Lambert09 Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 i’m always curious on where we lie with our net spend compared to others. So i was wondering how people would rank the clubs for this summer. Now i know ffp might have an impact in this but then you see clubs like villa still popping off cash, so i’m not sure if you can even use it as a measurement. The rankings are for what you think they will spend, so not a rich list but who you think will actually splash it. my stab would be: 1.Man City 2.Newcastle ( i seemed to remember seeing they had a lot of room with ffp after years without investment) 3. Spurs (150m just been injected supposedly) 4. chelsea (could see some big cb deals) 5.man u 6. arsenal 7. villa 8. fulham ( i think they’ll splash the dough) 9. Liverpool ( i’m not sure if they will spend much this summer, could be lower than us) 10. west ham 11. playoff winners 12. palace 13. wolves 14. Us ( 12-18 is a crap shoot imo) 15. brighton 16. bournemouth (just a guess but i don’t think they will throw money at it) 17. southampton 18. leeds (probably from here to palace you’d be looking at 20m net ) 19. brentford (i imagine they will be spending on contracts) 20. everton ( not a pot to piss in) This newcastle thing really is annoying. It’s pure corruption and they are going to pull away, i’m just bracing myself for it. Obviously it would be nice to stay optimistic but 7 teams with the ability to net spend 100m each summer is going to be hard to keep up with.
davieG Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 https://fb.watch/dff7xq9I_p/ Breakdown Of Total Transfer and Wage Spend Since The Start Of The Premier League 1 3
Fox92 Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 57 minutes ago, Lambert09 said: This newcastle thing really is annoying. It’s pure corruption and they are going to pull away, i’m just bracing myself for it. Obviously it would be nice to stay optimistic but 7 teams with the ability to net spend 100m each summer is going to be hard to keep up with. No they're not. Wannabe "big club". No player will go there unless it's for money. They'll end up signing a summer of okay PL players such as Tarkowski. There will still be 6 or 7 teams better than them next season at the very least. 1
JimJams Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 Given their form since January, that’s a bold statement. 2
volpeazzurro Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 35 minutes ago, JimJams said: Given their form since January, that’s a bold statement. It is and although they had an injection of cash, even with those players, one who was injured fairly quickly and one, Wood, a bit of a flop, they finished only 3 points behind us! Bearing in mind the predicament they'd been in and comparing their overall squad with ours, it really does for me suggest a tale of two managers. It could have been worse if we hadn't played the very poor Norwich, Watford and Southampton at the end! One manager has been progressive and revitalised a failing almost down and out team, the other has been travelling by the seat of his pants, blaming his players whilst employing poor tactics and flawed philosophy for over a season with several of his players regressing drastically. Tielemans is probably one of a few questioning their future under him and his coaching staff. I think his blarney has been found out and his bubble burst. 2 1
Fox92 Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 1 hour ago, JimJams said: Given their form since January, that’s a bold statement. Form will drive expectation up. It's carrying into the next season which is the toughest thing to do.
Muzzy_no7 Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 2 hours ago, JimJams said: Given their form since January, that’s a bold statement. Howes Bournemouth were very streaky in the prem. Soon as he started messing and splashing money they crashed though.
Aus Fox Posted 26 May 2022 Posted 26 May 2022 Interesting we only sneak into this list in 12th at the end, yet one of only 5 clubs to win the full set. Some of the clubs who have spent ridiculous amounts of money and gone down Boro, Sunderland, Leeds, Fulham then the clubs who are top 10 and won nothing in that time Everton, Newcastle,West Ham, Villa and Southampton have what a couple of league cups and one Fa Cup at 30 odd years ago between them. 8 hours ago, davieG said: https://fb.watch/dff7xq9I_p/ Breakdown Of Total Transfer and Wage Spend Since The Start Of The Premier League 1
The Quick Brown Fox Posted 27 May 2022 Posted 27 May 2022 23 hours ago, Fox92 said: No they're not. Wannabe "big club". No player will go there unless it's for money. They'll end up signing a summer of okay PL players such as Tarkowski. There will still be 6 or 7 teams better than them next season at the very least. Reminds me of another club that became rich all of a sudden and players only went there for the big money. Just trying to think how they're doing now? Oohhh yeah! 2
Stadt Posted 27 May 2022 Posted 27 May 2022 16 hours ago, Aus Fox said: Interesting we only sneak into this list in 12th at the end, yet one of only 5 clubs to win the full set. Some of the clubs who have spent ridiculous amounts of money and gone down Boro, Sunderland, Leeds, Fulham then the clubs who are top 10 and won nothing in that time Everton, Newcastle,West Ham, Villa and Southampton have what a couple of league cups and one Fa Cup at 30 odd years ago between them. It's essentially just a list of who has spent the longest amount of time in the league, skewed heavily towards clubs that have been in it for the last 10 years. It'd be much more useful with wages & transfer spending separated. 1
SheppyFox Posted 27 May 2022 Posted 27 May 2022 Spending doesn’t always equal success, look at United and Everton for example. Newcastle won’t necessarily do well anytime soon. 1
Fox92 Posted 30 May 2022 Posted 30 May 2022 On 27/05/2022 at 15:30, browniefox said: Reminds me of another club that became rich all of a sudden and players only went there for the big money. Just trying to think how they're doing now? Oohhh yeah! It also took Man City about 5 years before they won the league.
Recommended Posts