Are the 'big' 4, well 3 in trouble?

[eye666]

So Yanited's dominace in the 90's was because they bought the league? Or Arsenal's 49 game unbeaten run was because they spent millions and millions on players?

Granted Man Utd had a good youth team and brought through a lot of players but... - Roy Keane (£3.75m - at the time English record), Andy Cole (£7m), In 1997-98 'Alex Ferguson went on a spending spree of £28.35 million (twice breaking the club's transfer record) by signing Dutch defender Jaap Stam from PSV, Trinidadian striker Dwight Yorke from Aston Villa and Swedish winger Jesper Blomqvist from Parma.'

Arsenal's 49 game unbeaten squad contained Bergkamp (£7.5m), Henry (£10.5m), Reyes (£10.5m - 17.5m depending on add-ons), Kanu (£4.2m), Wiltord (£13m), Edu (£6m), Gilberto Silva (£4.5m) etc. etc.

Is that good enough evidence? Not trying to start an argument, just putting over my point of view that whoever spends, wins.

[Simi]

Man Utd - Roy Keane (£3.75m - at the time English record), Andy Cole (£7m), In 1997-98 'Alex Ferguson went on a spending spree of £28.35 million (twice breaking the club's transfer record) by signing Dutch defender Jaap Stam from PSV, Trinidadian striker Dwight Yorke from Aston Villa and Swedish winger Jesper Blomqvist from Parma.'

Arsenal's 49 game unbeaten squad contained Bergkamp (£7.5m), Henry (£10.5m), Reyes (£10.5m - 17.5m depending on add-ons), Kanu (£4.2m), Wiltord (£13m), Edu (£6m), Gilberto Silva (£4.5m) etc. etc.

Is that good enough evidence? Not trying to start an argument, just putting over my point of view that whoever spends, wins.

But breaking into the top four is not solely on spending now. Surely, if that was the case then Spurs would be ahead of Arsenal. They've spent much more on players lately than Arsenal have. Yet, last season they managed to finish in the botttom half of the table! Doesn't always work like that.

[Uncle Albert]

Granted Man Utd had a good youth team and brought through a lot of players but... - Roy Keane (£3.75m - at the time English record), Andy Cole (£7m), In 1997-98 'Alex Ferguson went on a spending spree of £28.35 million (twice breaking the club's transfer record) by signing Dutch defender Jaap Stam from PSV, Trinidadian striker Dwight Yorke from Aston Villa and Swedish winger Jesper Blomqvist from Parma.'

Arsenal's 49 game unbeaten squad contained Bergkamp (£7.5m), Henry (£10.5m), Reyes (£10.5m - 17.5m depending on add-ons), Kanu (£4.2m), Wiltord (£13m), Edu (£6m), Gilberto Silva (£4.5m) etc. etc.

Is that good enough evidence? Not trying to start an argument, just putting over my point of view that whoever spends, wins.

Arsenal didnt spend on all of them players the summer before they went on the 49 game unbeaten record did they? So how you can say Bergkamp and others who had all been there a season before they want on the unbeaten streak is laughable.

Compared to what Mourinho spent in a summer Man Yanited and Arsenal have spent nothing.

[eye666]

But breaking into the top four is not solely on spending now. Surely, if that was the case then Spurs would be ahead of Arsenal. They've spent much more on players lately than Arsenal have. Yet, last season they managed to finish in the botttom half of the table! Doesn't always work like that.

I am not denying that, but surely that comes down to poor management and buying the wrong players for stupid money? Darren Bent for £18m for example was ludicrous. For that money I'm sure they could have got a much better striker. Henry cost less then that for example. But the teams that win the league and do well, spend a lot of money and buy the right players. But they do spend a lot of money and will continue to if they want to remain at the top. But they have the basis to do so with the extra revenue from the Champions League. I don't think they are in trouble at all and will more than likely only get better.

[Simi]

I am not denying that, but surely that comes down to poor management and buying the wrong players for stupid money? Darren Bent for £18m for example was ludicrous. For that money I'm sure they could have got a much better striker. Henry cost less then that for example. But the teams that win the league and do well, spend a lot of money and buy the right players. But they do spend a lot of money and will continue to if they want to remain at the top. But they have the basis to do so with the extra revenue from the Champions League. I don't think they are in trouble at all and will more than likely only get better.

Indeed, but I am just identifying that it isn't possible to just buy yourself a place in the big four without good management and selection of players. Which is what some people think is going to happen, like Flynny!

[eye666]

Arsenal didnt spend on all of them players the summer before they went on the 49 game unbeaten record did they? So how you can say Bergkamp and others who had all been there a season before they want on the unbeaten streak is laughable.

Compared to what Mourinho spent in a summer Man Yanited and Arsenal have spent nothing.

Mourinho spent £92m in that summer and recouped £20m from players sold. United just spent £80m and made back about £15m. £7m is not a lot of difference for these big spending clubs. Does no-one see my point? I think you're missing it. All I'm saying is that the clusb that win spend vast sums of money to win the title. That's business, and that's football.

[Number 6]

I reckon Manderic expects us to take L'pool's place in the big 4 within 3 years doesn't he?

[Flynny]

Indeed, but I am just identifying that it isn't possible to just buy yourself a place in the big four without good management and selection of players. Which is what some people think is going to happen, like Flynny!

Good money attracts good management. Or ugly failures, it can go either way.