The Ever Contentious: Net Spend Per Trophy

Ah yes, one of the extremely rare times when Liverpool finish top of a table, by finishing bottom Vs some other big clubs

comment by TENƎꓕ (U17162)
posted 20 minutes ago
Ah yes, one of the extremely rare times when Liverpool finish top of a table, by finishing bottom Vs some other big clubs
----------------------------------------------------------------------

We’re top of the only one that counts.

The most successful team in English football history.

comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 3 hours, 17 minutes ago
Neither Chelsea and Man City should not be on the list. Both finanvially doped, and neither would have won a bean without their sugar daddies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says the guy supporting a club where their chairman called Lord Sugar saved them from going under.

I like the net spend comparison generally, though of course it doesn’t take everything into account.

The problem with it in this article though is the length of time.

Liverpool’s transfer record over the past decade is fantastic. At a time when big money has been thrown around, they’ve done very well indeed.

Conversely, their transfer record in the 90’s was laughable.

Thing is, inflation in football has been so high that we this helps to paint Liverpool in a better light than United when actually, United have had a period of time - possibly even longer - where their transfer dealings were just as good, if not better.

The other issue is of course… ‘trophies’.

Let’s be honest, nowadays it’s all about the CL and the league. Back in the 90’s, I’d say the FA Cup and UEFA cup held more weight.

It’s the one criticism of Liverpool at present but, it’s hardly Klopp’s fault that he’s timed this spell at Liverpool when there’s a financial juggernaut like City with one of the best coaches in the game ever.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
I like the net spend comparison generally, though of course it doesn’t take everything into account.

The problem with it in this article though is the length of time.

Liverpool’s transfer record over the past decade is fantastic. At a time when big money has been thrown around, they’ve done very well indeed.

Conversely, their transfer record in the 90’s was laughable.

Thing is, inflation in football has been so high that we this helps to paint Liverpool in a better light than United when actually, United have had a period of time - possibly even longer - where their transfer dealings were just as good, if not better.

The other issue is of course… ‘trophies’.

Let’s be honest, nowadays it’s all about the CL and the league. Back in the 90’s, I’d say the FA Cup and UEFA cup held more weight.

It’s the one criticism of Liverpool at present but, it’s hardly Klopp’s fault that he’s timed this spell at Liverpool when there’s a financial juggernaut like City with one of the best coaches in the game ever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

A reasonable post.

I disagree with the timeframe being a problem. It’s still measured against the trophies won in that same timeframe.

To use 10 years would be cherrypicking.

The inflation point is somewhat negated by the fact that your player sales are also inflated. So net is a great equaliser. All the above teams have operated with the same parameters over the same period.

As for trophies, yes, Liverpool ought to be winning more league titles. I do think we’re a well run club and our transfer policy is excellent. I see the youth players coming though and things are encouraging.

Metro, I don’t think that’s right.

Firstly, the number of trophies up for grabs has pretty much stayed as a constant.

A club with a bad transfer policy in the 90’s might have splashed the cash, with a relatively high net spend and wasted £50 million.

A club with a bad transfer policy in the previous decade with the same approach might have wasted five times that amount.

Same time period, same bad transfers, but the value of waste would be far higher.

Net spend per Champions league

Man City £ ERROR

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 hours, 40 minutes ago
Metro, I don’t think that’s right.

Firstly, the number of trophies up for grabs has pretty much stayed as a constant.

A club with a bad transfer policy in the 90’s might have splashed the cash, with a relatively high net spend and wasted £50 million.

A club with a bad transfer policy in the previous decade with the same approach might have wasted five times that amount.

Same time period, same bad transfers, but the value of waste would be far higher.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair point

👍🏼

Make that 17 for Liverpool