Beecher Networks - Web Development, Hosting & Domains
Page 3 of 44 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 870

Thread: Liverpool

  1. #41
    Reserves gaiscíoch's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Limerick
    Posts
    474
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10
    Thanked in
    7 Posts
    Still 3rd in the league......
    Fact!!!!!
    "Joe Jordan is off to watch Young Boys tomorrow" Ian Darke

  2. #42
    International Prospect De Town's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,090
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    90
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    275
    Thanked in
    188 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rafa B View Post
    4-1 fact!!!!!!
    yup, 4 points clear, 1 game in hand..

  3. #43
    Formerly: Rafa B
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,875
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    196
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    46
    Thanked in
    39 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Axe Man View Post
    Still 3rd in the league......
    Fact!!!!!
    Ahh can't take the defeat FACT!

  4. #44
    Reserves
    Joined
    May 2005
    Posts
    306
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Good article - dispels a few myths about benitez's spending at Liverpool

    I've tried in the past, but the media misinformation continues to gather pace like some ill-founded rumour. It's dangerous, because it causes unjust criticism.

    Let's make one thing clear: Liverpool have nowhere near the most expensive squad in the Premiership.

    No. Where. Near.

    Indeed, there are three clubs who have spent at least 50 per cent more on their current squad than Liverpool.

    Shocked? Well, you should be if you believe what's spouted out on TV. But it's true. And one of the clubs is not a name you'd necessarily expect.

    It doesn't help that some people – such as Jamie Redknapp last night – focus on Rafa's gross spend, rather than the net amount. Effectively, this means counting all the right-backs he's bought as one big outlay, rather than looking at how he's replaced one with another for roughly the same £2m fee.

    Working with just the gross spend, you add the £2m of Josemi to the £2m value of Kromkamp (even though it was a swap), to the £2.6m paid for Arbeloa. But none of these players were at the club at the same time, and each was traded to get to the point where an outright success was secured, as happened with the final purchase.

    So even though the total cost of getting Arbeloa was just the £2.6m paid, people will use a figure almost three times as high. That is illogical.

    (Another note, Jamie: Liverpool have three right-backs on the books, not just one; but the promising Darby, like Arbeloa, was injured and Degen has had a first season ruined by various ailments. So it's wrong to criticise the manager for an unbalanced squad and playing a midfielder out of position when three right-backs are unavailable.)

    It's like the housing market: you don't just go in and buy a mansion straight from school. (Okay, so maybe some footballers do, but not the normal people of this world. As someone stuck with renting, I'm speaking generally here!)

    You start with an affordable house; you then use the money from selling that to buy your next property. Most people can only get to own a big house having traded their way up over a number of years.

    Yet when someone asks how much you spent on your house, you don't add all the houses you've ever bought together, do you?

    If you own a £220,000 house, you don't say £470,000 because you add the £90,000 starter home and the £160,000 step up. That would be moronic.

    According to the excellent and reliable www.LFCHistory.net, Rafa's gross spend is approximately £188m, but his net spend is only £108m, given that around £80m has been recouped.

    (I'd hazard a guess that a large proportion of the £108m net spend has also been recouped through Champions League progress rewards, particularly with the Reds being the top-ranked team based on his five-year tenure.)

    So it's easy to pluck a figure of '£195m' from the air, live on air, and make it seem like that should make a team champions, or ultra-close challengers.

    But it's only the cost of the current squad that counts. Because that's all a manager can choose from; he can't go back in time and select a player he sold in order to trade up, just as you can't just turn up to one of your old houses and let yourself in.

    You simply cannot add Rafa having spent £5.8m on Sissoko to the £18m on Mascherano, because the two were never part of the same set-up; one was bought and sold for a profit, and as with a house, the money reinvested in a step-up. If Sissoko isn't bought and then sold, Mascherano probably doesn't arrive.

    Is that really too tough to grasp?

    From my own experience in writing 'Dynasty', I can attest that researching transfer fees is never easy, given the amount of undisclosed fees and various add-ons (for various things, like appearances, trophies won, national caps and the cultivation of unexpectedly daring hairstyles).

    But taking each fee as the most a club has expect to pay when add-ons are activated, I've calculated the cost of the most expensive squads in the league, and listed them below.

    (Note: while it's impossible to be 100 per cent accurate with the figures in the public domain, I'd say that overall it's at least 95 per cent of the true amount, and with rival teams I've actually been generous and excluded a couple of players whose cost just isn't listed anywhere I could find.)

    The most expensive squads (excluding players out on long-term loan) are as follows:

    Chelsea £207m
    Manchester United £206m*
    Spurs £188m
    Manchester City £140m
    Liverpool £127m

    (*£226m if Carlos Tevez's deal made permanent, given that it is initially a unique two-year £10m agreement, and very different from 99.9 of transfer deals. Effectively United are winning games with a £30m player.)

    So what does this tell us?

    Let's start with the leaders. United's squad contains the most home-grown players, such as Giggs, Scholes, Neville, O'Shea, Brown and Fletcher, who all arrived for free.

    So that shows that it is a long-established core supplemented by a lot of expensive signings added one by one to a unified collection. In other words, classic, spot-on building of a squad when already established at the very top.

    But it shows that even if you work with the unfair use of Rafa's gross spend, it still doesn't match what Ferguson has spent on his current squad, let alone those who have been bought and sold for record fees in the past.

    And this is utterly, utterly critical, and beyond the grasp of some people who cannot analyse things with common sense.

    After all, what does it matter how much Rafa has spent since 2004 if Ferguson is currently fielding players like Ferdinand (£30m) and Ronaldo (£12.8m) who were bought before then?

    Isn't Rafa – in the real world – competing with a team whose construction started well before he arrived?

    Unless Ferguson is banned from fielding players like Ferdinand and Ronaldo (which would be illogical), or forced to start from scratch in 2004 (again illogical), it is not a fair comparison, is it? – I mean, come on, use your brain for a second here.

    After all, how much as Harry Redknapp spent since he took over at Spurs? I make it almost £50m. How much has Rafa spent since Harry Redknapp took over at Spurs? Nothing. But only a nutter would compare the two in this deeply skewed way.

    Rafa has been in his job about 25 times as long as Harry, so you obviously wouldn't dare compare their teams. And yet Ferguson has been in his job about five times as long as Rafa, and yet the Spaniard is expected to have Liverpool as champions by now.

    Chelsea and Spurs are actually the more interesting examples in many ways. I knew Spurs had spent a lot, but to have a current squad that cost almost £200m shocked me. Add together the cost of Bentley, Pavyluchenko, Palacios, Bale, Defoe, Bent, Keane and Modric and you more-or-less end up with the cost of Liverpool's entire squad.

    I could be sarcastic – or media-style sensationalistic – and say that with that much spent, any manager should be able to win almost all of his matches, but it wouldn't be fair or logical. It's far more complex than that, and even a good manager like Redknapp has his work cut out.

    Chelsea and Spurs have had seven managers between them since 2007. This means different men making expensive signings and ending up with a mixed squad. Based on expenditure, both of these clubs are massively underachieving this season. Almost certainly to blame for that is the hierarchy having itchy fingers when it comes to firing managers.

    Of course, this analysis doesn't include wages, either. You don't get the very top players in the world without also having to pay them a king's ransom. Michael Ballack must be most expensive free transfer ever, with wages reported to be around £130,000 a week, or about £30m over five years. Again, Liverpool are no way near the highest payers, either.

    So there you have it. By all means print it out and pass it around; 'pass it on', as the saying goes, including to those in the media who could do with reading it. By all means quibble over some of the finer details, as there is a tolerance of a few percent on the accuracy of the figures, but the overall gist is very much sound and robust.

  5. #45
    Reserves Angus's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2007
    Location
    In front of the back four
    Posts
    713
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    19
    Thanked in
    14 Posts
    A Tour de Force - nice post

    Clearly my original post in this thread has spurred Liverpool into life - they have had one super performance and 2 super results in the last 10 days - well done.

    Do they have enough to win one of the proper trophies ? Not sure - better chance of them winning the CL - and by the way - lets drop the pretense - the CL is the priority.


    Quote Originally Posted by Monster View Post
    Good article - dispels a few myths about benitez's spending at Liverpool

    I've tried in the past, but the media misinformation continues to gather pace like some ill-founded rumour. It's dangerous, because it causes unjust criticism.

    Let's make one thing clear: Liverpool have nowhere near the most expensive squad in the Premiership.

    No. Where. Near.

    Indeed, there are three clubs who have spent at least 50 per cent more on their current squad than Liverpool.

    Shocked? Well, you should be if you believe what's spouted out on TV. But it's true. And one of the clubs is not a name you'd necessarily expect.

    It doesn't help that some people – such as Jamie Redknapp last night – focus on Rafa's gross spend, rather than the net amount. Effectively, this means counting all the right-backs he's bought as one big outlay, rather than looking at how he's replaced one with another for roughly the same £2m fee.

    Working with just the gross spend, you add the £2m of Josemi to the £2m value of Kromkamp (even though it was a swap), to the £2.6m paid for Arbeloa. But none of these players were at the club at the same time, and each was traded to get to the point where an outright success was secured, as happened with the final purchase.

    So even though the total cost of getting Arbeloa was just the £2.6m paid, people will use a figure almost three times as high. That is illogical.

    (Another note, Jamie: Liverpool have three right-backs on the books, not just one; but the promising Darby, like Arbeloa, was injured and Degen has had a first season ruined by various ailments. So it's wrong to criticise the manager for an unbalanced squad and playing a midfielder out of position when three right-backs are unavailable.)

    It's like the housing market: you don't just go in and buy a mansion straight from school. (Okay, so maybe some footballers do, but not the normal people of this world. As someone stuck with renting, I'm speaking generally here!)

    You start with an affordable house; you then use the money from selling that to buy your next property. Most people can only get to own a big house having traded their way up over a number of years.

    Yet when someone asks how much you spent on your house, you don't add all the houses you've ever bought together, do you?

    If you own a £220,000 house, you don't say £470,000 because you add the £90,000 starter home and the £160,000 step up. That would be moronic.

    According to the excellent and reliable www.LFCHistory.net, Rafa's gross spend is approximately £188m, but his net spend is only £108m, given that around £80m has been recouped.

    (I'd hazard a guess that a large proportion of the £108m net spend has also been recouped through Champions League progress rewards, particularly with the Reds being the top-ranked team based on his five-year tenure.)

    So it's easy to pluck a figure of '£195m' from the air, live on air, and make it seem like that should make a team champions, or ultra-close challengers.

    But it's only the cost of the current squad that counts. Because that's all a manager can choose from; he can't go back in time and select a player he sold in order to trade up, just as you can't just turn up to one of your old houses and let yourself in.

    You simply cannot add Rafa having spent £5.8m on Sissoko to the £18m on Mascherano, because the two were never part of the same set-up; one was bought and sold for a profit, and as with a house, the money reinvested in a step-up. If Sissoko isn't bought and then sold, Mascherano probably doesn't arrive.

    Is that really too tough to grasp?

    From my own experience in writing 'Dynasty', I can attest that researching transfer fees is never easy, given the amount of undisclosed fees and various add-ons (for various things, like appearances, trophies won, national caps and the cultivation of unexpectedly daring hairstyles).

    But taking each fee as the most a club has expect to pay when add-ons are activated, I've calculated the cost of the most expensive squads in the league, and listed them below.

    (Note: while it's impossible to be 100 per cent accurate with the figures in the public domain, I'd say that overall it's at least 95 per cent of the true amount, and with rival teams I've actually been generous and excluded a couple of players whose cost just isn't listed anywhere I could find.)

    The most expensive squads (excluding players out on long-term loan) are as follows:

    Chelsea £207m
    Manchester United £206m*
    Spurs £188m
    Manchester City £140m
    Liverpool £127m

    (*£226m if Carlos Tevez's deal made permanent, given that it is initially a unique two-year £10m agreement, and very different from 99.9 of transfer deals. Effectively United are winning games with a £30m player.)

    So what does this tell us?

    Let's start with the leaders. United's squad contains the most home-grown players, such as Giggs, Scholes, Neville, O'Shea, Brown and Fletcher, who all arrived for free.

    So that shows that it is a long-established core supplemented by a lot of expensive signings added one by one to a unified collection. In other words, classic, spot-on building of a squad when already established at the very top.

    But it shows that even if you work with the unfair use of Rafa's gross spend, it still doesn't match what Ferguson has spent on his current squad, let alone those who have been bought and sold for record fees in the past.

    And this is utterly, utterly critical, and beyond the grasp of some people who cannot analyse things with common sense.

    After all, what does it matter how much Rafa has spent since 2004 if Ferguson is currently fielding players like Ferdinand (£30m) and Ronaldo (£12.8m) who were bought before then?

    Isn't Rafa – in the real world – competing with a team whose construction started well before he arrived?

    Unless Ferguson is banned from fielding players like Ferdinand and Ronaldo (which would be illogical), or forced to start from scratch in 2004 (again illogical), it is not a fair comparison, is it? – I mean, come on, use your brain for a second here.

    After all, how much as Harry Redknapp spent since he took over at Spurs? I make it almost £50m. How much has Rafa spent since Harry Redknapp took over at Spurs? Nothing. But only a nutter would compare the two in this deeply skewed way.

    Rafa has been in his job about 25 times as long as Harry, so you obviously wouldn't dare compare their teams. And yet Ferguson has been in his job about five times as long as Rafa, and yet the Spaniard is expected to have Liverpool as champions by now.

    Chelsea and Spurs are actually the more interesting examples in many ways. I knew Spurs had spent a lot, but to have a current squad that cost almost £200m shocked me. Add together the cost of Bentley, Pavyluchenko, Palacios, Bale, Defoe, Bent, Keane and Modric and you more-or-less end up with the cost of Liverpool's entire squad.

    I could be sarcastic – or media-style sensationalistic – and say that with that much spent, any manager should be able to win almost all of his matches, but it wouldn't be fair or logical. It's far more complex than that, and even a good manager like Redknapp has his work cut out.

    Chelsea and Spurs have had seven managers between them since 2007. This means different men making expensive signings and ending up with a mixed squad. Based on expenditure, both of these clubs are massively underachieving this season. Almost certainly to blame for that is the hierarchy having itchy fingers when it comes to firing managers.

    Of course, this analysis doesn't include wages, either. You don't get the very top players in the world without also having to pay them a king's ransom. Michael Ballack must be most expensive free transfer ever, with wages reported to be around £130,000 a week, or about £30m over five years. Again, Liverpool are no way near the highest payers, either.

    So there you have it. By all means print it out and pass it around; 'pass it on', as the saying goes, including to those in the media who could do with reading it. By all means quibble over some of the finer details, as there is a tolerance of a few percent on the accuracy of the figures, but the overall gist is very much sound and robust.
    DB Cooper is alive !

  6. #46
    Youth Team
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    166
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Angus View Post
    A Tour de Force - nice post

    Clearly my original post in this thread has spurred Liverpool into life - they have had one super performance and 2 super results in the last 10 days - well done.

    Do they have enough to win one of the proper trophies ? Not sure - better chance of them winning the CL - and by the way - lets drop the pretense - the CL is the priority.
    I see from your thread starting post you know more about the game then zidane.

  7. #47
    First Team
    Joined
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,528
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    29
    Thanked in
    25 Posts
    Looks like a Paul Yawnkins the super red article.

  8. #48
    Seasoned Pro shakermaker1982's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nottingham
    Posts
    4,400
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    149
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    318
    Thanked in
    214 Posts
    http://transferleague.co.uk/

    net spend since 2004 according to this website has Liverpool in third place.

  9. #49
    Godless Commie Scum
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Co Wickla
    Posts
    11,396
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    138
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    656
    Thanked in
    436 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by shakermaker1982 View Post
    http://transferleague.co.uk/

    net spend since 2004 according to this website has Liverpool in third place.
    Or put another way, the scousers are trying to dispel myths by creating new ones?
    If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.

  10. #50
    Formerly: Rafa B
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,875
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    196
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    46
    Thanked in
    39 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Macy View Post
    Or put another way, the scousers are trying to dispel myths by creating new ones?
    One myth they dispeled was Man U are untouchable

  11. #51
    Seasoned Pro old git's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Location
    cooraclare
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    37
    Thanked in
    34 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Rafa B View Post
    One myth they dispeled was Man U are untouchable
    no team untouchable just the good old british media once again building up teams ... but in liverpools case beat utd twice and probally still not win league .. unfortunatly records only matter for league winners ,, i'm sure all the utd fans out there will be more than happy if utd win the league even with these 2 defeats to their bitter rivals
    Last edited by old git; 19/03/2009 at 9:42 PM.

    " football is a simple game "

  12. #52
    Seasoned Pro shakermaker1982's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Nottingham
    Posts
    4,400
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    149
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    318
    Thanked in
    214 Posts
    if Manchester United win another 3 trophies this season then I'm sure losing to Liverpool will be a distant memory. Man City beat United twice last season. So what? United won the double!!!

  13. #53
    First Team
    Joined
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,528
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    29
    Thanked in
    25 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by shakermaker1982 View Post
    if Manchester United win another 3 trophies this season then I'm sure losing to Liverpool will be a distant memory. Man City beat United twice last season. So what? United won the double!!!
    They weren;t better than City though

  14. #54
    Seasoned Pro old git's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Location
    cooraclare
    Posts
    3,087
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    37
    Thanked in
    34 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Roadend View Post
    They weren;t better than City though
    are u for real .... last year. preimer league champions / champions league winners but beaten twice by city oh yes what a disaster

    " football is a simple game "

  15. #55
    Reserves
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Never outside the 6yd box!
    Posts
    537
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    39
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    22
    Thanked in
    21 Posts
    While Man U will prob win the league again this year I think Rafa is getting Liverpool closer to them all the time. To get to United's level Liverpool will need to spend more and buy better. But without the cash I don't think that Liverpool have a level playing field at the moment. I think Rafa has done a great job for Liverpool and will win the league... but not just yet.

  16. #56
    First Team
    Joined
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,528
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    29
    Thanked in
    25 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by old git View Post
    are u for real ....
    Well they tried to beat them twice and couldn't, so I'd say thhere must be a reason for that

  17. #57
    International Prospect bennocelt's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Basel (Allschwil)
    Posts
    5,829
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,823
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    436
    Thanked in
    335 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Shilts View Post
    While Man U will prob win the league again this year I think Rafa is getting Liverpool closer to them all the time. To get to United's level Liverpool will need to spend more and buy better. But without the cash I don't think that Liverpool have a level playing field at the moment. I think Rafa has done a great job for Liverpool and will win the league... but not just yet.
    ha ha ha - thanks for that - hilarious
    how much again for Robbie keane, look at all the rubbish he has bought - how many of the Liverppol team would get on the Man u team?
    cash - bloody hell hasnt rafa B spent enough money?

  18. #58
    Banned
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,228
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bennocelt View Post
    ha ha ha - thanks for that - hilarious
    how much again for Robbie keane, look at all the rubbish he has bought - how many of the Liverppol team would get on the Man u team?
    cash - bloody hell hasnt rafa B spent enough money?
    Carragher
    Mascherano
    Gerrard
    Alonso
    Torres

    So thats almost half..

  19. #59
    Closed Account
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    ...
    Posts
    2,870
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    121
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    340
    Thanked in
    200 Posts
    Reina next season too maybe ? Van Der Saaar is not getting any younger and I still think if he's put under a lot of pressure his prone to the occasional error - by that I mean say he's not as solid as Schmeichel in say 1998...

  20. #60
    International Prospect NeilMcD's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    7,692
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Carragher and Alonso would not get near the team and I dont think Mascherano would either Gerrard and Torres would and thats about it.

    my logic is that centre backs are all about partnerships so Carragher and Vidic together would not work as there would be a lack of pace. As a result Carragher would be competing with Vidic and he is not as good as him.

    Seconly Alonso would be competing with Scholes and Carrick and I do not think he is as good as either. He is a good player but not quite as good as Scholes or Carrick.

    Mascherano is one dimensional and only works in a 3 man central midfielder where he can do the defensive job to perfection but is lacking when it comes to creating. As a result he gets found out when playing as a two in central midfield.

    Gerrard and Torres would be good enough though.
    Last edited by NeilMcD; 20/03/2009 at 8:17 PM.
    In Trap we trust

Page 3 of 44 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Liverpool do it again
    By inexile in forum World League Football
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 09/05/2007, 3:08 PM
  2. Liverpool v Man Utd
    By KK77 in forum World League Football
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 26/02/2006, 5:48 PM
  3. Man Utd Vs Liverpool
    By Roo69 in forum World League Football
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: 01/02/2006, 8:47 PM
  4. How did Liverpool get in the CL???
    By Poor Student in forum World League Football
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 13/06/2005, 8:29 AM
  5. Liverpool
    By gwanyagoodting in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 13/04/2002, 4:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •