The Official Liverpool Thread - Part 2

[Philby]

This thread is about to go nuclear.


Compare Liverpools and City's net spend for the last 5 years.

Man City leapfrog Liverpool in net spend table with January splurge

Forget the league table, it's all about the Premier League net spend table. And neither Man City nor Liverpool are in top five.

www.football365.com

View attachment 43488

Provides a link which shows that 5 clubs (yes readers, including his own!!!) have outspent Liverpool during that period and they've won precisely zero PL titles between them during that period.

What a heroic self-pwn.

 

[Nollaig O Muracu]

I think you've lost the run of your argument at this stage buddy,

Nobody is disputing that Liverpool have bought some expensive players. That's just a faacccccchhhhhttttttt.

Nobody is disputing that Liverpool are one of the biggest clubs in the world.

Liverpool fans on here have simply pointed out that in the last decade or so the club have been heavily outspent (gross, net, first captain, second captain whateva') by a broad range of teams (domestically & across the continent) but still managed to compete at the top table and overachieve relative to the money which they actually spent.



If he did then it's a hell of an achievement as, like Klopp / Slot (so far), he was able to keep the club highly competitive despite being outspent by rivals.

That's a good thing. A very good thing.

The fact that Ferguson bought some expensive players is less important than the fact that he overachieved relative to his spend.

A club's achievement relative to their net spend tells you much more about a manager's performance than just cherry picking a few expensive players and saying "...ah he's had money to spend", however much you may try to oversimplify it.

I fundamentally disagree with this point. If you've been able to spend 100s of millions on top class players, then frankly I don't care how you got the money.

You had it and you spent it. Of course you had to spend well but that applies to every single club in existence relative to how much they can spend. If city had bought as badly as Utd they'd be fucked now too.

Liverpool and Utd both can spend fortunes, the likes of which 99 % of the clubs in Europe can only dream of.

Of course City have an advantage. It would be crazy to say they don't. But I'd have much more admiration for clubs like Brentford and BHA doing what they do on a pittance compared to what big clubs can do.

Anyway, enjoy yer new toys. I'm off to support Chelsea.

If you agree with the above then we have very little to argue about (...which would indeed be a shame).

You'll be mightily relieved so

I've not done this. Except the Arsenal lot of course. Not that there's many of them left on here ananymore.

When the going gets tough......


I miss Mayday and Marco tbh, but I'd never admit it in public.

 

[Nollaig O Muracu]

Provides a link which shows that 5 clubs (yes readers, including his own!!!) have outspent Liverpool during that period and they've won precisely zero PL titles between them during that period.

What a heroic self-pwn.

M8, you might want to read a post or two back where you said Liverpool can't be compared to City.......

 

[Philby]

M8, you might want to read a post or two back where you said Liverpool can't be compared to City.......

We both know that City were able to slow down their spending a bit in recent years because of the massive advantage they got from monstruous spending for years...spending at a level which looks to have been against the financial fair play laws.

Liverpool being outspent by 5 other clubs while winning more titles than all of them combined during that (cherry-picked) period conveys the core of my point nicely, ta.

Over a 10 year period City's net spend was the bones of half a billion euro higher than Liverpool's....and Chelsea and Man Utd's is even higher again!

 

[Nollaig O Muracu]

We both know that City were able to slow down their spending a bit in recent years because of the massive advantage they got from monstruous spending for years...spending at a level which looks to have been against the financial fair play laws.

Liverpool being outspent by 5 other clubs while winning more titles than all of them combined during that (cherry-picked) period conveys the core of my point nicely, ta.

Over a 10 year period City's net spend was the bones of half a billion euro higher than Liverpool's....and Chelsea and Man Utd's is even higher again!

We're never going to agree on this.

I'll be back to shame ye some more when the next 100 million player arrives

 

[jimmym]

Photo of @Nollaig O Muracu bedroom 1988

 

[Nollaig O Muracu]

Photo of @Nollaig O Muracu bedroom 1988

Bad form


You wouldn't like it if i posted those photos of you Jimmy, would ya?

 

[Nollaig O Muracu]

Has any other club ever spent £100 + million on two separate players in a single window?

Another first for big spending Liverpool, the great breaker of transfer records

Poor aul paupers

 

[Nollaig O Muracu]

Liverpools first line up August 15?

£61 Mill

40 mill 75 mill 45 mill 40 million

35 mill 120 mill 50 mill

35 mill 120 mill 50 mill

Subs

80 mill
40 mill
30 mill
10 mill
12 mill

Etc etc

Only about 800 million. How can they ever compete

I suppose ye did get 3 mill for Nat Phillips tbf

 

[Nollaig O Muracu]

Taking a brief break from my transfer wum... eh, devastating transfer facts to post this.

Diogo Jota and Andre Silva: Manchester United lay tribute at Anfield

Manchester United manager Ruben Amorim is joined by players Bruno Fernandes and Diogo Dalot as they visit Anfield to pay tribute to Portuguese compatriots Diogo Jota and his brother Andre Silva.

www.bbc.com

Nice touch to have the Portugeese lads bring it.