Lowest spenders

[sputnik]

Splashing the cash on transfers is no guarantee of success. Leicester City have spent a reported £25million in the last few years since their new owners took over and look where that's got them, (though I think we can thank them for giving us as much as they did for Mills!).

[Victor Meldrew]

I don't understand...

So despite our astute signings so far we need to be seen to be spending money to survive? Does this mean if Pog had been £5m, Guthrie had been £3m, McCleary £2m, Gunter £2m, Shorey £1m we'd have spent a whopping £13m and you'd all be sat here a lot happier despite having the same squad? Or perhaps we should sign Bas Savage for £15m to show our intentions?

This is real life not bloody champ man! If we struggle (which I don't think we will) then the difference this time compared to our last Prem campaign is we have the money available to make changes in January. Until then let's not concern ourselves with those taking up the back pages with over inflated transfer fees and instead let's focus on getting behind the squad we've got in once again showing the sceptics that we should never be under estimated.

pog guthrie and mcleary for free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>spending 7 million on jay rodriguez, or replacing an entire new team in one summer
imo

Er..you seem to have left out 3 lots of wages guaranteed to be paid for 3 years or so as part of your calculations,e.g
Rodriguez say 3 years at £30,000 per week = £4,680,000 plus transfer fee of £7,000,000= £11,680,000
Pog say 3 years at £30,000 per week =£4,680,000
Guthrie say 3 years at £25,000 per week =£3,900,000
Mc Cleary say 3 years at £25,000 per week=£3,900,000
Total=£12,480,000
plus 3 lots of N.I at say over 3 years=£1,500,000
compared to say £600,000
plus unknown signing-on fees for 3 players on "free" transfers say £3,000,000.

We have 3 players whereas they have one but our outlay will be say nearly £5,000,000 more.

As others have said it is impossible to make comparisons based on transfer costs alone and whether we pay loads of money or not is of no concern to us as fans-I just want us to get a few more better players in before the end of today to improve our chances,not to brag or moan about how little or how much the club has spent in doing so.
We will be able to better afford the wages over the contract period of the playyers if we stay in the Premier League.

[Stuboo]

Would the people complaining about us not spending enough money also be complaining if we had spent megabucks and put the club in a difficult financial position? I am glad we continue to act prudently. We seem to be spending more than we have been before, and are able to keep our best players now - why not be happy with that? It's progress.

I understand that with teams like QPR and Southampton splashing the cash on marque signings it is easy to feel jittery. I do a little bit too. But I remember big spending teams in the past, like Brian Robson's Middlesborough who crashed out of the top division, and I feel reassured that this big spending doesn't make them better than us. I think the problem is that we did our business early in the transfer window and some people seem to have forgotten that we have signed Pogbregnyak, Guthrie, Gunter, Shorey, Mariappa, McCleary and Taylor. Now other teams are spending and we're not, it gives a false impression that we are not competing in the market.

I agree that how much we spend on players often has little to do with performance on the pitch. Football is riddled with players on big wages and big transfer values being complete toilet on the pitch (Carol?). We have done smart business, paying sensible prices for good players, and I feel we should be happy about that. I feel it's about the group of players we have and the team gelling as a unit, and I feel we have that. If you think we need to spend big to be successful, look at Everton.

[Victor Meldrew]

Would the people complaining about us not spending enough money also be complaining if we had spent megabucks and put the club in a difficult financial position? I am glad we continue to act prudently. We seem to be spending more than we have been before, and are able to keep our best players now - why not be happy with that? It's progress.

I understand that with teams like QPR and Southampton splashing the cash on marque signings it is easy to feel jittery. I do a little bit too. But I remember big spending teams in the past, like Brian Robson's Middlesborough who crashed out of the top division, and I feel reassured that this big spending doesn't make them better than us. I think the problem is that we did our business early in the transfer window and some people seem to have forgotten that we have signed Pogbregnyak, Guthrie, Gunter, Shorey, Mariappa, McCleary and Taylor. Now other teams are spending and we're not, it gives a false impression that we are not competing in the market.

I agree that how much we spend on players often has little to do with performance on the pitch. Football is riddled with players on big wages and big transfer values being complete toilet on the pitch (Carol?). We have done smart business, paying sensible prices for good players, and I feel we should be happy about that. I feel it's about the group of players we have and the team gelling as a unit, and I feel we have that. If you think we need to spend big to be successful, look at Everton.

The same Everton who spent £17 million on Fellaini.

[melonhead]

I don't understand...

So despite our astute signings so far we need to be seen to be spending money to survive? Does this mean if Pog had been £5m, Guthrie had been £3m, McCleary £2m, Gunter £2m, Shorey £1m we'd have spent a whopping £13m and you'd all be sat here a lot happier despite having the same squad? Or perhaps we should sign Bas Savage for £15m to show our intentions?

This is real life not bloody champ man! If we struggle (which I don't think we will) then the difference this time compared to our last Prem campaign is we have the money available to make changes in January. Until then let's not concern ourselves with those taking up the back pages with over inflated transfer fees and instead let's focus on getting behind the squad we've got in once again showing the sceptics that we should never be under estimated.

pog guthrie and mcleary for free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>spending 7 million on jay rodriguez, or replacing an entire new team in one summer
imo

Er..you seem to have left out 3 lots of wages guaranteed to be paid for 3 years or so as part of your calculations,e.g
Rodriguez say 3 years at £30,000 per week = £4,680,000 plus transfer fee of £7,000,000= £11,680,000
Pog say 3 years at £30,000 per week =£4,680,000
Guthrie say 3 years at £25,000 per week =£3,900,000
Mc Cleary say 3 years at £25,000 per week=£3,900,000
Total=£12,480,000
plus 3 lots of N.I at say over 3 years=£1,500,000
compared to say £600,000
plus unknown signing-on fees for 3 players on "free" transfers say £3,000,000.

We have 3 players whereas they have one but our outlay will be say nearly £5,000,000 more.

As others have said it is impossible to make comparisons based on transfer costs alone and whether we pay loads of money or not is of no concern to us as fans-I just want us to get a few more better players in before the end of today to improve our chances,not to brag or moan about how little or how much the club has spent in doing so.
We will be able to better afford the wages over the contract period of the playyers if we stay in the Premier League.

thats my whole point. bleating on about how weve spent nothing on transfers is rollox, and spending nothing in fees on really good players>>>>spending loads on average players

[sputnik]

Everton only consider their season a success if they finish above LIverpool.

[Stuboo]

Would the people complaining about us not spending enough money also be complaining if we had spent megabucks and put the club in a difficult financial position? I am glad we continue to act prudently. We seem to be spending more than we have been before, and are able to keep our best players now - why not be happy with that? It's progress.

I understand that with teams like QPR and Southampton splashing the cash on marque signings it is easy to feel jittery. I do a little bit too. But I remember big spending teams in the past, like Brian Robson's Middlesborough who crashed out of the top division, and I feel reassured that this big spending doesn't make them better than us. I think the problem is that we did our business early in the transfer window and some people seem to have forgotten that we have signed Pogbregnyak, Guthrie, Gunter, Shorey, Mariappa, McCleary and Taylor. Now other teams are spending and we're not, it gives a false impression that we are not competing in the market.

I agree that how much we spend on players often has little to do with performance on the pitch. Football is riddled with players on big wages and big transfer values being complete toilet on the pitch (Carol?). We have done smart business, paying sensible prices for good players, and I feel we should be happy about that. I feel it's about the group of players we have and the team gelling as a unit, and I feel we have that. If you think we need to spend big to be successful, look at Everton.

The same Everton who spent £17 million on Fellaini.

Touche. Fair point. Of course you can't compare their spending to ours, but in the context of where they are in the league, they spend much less than the teams around them (LiverpooLol).

The Everton Chief Executive, Robert Elstone, had this to say about Everton's spending:

"[2006/07] We spent £4m net on new players (money we paid out on signing including Kroldrup, Davies, Johnson and Lescott less money banked on the likes of Rooney, Bent, Kilbane and Davies).

[2007/08] A net spend of £15m (further money we paid out for Kroldrup, Johnson and Lescott and new spending on the likes of Howard, Jagielka, Yakubu, Baines and Pienaar, less the money banked for Davies, Kroldrup, Beattie, McFadden and Naysmith).

[2008/09] We spent £6m net on players(payments for Yakubu, Baines, Howard, Kroldrup, Lescott and Fellaini, less monies in for McFadden, Kroldrup, Beattie and Johnson).

[2009/10] We spent £3m net on players (payments out on Yakubu, Fellaini, Bilyaletdinov, Distin and Heitinga, less monies in for Johnson, Rooney and Lescott).

[2010/11] We spent a further £7m net on players (money spent on Fellaini, Heitinga and Gueye, less cash in for Lescott and Pienaar)."

http://andersred.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/explaining-confusing-world-of-evertons.html

So it would seem that appart from in 2007/08 they have hardly splashed the cash. And yet they constantly stay up and perform well (albeit they are due a trophy).

[Wax Jacket]

well-supported enough club to pay decent wages and a well-established management set up means they make it look easier than it might be for us

[melonhead]

plus its not their first season here

[Royal Lady]

Plus Everton have sold a number of players for high values - remember this is their NET spend.

It's not so much how much we spend, as who we get for our money - and, on paper, we've made some astute signings this season - time will tell. There's always January if it's all going tits up.

[Sir Dodger Royal]

It's good to see the RTGs still exists. They were braindead last time I took the trouble to see what they had to say and nothing has changed. One would have thought that RFC would have learnt from their last dallyance with the Premiership. It's change of name to the Prmeier League won't be any differnet. If RFC reckon you get ripped off in the August buying window then what do they reckon will happen in January if you are bottom five in the League. First no decent player will want to come so yet again we will pick up breadcrumbs from the First & Championship Leagues.

It didn't work the 'Reading Way' last time and it won't work this time. Even if we stay up RFC will still not want to spend real reubles and guess what what we will miss out yet again. Real Facts from the Main Mannnnnnnnnn You know it makes sense. Wake up and smell the pizzas!

[Stuboo]

OK OK OK. So what you are saying is that we can't compare ourselves to Everton at this point in time. Perhaps it was a bad example to choose.

I still think we can be successful by being prudent in our spending and sniffing out good players at value for money. I think we as a club have learned from our "second season syndrome" last time we were in the Prem, and will spend more for our second season than we did the first time. It's the second season that concerns me more than this season TBH.

By the way, if we manage to stay in the prem for a few seasons, build slowly, expand the stadium, expand the fanbase, etc, it's possible we could become an established premier league side, like an Everton. Isn't it?

[Caskeys Lovechild]

Prudently buying intelligently, early in the transfer window

Vs.

Having fat Sam in charge and paying over the odds - oh.... and being snubbed by Andy Carroll......

[ManchesterRoyals]

Prudently buying intelligently, early in the transfer window

Vs.

Having fat Sam in charge and paying over the odds - oh.... and being snubbed by Andy Carroll......

Andy Carroll signed for them

[melonhead]

but clearly didnt really want to

[Stuboo]

but clearly didnt really want to

Until Rogers played hard ball with him, making it clear he wasn't wanted (rightly or wrongly).

[Royal Lady]

Hmmm Liverpool or West Ham - tough decision.

Carroll has now said that he's happy to go on loan for the season to be with Nolan and Fat Sam again. Wasn't it £1.5 million in a loan fee and £80,000 a week wages WHU are paying? With the possibility of £18 million or something to buy him at end of season if WHU stay up?

I'm happy with Pog, Guthrie and McCleary - they seem astute buys - as I've said - however, if these players and the likes of Leigertwood, McAnuff, Gorkks and Pearce etc can't start doing the business within the next few games, you have to wonder whether it's their playing ability that is lacking or the way we are set up to play....I love McD - don't get me wrong - and I KNOW we're in a different league now - but last year - we really worked hard and ground out the results - if we don't start doing that soon - we're going to be in a lot of trouble and with no plan B to fall back on - as the window will have shut until January.

I have to say, that I am surprised that Anton hasn't splashed a bit more cash - but then again, it's a business to him, as it was to Madejski - and he'll be wanting a return on his investment - the best way to ensure that is to keep spending low. So has it been a case of talking a good game, but not actually intending to follow it through? Just being a bit of devil's advocate here really - as I think we'll come good - particularly with Roberts and Kebe back in the mix. But I do see where the differing points of view are coming from.

[melonhead]

2 games

[Cypry]

2 games

Yup, and in neither of those did we look totally outclassed, even against the current Champios of Europe...

[Cypry]

2 games

Yup, and in neither of those did we look totally outclassed, even against the current Champios of Europe...