78,200,000 £23,900,500 £3,983,417
18 West Ham £94,145,000 £71,325,000 £22,820,000 £3,803,333
15 Hull £22,415,000 £2,975,000 £19,440,000 £3,240,000
10 Fulham £59,925,000 £40,725,000 £19,200,000 £3,200,000
12 Birmingham City £60,800,000 £41,825,000 £18,975,000 £3,162,500
11 Bolton £42,400,000 £26,300,000 £16,100,000 £2,683,333
13 Wolves £22,075,000 £15,575,000 £6,500,000 £1,083,333
14 Burnley £10,505,000 £8,625,000 £1,880,000 £313,333
15 Blackburn Rovers £49,052,000 £57,290,000 -£8,238,000 -£1,373,000
16 Wigan £57,850,000 £66,250,000 -£8,400,000 -£1,400,000
17 Portsmouth £92,200,000 £107,240,000 -£15,040,000 -£2,506,667
18 Arsenal £112,050,000 £138,320,000 -£26,270,000 -£4,378,333

Not sure how accurate it is as think chelsea has spent a lot more than that - with some reports saying they are close to 500 mill spent .

Also the Mancs have been helped with a 80 million pound income from one player .

There is also the addition of us having to totally overhaul our squad with the others tinkering theres .

While we have spent a fair bit of money there was a report that we have bought double the amount of players chelsea have and nearly triple what the mancs .

by **lakes10** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:25 am

bigmick wrote:
Penguins wrote:I just read one sentence on another forum and it tells a picture:

"We pay the 5th highest wages and have the 5th most valuable squad and are 5th in the league"

Supporters just doesn't care that Spurs pays more wages, has a
more expensive squad to assemble and Rafa has overachieved
with what he has been given.

But sorry we are big club no matter the finances cause we won the league 18 times....
Therefore we must win the league even if Sunderland will have a squad that is worth more just cause we are LFC.
That kind of reasoning is horse**** and outdated!

Why oh why do you persist with this nonsense? We have spent more money since Rafa has been manager than either Man Utd or Arsenal, and are only marginally behind Chelsea. Now you are saying that Sunderland have outspent us . Fecking hell.

in truth looking at all the money that has been spent in the prem this year all the top teams have been :censored:

poor.

the winner of the prem this year might be the team that has still lost about 5 to 6 games, that could still give us a chance.

by **bigmick** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:33 am

Benny The Noon wrote:
bigmick wrote:
Penguins wrote:I just read one sentence on another forum and it tells a picture:

"We pay the 5th highest wages and have the 5th most valuable squad and are 5th in the league"

Supporters just doesn't care that Spurs pays more wages, has a
more expensive squad to assemble and Rafa has overachieved
with what he has been given.

But sorry we are big club no matter the finances cause we won the league 18 times....
Therefore we must win the league even if Sunderland will have a squad that is worth more just cause we are LFC.
That kind of reasoning is horse**** and outdated!

Why oh why do you persist with this nonsense? We have spent more money since Rafa has been manager than either Man Utd or Arsenal, and are only marginally behind Chelsea. Now you are saying that Sunderland have outspent us . Fecking hell.

# Net Spend 04 - 09 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season

1 Manchester City £292,750,000 £71,900,000 £220,850,000 £36,808,333
2 Chelsea £267,950,000 £123,300,000 £144,650,000 £24,108,333
3 Liverpool £247,730,000 £134,080,000 £113,650,000 £18,941,667
4 Tottenham £262,000,000 £163,550,000 £98,450,000 £16,408,333
5 Aston Villa £130,200,000 £37,255,000 £92,945,000 £15,490,833
6 Sunderland £154,080,000 £67,900,000 £86,180,000 £14,363,333
9 Stoke City £39,100,000 £10,095,000 £29,005,000 £4,834,167
7 Manchester United £188,650,000 £161,050,000 £27,600,000 £4,600,000
8 Everton £102,100,500 £78,200,000 £23,900,500 £3,983,417
18 West Ham £94,145,000 £71,325,000 £22,820,000 £3,803,333
15 Hull £22,415,000 £2,975,000 £19,440,000 £3,240,000
10 Fulham £59,925,000 £40,725,000 £19,200,000 £3,200,000
12 Birmingham City £60,800,000 £41,825,000 £18,975,000 £3,162,500
11 Bolton £42,400,000 £26,300,000 £16,100,000 £2,683,333
13 Wolves £22,075,000 £15,575,000 £6,500,000 £1,083,333
14 Burnley £10,505,000 £8,625,000 £1,880,000 £313,333
15 Blackburn Rovers £49,052,000 £57,290,000 -£8,238,000 -£1,373,000
16 Wigan £57,850,000 £66,250,000 -£8,400,000 -£1,400,000
17 Portsmouth £92,200,000 £107,240,000 -£15,040,000 -£2,506,667
18 Arsenal £112,050,000 £138,320,000 -£26,270,000 -£4,378,333

Not sure how accurate it is as think chelsea has spent a lot more than that - with some reports saying they are close to 500 mill spent .

Also the Mancs have been helped with a 80 million pound income from one player .

There is also the addition of us having to totally overhaul our squad with the others tinkering theres .

While we have spent a fair bit of money there was a report that we have bought double the amount of players chelsea have and nearly triple what the mancs .

Yes there are various different interpretations around, different figures and the rest, but pretty much every comparison you look at has us spending more than everyone except Chelsea (and event then only just), with it being very close between us and Man City. We've certainly outspent Manchester United by a fair bit now they've sold Ronaldo, while obviously Arsenal are something of a law unto themselves.

Not that there's any shame in all of that I hasten to add, Liverpool football club ought to sign big money players. It would just be helpful to the debate if people wouldn't constantly drag it up as an excuse as to why we don't compete better, "shopping in the bargain basement" and all that nonsense. It quite simply isn't true.

by **Benny The Noon** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:35 am

What must also be added is Rafa has had to sell a fair number of players to fund some purchases that he has made .

by **bigmick** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:40 am

Benny The Noon wrote:What must also be added is Rafa has had to sell a fair number of players to fund some purchases that he has made .

That's where "net spend" comes into play Ben. Look, FWIW I actually think Rafa has not traded too badly in the transfer market. I think after him being in charge for six seasons, we actually have a good team. That wouldn't be possible if he'd bought rubbish exclusively, and he hasn't. But amonst the many reasons that we haven't won any trophies in a while or are struggling this season, we can hardly claim that "we haven't spent sufficient money" is chief amongst them.

It's an old arguement which has been done to death and won so many times by those who simply stick to the facts, but some posters just don't want to read. Thankfully not you here.

by **tubby** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:44 am

bigmick wrote:
Benny The Noon wrote:
bigmick wrote:
Penguins wrote:I just read one sentence on another forum and it tells a picture:

"We pay the 5th highest wages and have the 5th most valuable squad and are 5th in the league"

Supporters just doesn't care that Spurs pays more wages, has a
more expensive squad to assemble and Rafa has overachieved
with what he has been given.

But sorry we are big club no matter the finances cause we won the league 18 times....
Therefore we must win the league even if Sunderland will have a squad that is worth more just cause we are LFC.
That kind of reasoning is horse**** and outdated!

Why oh why do you persist with this nonsense? We have spent more money since Rafa has been manager than either Man Utd or Arsenal, and are only marginally behind Chelsea. Now you are saying that Sunderland have outspent us . Fecking hell.

# Net Spend 04 - 09 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season

1 Manchester City £292,750,000 £71,900,000 £220,850,000 £36,808,333
2 Chelsea £267,950,000 £123,300,000 £144,650,000 £24,108,333
3 Liverpool £247,730,000 £134,080,000 £113,650,000 £18,941,667
4 Tottenham £262,000,000 £163,550,000 £98,450,000 £16,408,333
5 Aston Villa £130,200,000 £37,255,000 £92,945,000 £15,490,833
6 Sunderland £154,080,000 £67,900,000 £86,180,000 £14,363,333
9 Stoke City £39,100,000 £10,095,000 £29,005,000 £4,834,167
7 Manchester United £188,650,000 £161,050,000 £27,600,000 £4,600,000
8 Everton £102,100,500 £78,200,000 £23,900,500 £3,983,417
18 West Ham £94,145,000 £71,325,000 £22,820,000 £3,803,333
15 Hull £22,415,000 £2,975,000 £19,440,000 £3,240,000
10 Fulham £59,925,000 £40,725,000 £19,200,000 £3,200,000
12 Birmingham City £60,800,000 £41,825,000 £18,975,000 £3,162,500
11 Bolton £42,400,000 £26,300,000 £16,100,000 £2,683,333
13 Wolves £22,075,000 £15,575,000 £6,500,000 £1,083,333
14 Burnley £10,505,000 £8,625,000 £1,880,000 £313,333
15 Blackburn Rovers £49,052,000 £57,290,000 -£8,238,000 -£1,373,000
16 Wigan £57,850,000 £66,250,000 -£8,400,000 -£1,400,000
17 Portsmouth £92,200,000 £107,240,000 -£15,040,000 -£2,506,667
18 Arsenal £112,050,000 £138,320,000 -£26,270,000 -£4,378,333

Not sure how accurate it is as think chelsea has spent a lot more than that - with some reports saying they are close to 500 mill spent .

Also the Mancs have been helped with a 80 million pound income from one player .

There is also the addition of us having to totally overhaul our squad with the others tinkering theres .

While we have spent a fair bit of money there was a report that we have bought double the amount of players chelsea have and nearly triple what the mancs .

Yes there are various different interpretations around, different figures and the rest, but pretty much every comparison you look at has us spending more than everyone except Chelsea (and event then only just), with it being very close between us and Man City. We've certainly outspent Manchester United by a fair bit now they've sold Ronaldo, while obviously Arsenal are something of a law unto themselves.

Not that there's any shame in all of that I hasten to add, Liverpool football club ought to sign big money players. It would just be helpful to the debate if people wouldn't constantly drag it up as an excuse as to why we don't compete better, "shopping in the bargain basement" and all that nonsense. It quite simply isn't true.

Of course we have outspent Utd. They had a title winning squad more or less in place when Rafa first arrived so didyou still expect them to spend big? They didn't have to. They were not trying to rebuild their entuire squad.

by **Benny The Noon** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:51 am

money is not a major reason , it would be nice to be able to blow millions on back up players and squad players like some teams have been able to . Rafa has been able to get the quality starting players for the big bucks , torres etc but we have then had to spend a little bit less for the back up players , zorba lucas or frees like voronin , thats where its a bit lacking funding wise . The problem we have is when those big money players are not available we are then lookin at the cheap back ups . It would of been nice to keep players like momo , bellamy , crouch etc for back up but they either didnt want to sit on bench or needed to be sold to buy better players .

The one thing i have to mention is Xabi - last summer when rafa was looking to sell him it was on the back of two below par seasons and he wanted an improvement so went for barry who did have a better season than xabi . If xabi had been as good as he was last season in previous seasons i can bet a lot of money that rafa wouldnt of even thought of selling him . Ps thats not aimed at you michael more at people who are blaming rafa for xabi going .

by **Dazzer** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:54 am

bavlondon wrote:
bigmick wrote:
Benny The Noon wrote:
bigmick wrote:
Penguins wrote:I just read one sentence on another forum and it tells a picture:

"We pay the 5th highest wages and have the 5th most valuable squad and are 5th in the league"

Supporters just doesn't care that Spurs pays more wages, has a
more expensive squad to assemble and Rafa has overachieved
with what he has been given.

But sorry we are big club no matter the finances cause we won the league 18 times....
Therefore we must win the league even if Sunderland will have a squad that is worth more just cause we are LFC.
That kind of reasoning is horse**** and outdated!

Why oh why do you persist with this nonsense? We have spent more money since Rafa has been manager than either Man Utd or Arsenal, and are only marginally behind Chelsea. Now you are saying that Sunderland have outspent us . Fecking hell.

# Net Spend 04 - 09 Purchased Sold Nett Per Season

1 Manchester City £292,750,000 £71,900,000 £220,850,000 £36,808,333
2 Chelsea £267,950,000 £123,300,000 £144,650,000 £24,108,333
3 Liverpool £247,730,000 £134,080,000 £113,650,000 £18,941,667
4 Tottenham £262,000,000 £163,550,000 £98,450,000 £16,408,333
5 Aston Villa £130,200,000 £37,255,000 £92,945,000 £15,490,833
6 Sunderland £154,080,000 £67,900,000 £86,180,000 £14,363,333
9 Stoke City £39,100,000 £10,095,000 £29,005,000 £4,834,167
7 Manchester United £188,650,000 £161,050,000 £27,600,000 £4,600,000
8 Everton £102,100,500 £78,200,000 £23,900,500 £3,983,417
18 West Ham £94,145,000 £71,325,000 £22,820,000 £3,803,333
15 Hull £22,415,000 £2,975,000 £19,440,000 £3,240,000
10 Fulham £59,925,000 £40,725,000 £19,200,000 £3,200,000
12 Birmingham City £60,800,000 £41,825,000 £18,975,000 £3,162,500
11 Bolton £42,400,000 £26,300,000 £16,100,000 £2,683,333
13 Wolves £22,075,000 £15,575,000 £6,500,000 £1,083,333
14 Burnley £10,505,000 £8,625,000 £1,880,000 £313,333
15 Blackburn Rovers £49,052,000 £57,290,000 -£8,238,000 -£1,373,000
16 Wigan £57,850,000 £66,250,000 -£8,400,000 -£1,400,000
17 Portsmouth £92,200,000 £107,240,000 -£15,040,000 -£2,506,667
18 Arsenal £112,050,000 £138,320,000 -£26,270,000 -£4,378,333

Not sure how accurate it is as think chelsea has spent a lot more than that - with some reports saying they are close to 500 mill spent .

Also the Mancs have been helped with a 80 million pound income from one player .

There is also the addition of us having to totally overhaul our squad with the others tinkering theres .

While we have spent a fair bit of money there was a report that we have bought double the amount of players chelsea have and nearly triple what the mancs .

Yes there are various different interpretations around, different figures and the rest, but pretty much every comparison you look at has us spending more than everyone except Chelsea (and event then only just), with it being very close between us and Man City. We've certainly outspent Manchester United by a fair bit now they've sold Ronaldo, while obviously Arsenal are something of a law unto themselves.

Not that there's any shame in all of that I hasten to add, Liverpool football club ought to sign big money players. It would just be helpful to the debate if people wouldn't constantly drag it up as an excuse as to why we don't compete better, "shopping in the bargain basement" and all that nonsense. It quite simply isn't true.

Of course we have outspent Utd. They had a title winning squad more or less in place when Rafa first arrived so didyou still expect them to spend big? They didn't have to. They were not trying to rebuild their entuire squad.

We never had to rebuild our whole squad it won the CL 2005 there ain't much better test of a team imo.We just needed to keep what we had and add a few players and things might have turned out alot different.

In fact be instresting to look over ins and outs of the summer after 2005 win to see who we let go and who we brought it.

by **Benny The Noon** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:57 am

dazzer that team also finished 5th in the league over 30 points behind the winners that year - also werent you suggesting earlier that the win was pretty lucky and not because we had a world class squad ? !

by **Dazzer** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:58 am

Is he talking to me agian ? I can't see what he is saying.

Ok off for another beer if he is still on I be drunk at this rate.

by **bigmick** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:01 am

bavlondon wrote:Of course we have outspent Utd. They had a title winning squad more or less in place when Rafa first arrived so didyou still expect them to spend big? They didn't have to. They were not trying to rebuild their entuire squad.

Not true I'm afraid Bav. They were actually fairly ordinary when Rafa arrived. The season before he arrived (I'm going from memory here because not more than a week ago another poster was similarly mistaken and we had a discussion about it), Arsenal won the league with the "invincible" team. Chelsea were second, Man Utd were third I think.

In Rafa's first season I think the Mancs were third again (Mourinho's Chelsea won it). The following season (Rafa's second) as Arsenal took apart their squad and began the process of replacing every single player, the Mancs progressed to second. The season after that (Rafa' third) the Mancs won their first league title for four seasons. They then of course won it the next two seasons as well.

Not true though I'm afraid all this "The mancs had a title winning team already in place". Simply not true.

Liverpool FC Forum

Sack Him - All Venting In Here Please

Who is online