Does money buy a good team ??

[sheded 0]

................Chelsea`s boss, Abramovich , has spent more on buying new players in 12 months than Fergie of Manu has spent in 18 years !............ well , did this win them the title ? did they actually WIN anything last season ? .................. pre-season friendly Oxford 1.. Chelsea 1 ........... next friendly is Celtic , that should be interesting !! .... O`Neil wont be regarding that match as a friendly !!!

Ladbrokes are offering 66:1 on Chelsea gaining the premiership title, EUFA cup, and the FA cup . think, before you all rush down to the bookie`s ......... :o))

[ZLF 274]

Money can buy a good team, if the manager uses it wisely and buys players that gel - look at Blackburn in the 90s - money spent wisely on proven talented players to supplement what the club already have and won the title.

Despite not winning anything I dont think you could claim that Chelski werent a better side last season than the one before Roman got involved best league finish in years and progressed to a club best semi final in the champions league.

And it is a damn sight easier making a good team with cash than without it. Without spending £1m on HUx, Leon and Sven last season I doubt very much that we would have made the premiership this year.

Good luck to Chelsea - at least there is a team different from the gooners and Manure who may win the title (who have also spend vast sums of money) and it has generated a huge amount of publicity/entertainment in the process. Of course we all know that they will struggle once he pulls the plug but why not ride the roller coaster while its in town.

OTBC

[ob1 0]

The only way to BUY a good team, is with money.

But money doesn''t necessarily build a good team! :)

Personally I think Chelsea are screwed. I don''t believe any manager is going to win the Premiership in their first year. Every year, a new manager will come in, buy practically a whole new team for themselves and then fail. Only to have another manager come in.....

Eventually Abramovich will get bored with failure and perhaps move on to American football where the aspect of "team" isn''t as important as in football and its easier to buy success. He''ll leave Chelsea, take his money, and they''ll have their debts and overpay glory hunters, who''ll be leaving that sinking ship like rats.

Money can''t buy you Delia, thats for sure.

[Tufnell Park Canary 0]

money will buy good players, but it won''t necessarily buy a good team.

[Temp the Revelator 0]

I''m not a closet gooner, but in their defence they don''t usually spend much money - when they do, it''s money they have earned by selling someone else! Anyone remember them selling Anelka and getting Henry and 20m change? Now that sounds like good business to me! And Wenger only spent 500k on Vieira, and a similar amount on Kolo Toure.......

Strikes me it''s not always what you spend on a player that matters.......

[Dirty Lyle 0]

I agree with ZLF.

The greater the amount of money to spend is beneficial as it gives the manager more options and ability to outbid rivals.

However, the manager must buy players to fit into his playing philosophy and systems, this does not always mean buying the best or most expensive players but players who will do a certain job in a certain position. Compare the players Ranieri and Mourinho have bought at Chelsea - Mourinho''s purchases are players who seem to want to play for Chelsea and have potential rather than some of the has-beens Ranieri bought. Ranieri though, bought expensive/exciting players with big reputations or young, largely unproven players (one or two exceptions - Wayne Bridge perhaps) who viewed Chelsea as no more than a fat pay cheque.

The situation above led to the scenario of last season. Chelsea, under Ranieri, bought a team that comprised a squad of, albeit very talented, individuals. Such was their individual talent they achieved what would normally be considered a creditable season of 2nd in the PL and the Semis of the Champions League. Open to question though is how much they would have achieved had Ranieri bought one team instead of 20 individuals. If team spirit had been present at Chelsea last year and not just cold, hard cash then I believe they could have kicked on to win the Champions League.

Money can and does buy good football teams but only if the money is placed in the hands of someone who knows how to spend it wisely. ZLF''s example of Blackburn is a good one (Jack Walker - gritty northerner - employed a Scotsman - Dalglish - to spend his hard-earnt and ensure value for money, which he achieved for at least for one season). Whether Mourinho is up to the task of moulding a team from Roman''s millions only time will tell but that is his primary job this year.

City''s example can be applied here. On many threads on this board there are posters questioning our finances, how much we have to spend on players is the burning question. What we can learn from the teams with vast financial resources is that they are no good unless those players are prepared to fight for one another because they do not want to let each other down. The core of the players at the club have this attitude and that is our greatest attribute as we look to survival. Money is important as it buys ability but it is the application of that ability that counts (many don''t apply themselves correctly IMO Mark Rivers, Man City etc). Our application will ensure our survival - the harder the players work the easier we will make the fight. We won''t compete over 38 games with the top 6 in the league but we can realistically finish sixth from bottom.

[bananaman 0]

The Arsenal "bargain-hunting" view is not completey correct having spent 13m on Wiltord, 7m on Lauren, 10m on Jeffers, 3m on Cygan and probably a lot more that I can''t remember.

But the philosophy is correct - spending money can often ensure that you get totally ripped off. Look at proven world-class players like Veron (44m in transfer fees in consecutive seasons) and never looked up to much.

I think people just need to remember that we need to find players that suit us, and spending millions is going to disrupt the squad we already have, and the work ethic. Then everyone will want a payrise, then someone will get in a huff because they''re on the bench and DOWN we go!

Eventually, as the squad improves, the quality of player we can sign will improve too.

[Temp the Revelator 0]

I agree that the ''bargain hunting'' view is not entirely the whole picture bananaman, I was simply pointing out that inflated transfer fees are not always necessary to buy quality. My other point was that although Arsenal DO spend big sometimes, it is usually through revenue produced by a couple of big sales - eg the Anelka sale, the Overmars and Petit sales etc.

[Jonzey 0]

Of course money will buy success. Arsenal have spent a fortune to assemble their phenomenal team, but this is over many years. The now have possibly the best team ever seen in British football.

This is the only reason Chelsea didn''t buy the Premier title last season, because you can''t buy a team as good as Arsenal in just 9 months. Give Chelsea 2 years maximum though and they will have a team to eclipse them.

[bananaman 0]

Actually, I don''t think they are the best team in British football.

The liverpool side of the late seventies won everything there was to win, and also did the same in the late eighties. But they bought their success then.

Man Utd blended club players with low-money signings (Cantona) and big money signings (Keane, Cole, Yorke) to make the best side in recent history. So it can be done without too much investment. But there has to be some money thrown around!

[0Amarillo<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM> º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>ddMMyyyy0Falseen-US<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM> º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>True 0]

Put it this way, where did Real Madrid finish in La Liga last season? And if you can''t win a league with Beckham, Zidane, Raul, Ronaldo, Figo etc....?!!!!

And here''s another interesting one today. Rebrov. £11m when Spurs bought him... now available on a free. Clearly wasn''t worth ten percent of what they paid for him. Or Postiga?

[First Wizard 0]

I don''t think it does, look at Charlton. A good manager can work wonders with reasonable transfer fees.

Although if you have a bigger budget, it must make some difference, if only to shut up ''moaners'' like me who know nothing about football!.

[pink lady 0]

I live in Oxford and supported them up until a few years but after what happend to us when we played Chelsea in the F. A. cup a few years ago, I wished we had beaten them on Saturday. But 1-1 will do. I hope they loose badly, as money can never buy a good football team, it all comes down to skill and team work.

[Jonzey 0]

Obviously 1st Wiz prudent management can possibly allow you to do well in football, like Charlton. It''s the formula I like the most, but it will very rarely WIN you anything major.
But if a billionaire wants to buy a new toy like Chelsea Fc and win the league he certainly will.
There is no doubt that if Abramovich doesn''t get bored and decides to stick around Chelsea they will win the league very soon.

As for Real, lets not forget last season was a spectacular failure for them, especially with the team they have. For once they won nothing, ONLY coming second in the league. But over the past few years they have bought 3 Champions Leagues and many more domestic triumphs.

Money, evil that it is, rules.

And here''s a point to argue: The current Arsenal team would thrash any Liverpool team from the 70s and 80s and would certainly roll over the Man Utd team of the 90s.

[0Amarillo<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM> º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>ddMMyyyy0Falseen-US<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM> º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>True 0]

Wiz, you''ve hit the nail on the head... "a good manager".

For me, a good manager is one who can make the team greater than the sum of the players he has. Worthy is surely a good manager for managing a team of largely good but not exceptional players to be comfortably champions of the league. Arguably Dowie achieved even more at Palace.

Conversely, Keegan seems at Man City to have taken some great players (on paper) and produce a fairly poor team from them, at least last season.

Ama

[blacko 0]

You can buy a good team, but you can''t buy the spirit.