The acid test

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, shailen said:

Like I said, if you're a top manager, like the media makes him out to be, then you don't blow a 14 point lead in half a season over United. You can't argue that the form second half of the season has been worrying. I'm a big fan of BR and I don't want him to go anywhere but he does need to reflect on what went wrong if we don't get CL football. 

 

Net spend is a terrible statistic, considering we have sold Kante, Drinkwater, Mahrez and Maguire in that time. Our recruitment though has been fantastic but there's no doubt we've spent a decent amount. 

Why is net spend a terrible statistic?

[VLC86]

Is there where you start to question if you have been drugged when you see Matty James on the bench?

[shailen]

6 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Why is net spend a terrible statistic?

Take Liverpool since 2014. A net spend of £18m which seems phenomenal but they've signed Van Dijk and Allison for big money and sold Coutinho for big money. It makes them look like they've controlled spending when in fact they've bought and sold for more value. It's a statistic that allows you to hide bad signings. We could have signed almost 3 Slimani's for what we got for Maguire. 

[shailen]

Good point today. No doubt the sending off was the turning point but we did well to grind out that result. 

[HybridFox]

we're never boring 

[coolhandfox]

11 hours ago, shailen said:

Take Liverpool since 2014. A net spend of £18m which seems phenomenal but they've signed Van Dijk and Allison for big money and sold Coutinho for big money. It makes them look like they've controlled spending when in fact they've bought and sold for more value. It's a statistic that allows you to hide bad signings. We could have signed almost 3 Slimani's for what we got for Maguire. 

Doesn't change a lot, net spend we are 11th, actual spend we are 9th so still punching above our weight!

 

As for you point about hiding poor signings with net spend, net spend does however take in to account selling well and at the right time, case in point Liverpool sale Coutinho for 140m us selling Maguire.

 

Net spend for me is a better indication of how well a club uses the transfer market as selling well can be as important a buying well.

[shailen]

38 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Doesn't change a lot, net spend we are 11th, actual spend we are 9th so still punching above our weight!

 

As for you point about hiding poor signings with net spend, net spend does however take in to account selling well and at the right time, case in point Liverpool sale Coutinho for 140m us selling Maguire.

 

Net spend for me is a better indication of how well a club uses the transfer market as selling well can be as important a buying well.

Yeah true, but as you say there are obviously 2 elements to recruitment. Buying and selling. Just because you do one well it doesn't mean you do well in the other, so using net spend can sometimes hide the fact you've done one of the two poorer than the other. 

 

Fortunately for us, we have done both really well over recent years and it's why we are where we are today and competing with the best in the league. We've reinvested the money and improved our squad each time we've lost one of our star players!