Chelsea have assembled the most expensive football squad in history. That's how they won back to back titles. If they had done this in 1998 then Wenger would not have won the Double. Liverpool have outperformed Arsenal every season since Rafa has arrived. Wenger has spent less but also achieved less in that time. Arsenal fans should perhaps be asking how come Arsenal spend the same in wages as Man U but have less big stars and less trophies? Why are their first-team players wanting to leave for more money?
Well, there is still a good 33 days left in this window. That said, it boils down to the decision on Tevez at the apparent £32mn, as otherwise we are only in for a striker. Last season I reckon we outspent them in gross with Hargreaves (£17mn), Nani & Anderson (app. £15mn ea) & Tevez (not sure of the loan fee, quite sure it was low - but the full price could jack this summer's total up a good bit). There was also Manucho (£500k, iirc) and West Brom Tom (McShane, Steele & £1mn... again iirc). This was however offset by the sales of Smith (£6mn), Judas (£7mn), Rossi (£6mn), Richardson (£5mn), Bardsley (£2mn) & Shawcross (£1mn). So for all the hubub over how much money we spent last season, the total in net was £21.5mn, plus whatever Tevez's loan fee was. In 06/07, we only bought Carrick (£18mn). In the meantime, we sold Ruud (£10mn), Bellion & Miller (iirc £500k, ea), Tim Howard (£2mn) and David Jones (£1mn). Then due to the whole Obi Mikel transfer saga mess, I am quite sure we were compensated with a further £12mn. So we actually made a net profit there of £8mn. Jump back of 05/06, and we bought Van der Sar (£2mn), Park (£4mn), Foster (£1mn), Vidic (£7mn) & Evra (£4mn) - a total of £18mn gross. The players we sold were Phil Neville (£2mn, iirc) and Kleberson (£2.5mn), bringing the total to £13.5mn net. Then in Rafa's first summer of 04/05, we bought Rooney (£27mn), Pique & Rossi (£1mn combined at the most) and sold Nicky Butt (£2.5mn), Forlan (£2mn) and Eric Djemba-Djemba (£1.5mn) - the total gross here was £28mn, and in net it was £22mn. So in total, Ferguson's net spendings since Benitez took over at Liverpool have been £52mn. I am not claiming to have these perfectly laid out to the penny, but doubt I am out by more than £2-3mn in either direction. --- Now after looking around a bit - and any Liverpool fans who find the figures wrong, please point them out - last season Liverpool bought Torres (£26mn), Benayoun (£4mn), Babel (£11.5mn), Lucas (£6mn), Itandje (£1.4mn) and Leto (£1.8mn), as well as Skrtel (6.5mn) and Mascherano (17mn). That is a total of £68.5mn gross, which surely eclipses Man United's 'stupid money' spendings of £53.5mn, plus the Tevez loan (which surely came nowhere remotely near £15mn). Meanwhile, the sales were Luis Garcia (£4mn), Mark Gonzalez (£4mn), Craig Bellamy (£7.5mn), Cisse (6mn), Paletta (£1.2mn), Sinama-Pongolle (2.7mn) & Sissoko (£8.25mn), which comes in at £33.5mn. This would mean that Liverpool's net spendings last season were £35mn last season, actually eclipsing Manchester United's by £10mn. Again, there may be an error or two here - my method was cross-referencing Google News pages from last summer, and taking a glimpse at Wikipedia and Transfermarkt.de along the way. It's not perfect, but it was the best (time efficient) method I could come up with. For the 2006/07 transfers, Liverpool bought Bellamy (£6mn), Paletta (£2mn), Pennant (£6.7mn), Kuyt (£10mn) & Arbeloa (£2.5mn) - a total gross of £27mn. Players then sold were Morientes (£3mn), Cheyrou (??? we'll say £2mn), Traore (£2mn), Mellor (£500k), Kromkamp (£1.75mn), Kirkland (£3.5mn), Warnock (£1.5mn), bringing in roughly £14.5mn. That would mean that the total net was around £12.5mn. In 2005/06, transfers in were Reina (£6mn), Sissoko (£5.5mn), Crouch (£7mn), Gonzalez (£1.5mn) and Agger (£6mn) - bringing gross spendings to £26mn. Players sold were Baros (£6.5mn), Nunez (£2mn), Alou Diarra (£2mn) and Diouf (£3.5mn). This would mean the net spendings were £12mn. Finally then, in 2004/05 the purchases were Josemi (£2mn), Nunez (£500k, iirc), Alonso (£10.5mn), Luis Garcia (£6mn), Carson (£1mn) and Morientes (£6.5mn) - the total gross here was £26.5mn. Players then sold were Michael Owen (£8.5mn) and Danny Murphy (£2.5mn) - making the total gross £14.5mn. Depending on the stance one wants to take about Cisse, you can throw in £14.5mn, but I'll classify him as a Houllier signing rather than arriving on Benitez's watch in the interest of fairness. So, in conclusion (if anybody is still reading )... 2007/08: Man United gross: £48.5mn Man United net: £21.5mn Liverpool gross: £68.5mn Liverpool net: £35mn 2006/07 Man United gross: £18mn Man United net: -£8mn Liverpool gross: £27mn Liverpool net: £12.5mn 2005/06 Man United gross: £18mn Man United net: £13.5mn Liverpool gross: £26mn Liverpool net: £12mn 2004/05 Man United gross: £28mn Man United net: £22mn Liverpool gross: 26.5 Liverpool net: £14.5mn Totals: Man United gross: £112.5mn Man United net: £49mn Liverpool gross: £148mn Liverpool net: £74mn --- Now granted that there is a reasonable margin for error when dealing with these types of things, due to differing reports and what have you - although for the record, I did almost exclusively use LFChistory.net for Liverpool's transfers from 04/05-06/07. The purchases and sales of players under £500k, as well as free signings/released players were also not accounted for because any differences they would make would be miniscule, so it slightly increases the margin of error further. However, the fact that Liverpool's transfers came in at £35.5mn more than Man United's gross, and £25mn more in net (not including the Cisse transfer, of course) has to stretch the differences far beyond the margin of error, and because of that it has to be acknowledged that for all the talk of Bentiez having no money, he has outspent Ferguson on both counts over the past four seasons. Once again I would like to point out that I did not include any dealings from either team for this summer so far, as it is pointless and distorting to include a transfer period that has no reached a conclusion yet. However, I will bring it to mention that both Liverpool's gross and net spendings do outweight United's so far this summer - it will be interesting to see if the former's search for wingers and possibly a CM, or the latter's search for a CF as well as the possible Tevez transfer will be the more costly come September. So, did anybody actually make it down this far? Anyway, I'm off to stick my head in a freezer, or a vat, or something...
Since Rafa has been at Liverpool, Wenger has been rebuilding his team to challenge in the future. Few Arsenal fans were complaining because they knew that some rebuilding had to take place. Bergkamp, Pires, Sol Campbell, Vieira were all getting on and Ljungberg was declining from his peak in the 2002 double season. But as I said before Liverpool crave the league again and rightly reckon that finishing fourth is too low for a club of its tradition. There is a possibility that Keane might not work out, or the new signings might not gel. If Liverpool finish 3rd or 4th in May again, then the Liverpool board might lose patience with him.
I will wait for any corrections if needed but im sure that we havent paid the full amount for Torres yet (which was actually more like 20.6 million rather than 26 million). I remember hearing somewhere that we are paying Atletico over a few years as we didnt have the money. Im almost 100% sure that we sold Cisse for 8 million pounds. Dont forget the 2.5 million that we received from Scott Carsons loan to Aston Villa. As well as a probably a one or two million from the Sinama-Pongolle loan to Le Mans. Antonio Barragan was also sold for just under 1 million pounds.
What, and Rafa hasnt? If Rafa isnt helping Liverpool be sustainable for the future then what are these signings for? Babel, Lucas, Leto, N'Gog, Plessis, Insua, Anderson, Hobbs, Mendy, Nemeth, Simon, Gulacsi, Pacheco, Bruna, San Jose, Bouzanis, Mihaylov, Martin, Amoo, Pourie, Weijl, Duran, El Zhar, Antwi, Dalla Valle, Saric, Poloskei, Cooper, Kasami and Buchtmann Also...the spine of our team (excluding Carragher and Gerrard) are all 25 years and younger: Reina (25), Skrtel (23), Agger (23), Mascherano (24), Lucas (21), Babel (21) and Torres (24). You can also include Arbeloa (25), Leto (21) and Degen (25) who are also 25 or younger and will play some part in the team. With Dossena and Xabi Alonso both 26 years old and Gerrard and Keane only 28 years old you see that we still have many years left with this squad. Also look to include players like N'Gog (19), Nemeth (19), Insua (19), Pacheco (17), Plessis (20), Hobbs (19) and Anderson (20) in the next few years.
An interesting post. I have not been able to verify your figures as this will take some time which I do not have currently. At a cursory glance You seem to have incorrectly listed Torres as £26 million when lfchistory.net (and rafa himself) listed his purchase as £20.2 million. Are you sure you used this resource for your Lfc figures? As for Tevez I have heard reports that his 2 year short term deal was anything from £2million total to £5 million per year. Also has not the Mikel case irregularities meant that Man U will forfeit their £12 million fee for him? If this is the case and a minimum of £2 million for Tevez' 2 yr deal means a swing of at least £14 million added to Man U net spend. Plus the correct fee for Torres would mean a reduction of almost £6 million from Liverpool's net spend. This leads to a closing of the gap by at least £20 million just from these 3 transfers. You state that the spending gap was approx £25 million so with the amended figures then that gap was a £5 million difference. Liverpool have spent more in net transfer fees under Rafa's time than Fergie. The difference (not including the current partially complete window) is small over that duration and is only made significant by the Mikel fee which is certainly in dispute. It is also clear that Rafa needed to spend 2004/2005 learning about his own squad and English football in general. Fergie had no such adjustment period to make in 2004. Consider also that Man U spent at least £15 million more on wages annually. This equates to a difference of ~£60 million in wages spent between the 2 clubs in 4 years. This is based on an estimate from the figures for 2006/2007. Chelsea are reported to have £150 million wage bill (after Deco and Essien contracts) annually. This could be as much as £60 million more per year than the next highest Man U and Arsenal at ~£90 million and a collossal £75 million more per year than Liverpool at ~£75 million! A good post above by BillyIreland, and one that deserves more than a cursory glance. I will look more closely at your figures to see if I agree with them apart from the points I have already made. Could you let me know your sources for the transfer fees for Man U players? I am interested in facts and figures regarding football and it is always a frustration that there are so many myths and falsehoods propogated by fans who claim these as facts. LFCHistory is a great resource for info about LFC (and kudos to the creators). It is a shame that other clubs do not have similar resources as it would simplify comparisons. Transfermarkt.de is meant to do so but it is laughably inaccurate and so is completely worthless for transfer valuations.
When Rafa came in 2004, Wenger led the unbeaten season. And even then, most of Arsenal's top players were getting on. in 2004, Houllier finished 4th in the Premier League and won nothing that season. So it's not exact situations.
Ok, I will claim igorance and Carson's loan, and I did miss Barragan (who LFChistory.net list at £675k, so it was possibly in the region of €1mn?). However, with relation to the Torres part, there are two reasons why I listed him at £25mn. First of all, as Garcia was supposedly part of the deal at a £4mn valuation, I added him into the transfers for the same season. Secondly, I did the same for all of Man United's "rising to" fees... I am quite sure for instance, that Nani & Anderson were not straight-up £15mn payments, but rather structured and depending on appearances, achievements, etc. Rooney & Carrick were laso the same, although by now I would imagine that at least the latter and probably the former have reached the requirements.
No-one knows whether the LFC board will lose patience with Rafa. It is true that LFC fans crave the league. However it is also true that certain Arsenal players are running out of patience and are worried that they are becoming uncompetitive. How long will Cesc stay if players keep leaving and Arsenal fail to win trophies? Scolari is under immense pressure to deliver the CL or the Prem this season. Roman does not play around and having assembled the most expensive squad in the history of the sport and also outspending Man U in wages in 2006/2007 by ~£40 million then a trophyless season again would not be acceptable. The pressure is more on Scolari than Rafa imo. The only one who can relax slightly is Fergie who has won the CL and Prem last year and so can rest easy if he so chose. However he is aware that he is close to equalling LFC's league championships record and so will be striving to do so. Bear in mind Fergie has 3 years left max before he retires, so is under a limited time frame. He is also not the complacent type. Yes Rafa has pressure but so do the other top managers. In fact all managers have certain levels of expectation to achieve and live and die by results. Rafa is no different from anyone in that regard.
You're right about Barragan's transfer was around 675k and certainly not over 700k. Torres' individual transfer was 20.2 million pounds or about 22/23 million euros. The Luis Garcia transfer was completely seperate from Torres' transfer, despite the same two clubs being involved in both transfers. I didnt know that about Carrick and Rooney etc...disregard the payment structure.
If Liverpool go another season or two without winning the league, why shouldn't the Liverpool board lose patience with Rafa, especially if United equal or surpass Liverpool's league record? I don't see how anyone can suggest there isn't a time when the board would think Rafa cannot deliver and let him go. And I see your points about Arsenal, Chelsea and United. But I don't think they are exact. Scolari obviously needs time to settle in and implement his style onto the team. If Arsenal finish only 3rd or 4th, then it's unlikely that Wenger would get the sack on that basis. If somehow Arsenal go three or four seasons by just scraping in the top four then I'd imagine calls from Gooners for his resignation would increase. Besides, if Arsenal only just sneak into the top four, but win the Champions League, I doubt many Arsenal fans would mind since the Champions League is a kind of holy grail for them. As Arsenal have had success domestically under Wenger, the next logical step is to triumph in the Champions League. And Fergie might be under pressure too, but I doubt Glazer would possess the balls or even audacity to sack him. Like Wenger at Arsenal, Fergie is a legend at United, even if somehow he nevers get to equal and overtake Liverpool's league record.
This thread is about Rafa not Wenger. Go to Arsenal board and you will see that many Gunners who are not happy with Wenger. My CL comment was to point out that since Rafa won with GH's player, then surely team was not as poor as the post that I was replying suggested. Please read carefully. "It is Arsenal who have actually regressed in the time since Rafa arrived in England. Arsenal have gone from a team who were undefeated and League Champions to a team that has not won anything in 3 years. They have also shown a trend of unrest amongst their first team players with many displaying dissatisfaction at Arsenal and wanting to move elsewhere." And how does this defend Rafa? I thought this thread was to discuss Rafa. Any way your statements don't do much.. first of all teams win titles and them lose them and then rebuild. So if Man U fail to win both CL and PL, that would be considered a regress? Once again: Are Liverpool a big team or not? If not then your point is Valid. Rafa has kept the team in PL at roughly same level and perhaps improved them a little and its good enough. Had Wenger resigned after 2004 seaosn and the new manager had gone for 3 years w/out silverware you can bet he would have been gone by now or certainly on hot seat. So once agian: Proven Managers e.g., Fergei and Wenger have earned the right to be trusted to end droughts. But when big club brings a with a new mananger they are expected to produce or compete in 4 years time. Arsenal took a dive after 2004, for what ever reason but we were back on title chase last year. But more importanlty, Wenger and Fergie have won multiple titles so there is not as much pressure (at least not yet). "They have also shown a trend of unrest amongst their first team players with many displaying dissatisfaction at Arsenal and wanting to move elsewhere." What is this? Sorry but specualtion, rumnours, etc. can't be used in a debate. Noone knows exactly what takes place in the clubhouse, or how much of it realy matters.
I guess now that the answer is: we'll see. Keane has signed and apparently Barry has finalised the details on a £17.5m deal with Finnan going the other way. Personally I think they need a wide player otherwise they're going to end up going down the middle all the time like they did last year and that's predictable. Still, Rafa's spending, I think, has been poor. Alot has been spent and only two cups to show for it, albeit one being the CL. Still, we'll see. At least by buying Keane and Barry they're making a decent fist of it. That's two top, top players in in one summer. That has to be a record.........
Hes just spent >20.3m for Keane to play along side Torres, a striker who plays best on his own. madness
Liverpool were not favourites against Juve, Chelsea or Milan en route to winning the CL in 2005. They surpassed expectations. The inherited side finished 4th in the Prem in 2003/4 and then lost Michael Owen. Rafa added a few players notably Luis Garcia and Alonso and played Carra as a CB. It was clear that Rafa initally struggled in the Prem that season especially away from home. Rafa has mentioned being shocked at the leniency of the officals and the physical aspect of the game. Liverpool finished 5th that season. Liverpool have a better squad now and better youth prospects in the pipeline. They also are considered a major force in the CL and are generally expected to make the knockout stages of the CL this coming season. This was not the case when Houllier was in charge. It was suggested that Liverpool under Rafa had not improved. I merely showed that it was Arsenal who have regressed and not Liverpool. As for Man U if they go the next 3 seasons without winning anything then they will have regressed from the peak of last year. How is such an assertion contentious? Liverpool under Rafa have won the CL and the FA Cup. They have also been runners-up in the CL and semi-finalists last year. They also were runners-up in the League Cup. They have also won the UEFA Super Cup and were Finalists of the World Club Championship. They have beaten Barca, Chelsea (twice), Juve, Milan, Inter and Arsenal in the CL under Rafa. They have beaten Chelsea and Man U in the FA Cup. These are significant accomplishments and something that surpasses those of Arsenal since Rafa arrived. Rafa has brought in youngsters who have won 2 FA Youth Cups, the Dallas Cup and the Reserves League last season. It is all these added together that have earned Rafa the time he has so far. Perhaps if Arsenal ever win the CL then their fans can sneer at those managers who have done so but they have not earnt that right. Not yet. Wenger has won patience because of his previous accomplishments, and so has Rafa. How is this speculation? Do you dispute that first team players Henry, Cole, Hleb, Flamini have left because they were disatisfied with life at Arsenal? Do you dispute that Adebayor has expressed a desire to move on to Barca or Milan last month? Do you dispute that Van Persie has complained about the dangers of the team breaking up? Do you dispute that Fabregas is likely to leave if Arsenal's trophy drought continues? The situation at Arsenal is different to that of Liverpool, Man U or Chelsea. First team players do not want to leave the latter 3 (apart from C Ronaldo). Crouch and Carson left Liverpool because they were not playing enough, not because they thought that other clubs were better prospects. Arsenal are in danger of becoming a finishing school for Barcelona.
I did for transfers prior to last summer, since the amount of players in and out on such a constant basis basically just made it a bit too much to deal with. I do know LFChistory lists him as £20.2mn independent of the Garcia transfer, but outside of that site I was struggling to find other sources that didn't list Torres as being a) £26mn, or b) £20mn + Garcia. In other words, the LFCHistory site was very much in the majority on their estimate/figure/whatever. Firstly, Tevez: type 'Tevez transfer' or something similar into Google News and click to go back to 2007, and you will find out it was one of those ones. E.g. there was so many varying, vague and speculative numbers thrown about from such a wide variety of sources that it is pointless to try and determine any sort of cross-referenced 'middle ground' loan-fee, unless a 100% official source can be determined. Finding anything on Mascherano's loan fee was quite similar, which is why both of them I just left blank and referred to as '+ Tevez/Masch loan fee'. With regards to Mikel, as best I understand it the forfeiture was on principal and in regards to proceedings of future conduct. I may be wrong on this as it is from a while back, but if it is indeed the case then the fee was not effected. That is also true, but there are two points of note here, the first being that the argument is covering the transfers spent and nto mitigating circumstances. The second point to make is that while he did break transfer records with certain players in his earlier years, the first year that Ferguson spent the most money in the league (at least since the inception of the Premiership, it's a pain in the knackers finding much comparative information from before then) was in the summer of 1998 - funny neough it was Everton who topped the spendings charts for the early/mid 1990's more than any team, if that is any reprieve . Now granted that by 1992 Ferguson had been at Manchester United for six years, which is two more than Benitez currently, but what I am getting at here is the principal of their handling transfer dealings. While Benitez also invests a lot in youth, their handling of first-team transfers are in quite stark contrast. Benitez has been almost wheeler-dealing for the last few years, buying players and selling them off soon after - seeing what fits and trying to make a small profit off what does not. Ferguson on the other hand has always been very specific in the type of player he looks to get to a club, and (until the last 2-3 years) has always played youth products a lot, and brought them up and into the first team, effectively minimising his volume of purchases in the meantime. This then enables Ferguson that when he buys, he buys big... and that of course is what grabs the media attention. My point here basically is that a £25mn purchase will gain a lot mroe attention and be remembered for a lot longer than five or even six £5mn purchases, which can skew the public's perception. That is true, however when we get into the matter of streaming outflow of cash, you also have to pay attention to the streaming input of capital as well. Which is to say that, while Manchester United pay more in wages per season that Liverpool, they also make more in merchandise/ticket sales/prize money, which offsets the balance. It is for this exact reason why so many people took/take issue with Chelsea's spending (and sugar-daddy clubs in general) as the cashflow usually does not balance itself out. So what I am getting at is that basically, we spend more on wages though a season, but make more on other revenues through the season. To be honest, it was more a method of cross-referencing reliable sources via Google News again, as well as tracking my memory (I am sure you had a few of those moments reading through - such as "oh yeah, I still can't believe we got £2mn for Djimi Traore. I completely forgot that!")
I believe that Tevez' short term deal cost £2 million as this was the amount MSI have to pay WHU as compensation for Tevez' registration. However as a court case is ongoing between MSI and WHU the truth has not been publicised but should be revealed in court. The situation is complicated. I expect the cost of Tevez' short term deal will become explicitly known when/if Man U exercise their option to buy Tevez on a new longer term deal. Such a deal can be conducted outside the transfer window and the option runs through to next summer. The Mikel case is also complicated by a court case. This may result in Man U paying back/not receiving £12 million from Chelsea for Mikel. I am not sure if this issue has been resolved as yet, but it seems likely as the Lyn director was found guilty. Perhaps someone more familiar with the case can comment. Agreed.
Maybe it would be a consequence of the opposition catching up, rather than the side regressing? Just a thought. After all, everyone, including Arsenal no less, is buying players.......
Well if Man U achieve the same pts total but finish lower then yes that would be opposition catching up rather than regression.
Still, sides get better. 3 years ago taking 6 points off Portsmouth would have been something most major sides would have expected. Now a days Pompey are a top notch side. Along with City and Villa they have all acquired new, rich owners who plow money into the sides. Indeed, Portsmouth and City are really splashing the cash as are Tottenham. Even Sunderland, who have only been an EPL side for 12 monthsor so have £25m+ to spend. While the top 4 are apparently getting further and further away frm everyone else in general, some sides such as those mentioned are getting stronger and the possibility if them taking points off the top sides is getting more and more probable with every season. Along with the league format in which sides are expected to drop some points here and there anyway, I don't think over all points totals are that much of an accurate eway of rating sides any more. It is a decent way of looking at it, but it's important not to under-estimate the development that sides like Portsmouth have gone through in recent years. West Ham and City did the double over us last term. I think it's all relative. We may progress, but not as much as other have, in which case we won't have regressed as such, only in relation to thosesides who are improving at a dramatic rate.
he has done well outside of the league but with the funds he has spent its quite a poor finish 4th considering the time and funds he has had at his disposal. I also dont understand why ppl say he's a master tactician the man has made some of the most stupid choices during games i have ever seen unless its a case of waving your hands around like a tit that makes you a master tactician he gets first prize