Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ruthers1

Transfer Spend League Table

Recommended Posts

Here''s the table of net summer spending by club:

City 101.3

United 43.4

Newcastle 42

Chelsea 38.1

Watford 31.6

West Ham 29.6

West Brom 24.8

Bournemouth 23

Liverpool 22.7

Leicester 20.4

Palace 18.5

Everton 15.1

Sunderland 14

Spurs 12.3

Arsenal 10.7

Villa 9.9

Swansea 9.6

Norwich 3.9

Stoke 3.3

Southampton 3.2

We''re nearly £20m behind Bournemouth and £27m behind Watford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southampton at least spent 11m+ on a top defender..other then that they had no need to spend, niether did stoke, we did need to spend..we never..for that we will go down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s not really about how much we spent net but rather about perceived weaknesses not supported. Had we acquired the Danish centre back for £3 million say, we would still have spent modestly overall however most fans would feel it had been a successful window in spite of the shambolic manner of its progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Strange, i just read a sky sports report stating that we spent 10 mill.

Brady in 7 mill, Johnson out 6 mill.

Surely between the undisclosed fee for Dorrans and the loan fees for Mbokani and Jarvis wouldn''t add up to 9 million?

Am i missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The sky thing was just spending, it didn''t take into account money received from selling.

I also assume that in both the ''net spend'' and the ''total spend'' stats, sky omitted the loan fees. £7m for Brady & £3m for Dorrans sounds about right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Steelsilver"]southampton at least spent 11m+ on a top defender..other then that they had no need to spend[/quote]

That is nonsense.

The needed to replace Alderweireld, Clyne, Schneiderlin and cover for long term injuries to Gardos and Forster.

This summer they spent...

£13m Virgil van Dijk

£8m Jordy Clasie

£5m Oriol Romeu

£5m Juanmi

£4.7m Cedric Soares

£1.5m Cuco Martina

£1.3m loan fee for Steven Caulker

£1m loan fee for Maarten Stekelenburg

Total Spent = £39.5m

Because of the large fees received for Schndeirlin and Clyne this summer the net fee Sky and other media show for Saints is the smallest in the league.

But so what? If you buy and sell well leading have a small net spend then that is a sustainable football club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
when norwich spent near 25million(?) they got relegated.

im all for bringing in good players but trust the professionals they probably dont want to pay inflated prices for players and we have a decent enough squad anyway :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]Not sure how true it is, but someone on Twitter reckons we had the lowest spend out of all the teams in the top 6 leagues in Europe.[/quote]

I think the chances of that being true are considerably less than zero. In fact, given some of the budgets at the lower end of the leagues in France, Spain and in particular Portugal, I''d say we are about mid-table.

Also, if these figures are accurate, Tony Scholes at Stoke deserved a medal. But I don''t think Stoke recouped anywhere near enough to end up with a net spend that low- did they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"We''re nearly £20m behind Bournemouth and £27m behind Watford."

That''s probably because Bournemouth haven''t sold anyone worth anything and paid £8million for a left back who''s probably worth more like £3-4 at best.

Not to mention Watford have signed an entire new squad. Although many of them from other clubs owned by the same people.

As said many times before - we have not needed a drastic overhaul of our squad. Despite that we have signed Mulumbu, Brady, Dorrans and Mbokani who are either already starters or will potentially be along with Jarvis, Wisdom and Kean who add strength and competition to areas that needed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite frankly people who look at net spends are morons, especially in todays market when players are being sold for ridiculous amounts. And we definitely were not the lowest spenders in the who of European top flight leagues, we weren''t even the lowest spenders in the our league!! It was a good transfer window for us, bar signing once defender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Martin Bryant"]when norwich spent near 25million(?) they got relegated.

im all for bringing in good players but trust the professionals they probably dont want to pay inflated prices for players and we have a decent enough squad anyway :)[/quote]No, the squad is weak defensively and that will cost us the millions we''ve failed to spend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This whole thing is pretty-much a load of crap and means little - there''s no gauge on ''quality''over quantity'' - for instance Watford bought anything on 2 legs, no one knows how that will pan out. Also, we haven''t spent loads, but Bournemouth spent c£15m on two players they can''t use until the new year at best (Gradel and Mings). Others spent because they had to fill gaps where players left/were poached. We do also have Mbokani (value £6m+) signed on loan so presumably doesn''t count.

These sorts of figures really don''t mean a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Kiev had played hard ball and we had ended up paying £10m for Mbokani the mood music around here would be a lot different.

Brady, Dorrans and Mulumbu are great additions for us and many posters claimed a desire for Mbokani.

Yes, a CB is needed but perhaps we can hold the fort until January?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Didn''t Bournemouth spend 15 mil + wages on Mongs and Gradel? Well, that worked out great for them... transfer fees dont''t equal success

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ellis206"]Quite frankly people who look at net spends are morons, especially in todays market when players are being sold for ridiculous amounts. And we definitely were not the lowest spenders in the who of European top flight leagues, we weren''t even the lowest spenders in the our league!! It was a good transfer window for us, bar signing once defender. [/quote]

Spot on. Some people think it works just like it does on FIFA. We could have done with another CB but despite that, it was a decent window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I quite like the fact that we haven''t gone gangbusters in a crazy hyped up market. But we''re a little bit light and will face pressure to spend in the future to replace an aging defence.At the outset we should have got a couple of cheap younger players from the lower leagues (or abroad), if only to replace Miquel and help prevent the situation we''re now in from recurring.We''ve not bought any young prospects like Adams did, so investing for the future has been postponed for another year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...