Not a huge believer in net spend but either way that's not really anything to do with Klopp.
He spent £400 million to get the players he wanted. What the club got for the players he didn't want was down to the board.
Taking nothing away from Klopp though, terrific manager at the right club. I was envious but it's a great match.
Our recruitment would be good regardless of Klopp. The choice of areas to improve and the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him. He doesn't have the "you can get whatever you want" that pep, ole and lampard currently enjoy. But he has been backed by the owners- though he has earned their continued trust in that regard. Our spending ramped up when he got us CL football and then rocketed when he showed signs of challenging. He didn't JUST buy success but buying is necessary to progress in football.
You're right 52. But I think getting the right players to win at so little cost to the club overall, shows a great synergy between manager and board. I hope it means that there is the willingness to back him should he set his sights on any player to continue winning things.
I think this is one of the misnomers of football.
It isn’t managers job to ascribe financial value to players, or to account for how much their club spends on signing new players.
Managers will identify areas of the team/squad that need improving, or even target specific players that they feel will improve the team. They will also have input into which players are surplus to their requirements. But they won’t set fees, for either incoming or outgoing players. Nor will they negotiate contracts.
Plus, clubs will make many signings and sell/release players who aren’t part of the first team squad (signings that are made without any input from the manager).
So to say the a manager spent x-amount by looking at gross and net spend that their club has made during their tenure isn’t really fair.
KingKenny makes a very good point in this respect. His point hints at a stronger approach that Liverpool have beyond the manager when it comes to player signings and sales.
Liverpool’s transfer dealings really are to be applauded in this respect. Not only the players they do target and sign (the majority of which have been a great success over the past few seasons), but also on how shrewd the club is in getting a lot of money for players that they sell.
To say Klopp bought those players is very naive. I seem to remember Fabinho being one he didn’t want. So glad he’s managed to change the gaffer’s mind
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Our recruitment would be good regardless of Klopp. The choice of areas to improve and the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him. He doesn't have the "you can get whatever you want" that pep, ole and lampard currently enjoy. But he has been backed by the owners- though he has earned their continued trust in that regard. Our spending ramped up when he got us CL football and then rocketed when he showed signs of challenging. He didn't JUST buy success but buying is necessary to progress in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
whoa just one minute. what did we do under rodgers.
klopps requirement for attitude and ethics is massive.
of course the owners and edwards et al have all come together in a happy team pulling in the one direction behind klopp. getting rid of ayre may have played a part in that.
the fact is people talk net spend bit they rarely look deep enough into the amount of fees that spending and contracts shovel down the throat of agents. that 400mil will have another 100mil to 200mil in fees along the way be it signing on fees or handling fees etc. remember selling players also requires agents cuts.
"the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him"
It wasn't Klopp who got 20m for Solanke and 15m for Ibe. How you guys conned Bournemouth out of 35 million on players not worth 3.5 million combined is a stroke of genius. Both players should be playing League 1 football. The guy who did that is a genius.
£26,000,000 for Sakho is a favpurite.
comment by CurrentlyStuckIntheUK (U11181)
posted 1 minute ago
It wasn't Klopp who got 20m for Solanke and 15m for Ibe. How you guys conned Bournemouth out of 35 million on players not worth 3.5 million combined is a stroke of genius. Both players should be playing League 1 football. The guy who did that is a genius.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth also gave them £6m a few years ago for a left back that had hardly played for Liverpool and then hardly played for once he signed.
Wouldn't be surprised to have seen them try and give Liverpool some money for an out of contract Lallana before he signed for Brighton.
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I�... (U6374)
posted 33 seconds ago
£26,000,000 for Sakho is a favpurite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a good one. Klopp wanted him out and the team were looking to sell. Usually you might make a loss on such a player. And we couldn't even get Palace to pay 12m to take Zaha back, they got him back for half price.
comment by Barf Vader (U15867)
posted 59 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyStuckIntheUK (U11181)
posted 1 minute ago
It wasn't Klopp who got 20m for Solanke and 15m for Ibe. How you guys conned Bournemouth out of 35 million on players not worth 3.5 million combined is a stroke of genius. Both players should be playing League 1 football. The guy who did that is a genius.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth also gave them £6m a few years ago for a left back that had hardly played for Liverpool and then hardly played for once he signed.
Wouldn't be surprised to have seen them try and give Liverpool some money for an out of contract Lallana before he signed for Brighton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who was that LB?
Didn't Liverpool also sell their third choice GK to Leicester for a decent fee as well?
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 40 seconds ago
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth are probably paying you a fortune for loaning Harry Wilson as well. They do seem to have a weird fixation with chucking money at you.
The only one out of those who is PL level is Sahko. If I was the owner of Bournemouth, I'd have sacked the guy who kept buying Liverpool rejects for large sums.
comment by Barf Vader (U15867)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 40 seconds ago
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth are probably paying you a fortune for loaning Harry Wilson as well. They do seem to have a weird fixation with chucking money at you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Palace too.
I think we must let teams pay over loads of years or something. Dunno.
Zidane's title haul vs net spend has to be the best. Only really big purchase was Hazard for 100m plus but he sold Ronaldo for 100m as well.
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ffs
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 38 minutes ago
Zidane's title haul vs net spend has to be the best. Only really big purchase was Hazard for 100m plus but he sold Ronaldo for 100m as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
seruliously!
the entire globe knows no manager of real has any say in who is signed or sold.
all you need us a reference to Gareth bale summer 2019. zidane wasted him gone and the real president decided no
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 38 minutes ago
Zidane's title haul vs net spend has to be the best. Only really big purchase was Hazard for 100m plus but he sold Ronaldo for 100m as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
seruliously!
the entire globe knows no manager of real has any say in who is signed or sold.
all you need us a reference to Gareth bale summer 2019. zidane wasted him gone and the real president decided no
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He didn't leave in 2019 beacuse they suddenly decided they wanted a fee for him when he was supposed to be leaving on a free. Youve got your years mixed up.
Remember we sold Stewart to Hull for 8mil and got robertson from them for 4 mil more.
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 2 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Our recruitment would be good regardless of Klopp. The choice of areas to improve and the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him. He doesn't have the "you can get whatever you want" that pep, ole and lampard currently enjoy. But he has been backed by the owners- though he has earned their continued trust in that regard. Our spending ramped up when he got us CL football and then rocketed when he showed signs of challenging. He didn't JUST buy success but buying is necessary to progress in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
whoa just one minute. what did we do under rodgers.
klopps requirement for attitude and ethics is massive.
of course the owners and edwards et al have all come together in a happy team pulling in the one direction behind klopp. getting rid of ayre may have played a part in that.
the fact is people talk net spend bit they rarely look deep enough into the amount of fees that spending and contracts shovel down the throat of agents. that 400mil will have another 100mil to 200mil in fees along the way be it signing on fees or handling fees etc. remember selling players also requires agents cuts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Remeber hiw we were all slating the "transfer commitee" at Liverpool. Turns out most of the players they biught where a success. But let's face it, it really took off once klopp became manager. Rodgers was just starting out and did not jave the pull of klopp. Put it this way, when virgil was pursued by klopp and pep he chose klopp. I can not imagine that happening with rodgers in charge
Has any other manager been as successful spending so little in recent years?
---------------------------------------
You cannot be this thick.
You cannot seriously think that because he recouped £327m he's only spent £74m.
The £410m was still actually spent.
Sign in if you want to comment
Chequebook Managers
Page 1 of 2
posted on 27/7/20
Frank lampard lol
posted on 27/7/20
Not a huge believer in net spend but either way that's not really anything to do with Klopp.
posted on 27/7/20
He spent £400 million to get the players he wanted. What the club got for the players he didn't want was down to the board.
Taking nothing away from Klopp though, terrific manager at the right club. I was envious but it's a great match.
posted on 27/7/20
Our recruitment would be good regardless of Klopp. The choice of areas to improve and the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him. He doesn't have the "you can get whatever you want" that pep, ole and lampard currently enjoy. But he has been backed by the owners- though he has earned their continued trust in that regard. Our spending ramped up when he got us CL football and then rocketed when he showed signs of challenging. He didn't JUST buy success but buying is necessary to progress in football.
posted on 27/7/20
You're right 52. But I think getting the right players to win at so little cost to the club overall, shows a great synergy between manager and board. I hope it means that there is the willingness to back him should he set his sights on any player to continue winning things.
posted on 27/7/20
I think this is one of the misnomers of football.
It isn’t managers job to ascribe financial value to players, or to account for how much their club spends on signing new players.
Managers will identify areas of the team/squad that need improving, or even target specific players that they feel will improve the team. They will also have input into which players are surplus to their requirements. But they won’t set fees, for either incoming or outgoing players. Nor will they negotiate contracts.
Plus, clubs will make many signings and sell/release players who aren’t part of the first team squad (signings that are made without any input from the manager).
So to say the a manager spent x-amount by looking at gross and net spend that their club has made during their tenure isn’t really fair.
KingKenny makes a very good point in this respect. His point hints at a stronger approach that Liverpool have beyond the manager when it comes to player signings and sales.
Liverpool’s transfer dealings really are to be applauded in this respect. Not only the players they do target and sign (the majority of which have been a great success over the past few seasons), but also on how shrewd the club is in getting a lot of money for players that they sell.
posted on 27/7/20
To say Klopp bought those players is very naive. I seem to remember Fabinho being one he didn’t want. So glad he’s managed to change the gaffer’s mind
posted on 27/7/20
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Our recruitment would be good regardless of Klopp. The choice of areas to improve and the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him. He doesn't have the "you can get whatever you want" that pep, ole and lampard currently enjoy. But he has been backed by the owners- though he has earned their continued trust in that regard. Our spending ramped up when he got us CL football and then rocketed when he showed signs of challenging. He didn't JUST buy success but buying is necessary to progress in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
whoa just one minute. what did we do under rodgers.
klopps requirement for attitude and ethics is massive.
of course the owners and edwards et al have all come together in a happy team pulling in the one direction behind klopp. getting rid of ayre may have played a part in that.
the fact is people talk net spend bit they rarely look deep enough into the amount of fees that spending and contracts shovel down the throat of agents. that 400mil will have another 100mil to 200mil in fees along the way be it signing on fees or handling fees etc. remember selling players also requires agents cuts.
posted on 27/7/20
"the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him"
posted on 27/7/20
It wasn't Klopp who got 20m for Solanke and 15m for Ibe. How you guys conned Bournemouth out of 35 million on players not worth 3.5 million combined is a stroke of genius. Both players should be playing League 1 football. The guy who did that is a genius.
posted on 27/7/20
£26,000,000 for Sakho is a favpurite.
posted on 27/7/20
comment by CurrentlyStuckIntheUK (U11181)
posted 1 minute ago
It wasn't Klopp who got 20m for Solanke and 15m for Ibe. How you guys conned Bournemouth out of 35 million on players not worth 3.5 million combined is a stroke of genius. Both players should be playing League 1 football. The guy who did that is a genius.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth also gave them £6m a few years ago for a left back that had hardly played for Liverpool and then hardly played for once he signed.
Wouldn't be surprised to have seen them try and give Liverpool some money for an out of contract Lallana before he signed for Brighton.
posted on 27/7/20
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I�... (U6374)
posted 33 seconds ago
£26,000,000 for Sakho is a favpurite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was a good one. Klopp wanted him out and the team were looking to sell. Usually you might make a loss on such a player. And we couldn't even get Palace to pay 12m to take Zaha back, they got him back for half price.
posted on 27/7/20
comment by Barf Vader (U15867)
posted 59 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyStuckIntheUK (U11181)
posted 1 minute ago
It wasn't Klopp who got 20m for Solanke and 15m for Ibe. How you guys conned Bournemouth out of 35 million on players not worth 3.5 million combined is a stroke of genius. Both players should be playing League 1 football. The guy who did that is a genius.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth also gave them £6m a few years ago for a left back that had hardly played for Liverpool and then hardly played for once he signed.
Wouldn't be surprised to have seen them try and give Liverpool some money for an out of contract Lallana before he signed for Brighton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who was that LB?
Didn't Liverpool also sell their third choice GK to Leicester for a decent fee as well?
posted on 27/7/20
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
posted on 27/7/20
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 40 seconds ago
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth are probably paying you a fortune for loaning Harry Wilson as well. They do seem to have a weird fixation with chucking money at you.
posted on 27/7/20
The only one out of those who is PL level is Sahko. If I was the owner of Bournemouth, I'd have sacked the guy who kept buying Liverpool rejects for large sums.
posted on 27/7/20
comment by Barf Vader (U15867)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 40 seconds ago
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bournemouth are probably paying you a fortune for loaning Harry Wilson as well. They do seem to have a weird fixation with chucking money at you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Palace too.
I think we must let teams pay over loads of years or something. Dunno.
posted on 27/7/20
Zidane's title haul vs net spend has to be the best. Only really big purchase was Hazard for 100m plus but he sold Ronaldo for 100m as well.
posted on 27/7/20
comment by *Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
Brad Smith £6m
We got £11m for Danny Ward
Love it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ffs
posted on 27/7/20
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 38 minutes ago
Zidane's title haul vs net spend has to be the best. Only really big purchase was Hazard for 100m plus but he sold Ronaldo for 100m as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
seruliously!
the entire globe knows no manager of real has any say in who is signed or sold.
all you need us a reference to Gareth bale summer 2019. zidane wasted him gone and the real president decided no
posted on 27/7/20
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 38 minutes ago
Zidane's title haul vs net spend has to be the best. Only really big purchase was Hazard for 100m plus but he sold Ronaldo for 100m as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
seruliously!
the entire globe knows no manager of real has any say in who is signed or sold.
all you need us a reference to Gareth bale summer 2019. zidane wasted him gone and the real president decided no
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He didn't leave in 2019 beacuse they suddenly decided they wanted a fee for him when he was supposed to be leaving on a free. Youve got your years mixed up.
posted on 27/7/20
Remember we sold Stewart to Hull for 8mil and got robertson from them for 4 mil more.
posted on 27/7/20
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 2 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
Our recruitment would be good regardless of Klopp. The choice of areas to improve and the direction of what type of player to get in is where we credit him. He doesn't have the "you can get whatever you want" that pep, ole and lampard currently enjoy. But he has been backed by the owners- though he has earned their continued trust in that regard. Our spending ramped up when he got us CL football and then rocketed when he showed signs of challenging. He didn't JUST buy success but buying is necessary to progress in football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
whoa just one minute. what did we do under rodgers.
klopps requirement for attitude and ethics is massive.
of course the owners and edwards et al have all come together in a happy team pulling in the one direction behind klopp. getting rid of ayre may have played a part in that.
the fact is people talk net spend bit they rarely look deep enough into the amount of fees that spending and contracts shovel down the throat of agents. that 400mil will have another 100mil to 200mil in fees along the way be it signing on fees or handling fees etc. remember selling players also requires agents cuts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Remeber hiw we were all slating the "transfer commitee" at Liverpool. Turns out most of the players they biught where a success. But let's face it, it really took off once klopp became manager. Rodgers was just starting out and did not jave the pull of klopp. Put it this way, when virgil was pursued by klopp and pep he chose klopp. I can not imagine that happening with rodgers in charge
posted on 27/7/20
Has any other manager been as successful spending so little in recent years?
---------------------------------------
You cannot be this thick.
You cannot seriously think that because he recouped £327m he's only spent £74m.
The £410m was still actually spent.
Page 1 of 2