Levy: How are we supposed to make top 4?

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

The net transfer spend from the last 5 years.

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/transfer-league-table-last-five-seasons.html

Premier league wage bill - (no newer figures were available)

On what planet should we be achieving 4th spot?

We have zero net spend pretty much over the last 5 years and spend considerably less than our rivals in wages.

I am fully aware that football is not played on a balance sheet but anyone who argues that spending money on your squad is not linked to success is a lunatic.

If you look at Pool who appear to be our main rivals for 4th - whereas we have spent nothing over the last 5 seasons they have spent close to 100M net. This manifests itself in many ways, the key right now being they keep their best player whereas we sell ours.

Don't really see how we can expect the football management structure to turn lead into gold and compete with these clubs that spend mega money NET, allowing them to keep their best players and build long term competitive squads while we are left in a constant state of flux as Levy uses us as a player exchange.

Im confused as to how the footballing targets set by the board match with the investment into the squad. Our targets are in line with Pool's while our investment less than that of Fulham and Palace.

 

[yawa]

Stoke...bloody hell. That amount of spending for gbh football.

 

[jambreck]

How many times does it have to be repeated that Liverpool absolutely would have sold Suarez had they received a reasonable offer for him, from a foreign club and early enough in the transfer window?

John Henry was quite clear about it.

So please.....pretty please, with sugar on top......stop trying to make out that Liverpool's transfer policy is in any way better or that their nerve is more robust.

Comparing Bale's and Suarez's situations is comparing apples to oranges.

 

[scat1620]

Absolutely. At 11pm tonight when we our squad is still short of a much-needed additional striker, central defender and left-back, reality will set in for everyone except the THFC board and we can gear up for another season of not qualifying for the Champions League. And when we don't our manager will get the tin-tack and on to the merry-go-round we will step again.

The events of this season have led me to a conclusion which has taken years for me to reach a definitive position on (after lots of previous optimism followed by fence-sitting) that we will not become anything more than a club that achieves the odd one-time-every-decade qualification for the Champions League under ENIC. We could definitely, undeniably do worse than them, but for me the current status quo is pretty much our ceiling with them in charge (with maybe the occasional 2010/11 season once every 10 years as a treat resulting more from luck than judgement).

Harry was right: until we get a spend-happy patron for an owner, this is as good as it gets for us. So close, yet so far away.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

How many times does it have to be repeated that Liverpool absolutely would have sold Suarez had they received a reasonable offer for him, from a foreign club and early enough in the transfer window?

John Henry was quite clear about it.

So please.....pretty please, with sugar on top......stop trying to make out that Liverpool's transfer policy is in any way better or that their nerve is more robust.

Comparing Bale's and Suarez's situations is comparing apples to oranges.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...sists-Luis-Suarez-will-not-leave-Anfield.html

So on the 8/8/13 Henry rules out selling Suarez categorically to any club for any fee citing 'footballing reasons.'

1/9/13 Spurs sell Bale to Real Madrid.

Please stop talking nonsense.

Anyway. Please dont pick one sentence and try and derail the thread. That is a small aspect of the wider picture outlined in the OP.

 

[Mr Pink]

For a start Liverpool could well lose Suarez this summer even if they finish fourth. If they don't, which is still very possible, they'll most certainly lose him. We've also got a new a state of the art stadium to plan for and therefore a huge financial commitment to allow for.

Our investment isn't less than Fulham's and Palace, you can't look at in selective terms like that. We spend more in wages, far bigger gross fees for transfers. The fact that we can buy some players and sell them for much bigger fees allows us to bridge the gap, to an extent, with the Clubs with larger financial muscle, we have reinvested in the squad. The fact some players have chosen us over Liverpool recently shows how far we've come.

The fact of the matter is we spent 100 million in the summer, it doesn't matter that we got 80 million for Bale - we got 100 million's worth of players in. Our target should be the top four, it doesn't mean we have a right to be there.

 

[jambreck]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...sists-Luis-Suarez-will-not-leave-Anfield.html

So on the 8/8/13 Henry rules out selling Suarez categorically to any club for any fee citing 'footballing reasons.'

1/9/13 Spurs sell Bale to Real Madrid.

Please stop talking nonsense.

Anyway. Please dont pick one sentence and try and derail the thread. That is a small aspect of the wider picture outlined in the OP.

The whole point of that statement from Henry was that Liverpool would not sell Suarez to a PL rival and would not sell so late in the window without being able to replace him. That was all. Nothing about Suarez not being for sale at all.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

For a start Liverpool could well lose Suarez this summer even if they finish fourth. If they don't, which is still very possible, they'll most certainly lose him. We've also got a new a state of the art stadium to plan for and therefore a huge financial commitment to allow for.

Our investment isn't less than Fulham's and Palace, you can't look at in selective terms like that. We spend more in wages, far bigger gross fees for transfers. The fact that we can buy some players and sell them for much bigger fees allows us to bridge the gap, to an extent, with the Clubs with larger financial muscle, we have reinvested in the squad. The fact some players have chosen us over Liverpool recently shows how far we've come.

The fact of the matter is we spent 100 million in the summer, it doesn't matter that we got 80 million for Bale - we got 100 million's worth of players in. Our target should be the top four, it doesn't mean we have a right to be there.

Wtf?

So we sell our whole squad for 300m, spend 100m on 20 poverty players so we can field a team and it doesn't matter that we have 'spent' -200m net because we've spent 100m and thus should still target top 4???!!!!

Of course it bloody matters what we and others spent net! That's the only thing that matters!

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

The whole point of that statement from Henry was that Liverpool would not sell Suarez to a PL rival and would not sell so late in the window without being able to replace him. That was all. Nothing about Suarez not being for sale at all.

Wtf

He says explicitly they won't sell to any club as they cannot replace him on the 8/8/13. We sold bale on 1/9/13. How can pool not replace Suarez in 3 weeks but we can replace bale in that time?

Henry treats pool as a football club

Levy treats spurs as a player exchange.

 

[Mr Pink]

Wtf?

So we sell our whole squad for 300m, spend 100m on 20 poverty players so we can field a team and it doesn't matter that we have 'spent' -200m net because we've spent 100m and thus should still target top 4???!!!!

Of course it bloody matters what we and others spent net! That's the only thing that matters!

Okey dokey.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

Okey dokey.

Glad you've now understood

 

[guiltyparty]

Erm is it just me or is that net spend chart years old?

 

[absolute bobbins]

Perhaps through the guidance of a manager with a proven track record of developing and improving players and proven career success.

 

[scat1620]

Wtf?

So we sell our whole squad for 300m, spend 100m on 20 poverty players so we can field a team and it doesn't matter that we have 'spent' -200m net because we've spent 100m and thus should still target top 4???!!!!

Of course it bloody matters what we and others spent net! That's the only thing that matters!

See, I actually disagree with what you're saying here taken purely at face value. The fee we got for Bale was in excess of his 'worth' in terms of contribution to the team, as massive as that undeniably was last year - it just happened that in his case we got an offer of silly, life-changing money to sell him. So a small or £0 net spend this particular summer did not absolutely have to be a bad thing, no questions asked (that's not to say that it definitely wasn't, either) - if you spend the proceeds of that disproportionate sale wisely, then you can justify a small or £0 net spend in this case.

My problem with the Spurs board is that I don't think they spend their money particularly wisely, at least in terms of trying to put a team on the pitch that will be genuinely competitive for a Champions League spot (albeit the balance sheet looks lovely). IMO this is due to poor scouting, very poor choices in when and who we decide to spend big on (and we do spend big from time to time), and a reactive selection of first-team management/coaches (dating all the way back to the start of ENIC's control of the club). For me, ultimately this failure to make the most of our [well financially managed] resources on the pitch where it matters lies at the door of the board, and while I appreciate that other owners might indeed do worse than ENIC currently are, that is why I think that we have now reached the ceiling of exactly how successful we can be under the current ownership.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

Erm is it just me or is that net spend chart years old?

What possibly led you to that conclusion? It says for the 13/14 season and has the current PL teams quoted.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

Perhaps through the guidance of a manager with a proven track record of developing and improving players and proven career success.

Why would this manager come to us though?

Proven managers go to the big clubs who buy big players and pay big wages. Not us.

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

See, I actually disagree with what you're saying here taken purely at face value. The fee we got for Bale was in excess of his 'worth' in terms of contribution to the team, as massive as that undeniably was last year - it just happened that in his case we got an offer of silly, life-changing money to sell him. So a small or £0 net spend this particular summer did not absolutely have to be a bad thing, no questions asked (that's not to say that it definitely wasn't, either) - if you spend the proceeds of that disproportionate sale wisely, then you can justify a small or £0 net spend in this case.

My problem with the Spurs board is that I don't think they spend their money particularly wisely, at least in terms of trying to put a team on the pitch that will be genuinely competitive for a Champions League spot (albeit the balance sheet looks lovely). IMO this is due to poor scouting, very poor choices in when and who we decide to spend big on (and we do spend big from time to time), and a reactive selection of first-team management/coaches (dating all the way back to the start of ENIC's control of the club). For me, ultimately this failure to make the most of our [well financially managed] resources on the pitch where it matters lies at the door of the board, and while I appreciate that other owners might indeed do worse than ENIC currently are, that is why I think that we have now reached the ceiling of exactly how successful we can be under the current ownership.

I think you are underestimating the impact of Bale and just how good he is. He won us games on his own last season. For this season at least I do not think we have moved forward in footballing terms. If in the future we do, Levy will just sell Lamela or whoever is playing so well the big clubs come after him and we start over.

 

[guiltyparty]

Why would this manager come to us though?

Proven managers go to the big clubs who buy big players and pay big wages. Not us.

It says the last five years starting in 2003. Which would make the chart from 2008. Doesn't mention current season at all unless I'm being ridiculously blind. And the wage bill one is two years old, pre our big signing spree

 

[Actonspur_FromCOYS]

It says the last five years starting in 2003. Which would make the chart from 2008. Doesn't mention current season at all unless I'm being ridiculously blind. And the wage bill one is two years old, pre our big signing spree

Dont see how that can be the case at all. The Abu Dhabi group only took over in 2008. No way they spent 500M net in the 5 seasons before that. I cant see any mention of the years you mention.

The dates are 100% wrong - http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/manchester-city-transfers.html

 

[guiltyparty]

Dont see how that can be the case at all. The Abu Dhabi group only took over in 2008. No way they spent 500M net in the 5 seasons before that. I cant see any mention of the years you mention.

"In the Nett column the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 2003. This Nett figure is the "new investment" made available each season to the manager to buy players."

I'm not saying the order isn't right, it's just that by the guy's own words it seems old. Unless it's a typo. He does spell 'net' wrong all the way through, so it could be