davieG Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 https://tomkinstimes.com/2020/01/craving-context-worlds-best-liverpool-would-be-cheapest-champions-bar-leicester-since-1992/ If Liverpool hold onto their lead in the title race all the way through to May then, aside from Leicester’s improbable triumph in 2016, they would be the cheapest champions – by some distance – since Roman Abramovich changed English football. (The oligarch arrived in 2003 but it was 2004/05 when his spending coincided with a league title and contributed to the demise of Arsenal, then the best team in the land.) And in relative terms, they would be the cheapest champions (aside from Leicester) since at least 1992, when, as we know, all records began. Something all English people should be proud of – but of course, won’t! – is that the Reds are now ranked the 4th-best team in history according the long-established ClubElo rankings (based on all football results in history), just to sum up the incredible context of what the club is achieving. Some may argue (wrongly) that what Liverpool are doing is in some way bad for English football, but becoming the best team in the world on roughly half the budget of Manchester City – and by spending far less on transfers than the title-winning sides of Chelsea and Manchester United since 2004 – is an incredible achievement. Being smarter, and applying more attention to detail to make marginal gains, is a good thing. Buying undervalued players, often from relegated clubs, and making them world-class is a good thing. Finding little-known coaches – such as Pepijn Lijnders – and analytics staff, and having them make a world of difference is a good thing. A policy of only giving big wages to players who have already proved themselves at your own club is a good thing. (Seems like they achieved it by copying LCFC) Lot more in the link with charts etc.
Xen Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Van Dijk alone cost triple what our title-winning XI did. Hate these articles which are "X are the best at Y, except for this important caveat we've brushed over". Well, in that case, X arent the best at Y then, are they?!
Babylon Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 2 minutes ago, Xen said: Van Dijk alone cost triple what our title-winning XI did. Hate these articles which are "X are the best at Y, except for this important caveat we've brushed over". Well, in that case, X arent the best at Y then, are they?! Broke the world record for a keeper and a CB... yeah really cheap that!
Xen Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Just now, Babylon said: Broke the world record for a keeper and a CB... yeah really cheap that! Completely forgot about Allison! So thats about £130million tied up in just two players. From previous windows; Fabinho and Keita add another £100m, Salah and Oxlade-Chamberlain £60m, Mane and Wijnaldum £60m I find it very hard to believe that no other team since 2003 has spent as little, especially as the british transfer record was 'only' £30m for half of that time.
Dahnsouff Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 6 minutes ago, Babylon said: Broke the world record for a keeper and a CB... yeah really cheap that! Just now, Xen said: Completely forgot about Allison! So thats about £130million tied up in just two players. From previous windows; Fabinho and Keita add another £100m, Salah and Oxlade-Chamberlain £60m, Mane and Wijnaldum £60m I find it very hard to believe that no other team since 2003 has spent as little, especially as the british transfer record was 'only' £30m for half of that time. NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND!
Xen Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said: NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! NET SPEND! I could sell a house for £100k then buy another house for £120k - doesn't mean I got it for a 'cheap' £20k. Liverpool have done well on sales, admittedly, fleecing Coutinho to Barca for a ridiculous sum and then moving on crap like Solanke and Ward (sorry) for way more than they were worth. Still doesn't mean that they've been thrifty when buying in the market (which is what all these articles are trying to imply)
Alf Bentley Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Change thread title to: "Liverpool would not be cheapest champions since 1992. Leicester will be - and probably always will be!"
Dahnsouff Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 1 minute ago, Xen said: I could sell a house for £100k then buy another house for £120k - doesn't mean I got it for a 'cheap' £20k. Liverpool have done well on sales, admittedly, fleecing Coutinho to Barca for a ridiculous sum and then moving on crap like Solanke and Ward (sorry) for way more than they were worth. Still doesn't mean that they've been thrifty when buying in the market (which is what all these articles are trying to imply) Of course, I was being deliberately obtuse. The amount spent is the overriding factor, not the amount accrued from sales, but this obviously important to running a club sustainably.
Fox92 Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Literally every club spends to win the league. When Man City first won the league Fergie needed a goalscorer so just went out and bought Van Persie. Aside from us, and probably Arsenal under Wenger who didn't spend as much as Fergie, the rest chuck money at the league (mainly Chelsea and Man City).
Dahnsouff Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 The media will now begin the campaign to champion the Liverpool win* above and beyond any other winners, including us (Which would be patently ridiculous), Manchester City, anyone. * other results are apparently possible Another factor anytime a title win for Liverpool, or Manchester United occurs, even Chelsea or Arsenal, less so Manchester City, and infinitely less when we did, is to recognise that the starting points for all clubs are not equal, the brand value earns/gifts some clubs a greater capability in financial attitudes/behaviours than others. There is not a problem with this, except when some clubs fans state their own win is as unlikely as others.
Alf Bentley Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 - I won the primary school obstacle race, bar the lad who finished ahead of me - Man City, Leicester & Chelsea are set to contest the PL title, bar Liverpool who'll finish ahead of them - Corbyn's Labour stormed to election victory in December, bar Johnson's Tories, who defeated them.... p.s. I've only just twigged that @Dahnsouff lives in southern England (the Reading reference a clue) and is not from Switzerland, Alsace or somewhere vaguely Franco-Germanic...
urban.spaceman Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 So, the cheapest Champions since 2016 then?
Realjimbo Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Lies, damn lies and statistics. The same as the "supercomputer" that said we wouldn't lose again all season just prior to Burnley away! Granted Liverpool have a tremendous team but it is utterly impossible to compare teams from different era's let alone countries (only cup competitions). Yet more journalistic crap when there's not much happening on the pitch.... S'pose it's marginally better that hiding behind sand dunes in Dubai.
Oxfordfox83 Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 29 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: - I won the primary school obstacle race, bar the lad who finished ahead of me - Man City, Leicester & Chelsea are set to contest the PL title, bar Liverpool who'll finish ahead of them - Corbyn's Labour stormed to election victory in December, bar Johnson's Tories, who defeated them.... p.s. I've only just twigged that @Dahnsouff lives in southern England (the Reading reference a clue) and is not from Switzerland, Alsace or somewhere vaguely Franco-Germanic... 🤯
yorkie1999 Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 We've got at least 10 years of this guff!!!
Dahnsouff Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 18 minutes ago, Oxfordfox83 said: 🤯 Yes, disappointing, I felt quite exotic for a while after reading @Alf Bentley's post.
RoboFox Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 That's the longest article I've ever read and come away with absolutely nothing. What a load of dog mess.
Alf Bentley Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 4 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said: Yes, disappointing, I felt quite exotic for a while after reading @Alf Bentley's post. Sadly, this is now how I see you.....
Dahnsouff Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Just now, Alf Bentley said: Sadly, this is now how I see you..... Its like looking in a mirror
Jattdogg Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Ffs lpool fans are going to be unbearable. Congrats Liverpool, the 2019-2020 English Premier League Champions (*VAR). I need a few pints sigh.
foxy boxing Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Is the moral of the story that is is not how much money you spend on players, it is how you coach them and how you get the best out of the team or squad, week in week out and how you manage them. you can spend millions on players and still be dross, look at Manure.
Les-TA-Jon Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 Thing is, if you actually read the article, there's some good stuff in there - they're essentially saying "Liverpool have won it, and dominated it to an unprecedented level and spent less than traditional winners when doing so" That's totally fair. So it seems odd to make the nonsensical claim that Liverpool have done it 'cheaper' than anyone else - they haven't - and to put that claim in a headline! They've done it with less than other big spending sides of the past, but 'less than' isn't synonymous with 'we're thrifty AF' But fair play to them. They're amazing and are doing completely unprecedented things right now.
Leicester_Loyal Posted 11 February 2020 Posted 11 February 2020 What a crap article. They've literally spend hundreds of millions.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.