It's one of my biggest arguments when people say we can't win the League because of the money involved. We've had money and spent it. And all too often we've spent it wrongly. That's the biggest difference between now and then. Which is why in my opening post you quoted I said we had to go back to basics and make sure the players we were signing, were the right people.
First off: as you are probably aware Billy - I have often argued the very same thing [i.e. we have had money and lots of it but it's been spent on the wrong 'type' of player]. In my opinion (and it's only that); instead of buying three, four, five, players 'with potential' we could have spent that same money to buy and pay players who would have, there and then, added to a team which was performing well.
Instead of buying a squad of young and easily paid, players and throwing them all together, in the hope that they all become good all at once; we should have replaced lost experience with similar or better quality... just to keep up.
Because... and this is where 'life' really is different from 'the good old days' - we are playing catch up - we do not have the luxury of being able to wait as we integrate players (who might turn out to be LFC quality) into an already winning team.
The route we were on since the Summer of 2012 until 2015, saw us spend well over £200m - none of it on genuine, top quality, first team improvers.
The difference between 'now' and 'then' isn't the amount of money spent because that's all relative Billy: the difference is starting position. Back in the day we bought players who strengthened the first team [a team which was already strong]
and we bought players with potential. We could wait on kids coming through; we could integrate new players gradually and watch them grow alongside top players. Sadly we now do not have that luxury; we are starting from behind.
I fully understand the premise that we should get back to the "basics" of buying the right player Billy, I really do but right now [and for as long as we are playing catch up], in my opinion, the "right players" are the best, 'ready-made', players we can get for any position.
You want a new striker? Bust a gut to get the best; your first choice... not second or third best and not someone who might, eventually, maybe be a good 'un two, three or five seasons from now and certainly not one because he's less of a liability on the books, for your investors.
When you talk of basics and the right players, think of this: [
for illustration purposes only] - Sanchez; Costa; Fabregas; Song - four players with a combined cost of around £95m - three of which came from Barca, who we were doing business with... How many of them wouldn't have been "right"? How worse off would we have been with them in the team?
I, genuinely, believe we are close enough in thinking, as to make no difference Billy. Just to be clear: I know the right players need not cost a lot of money but similarly... the cost of a top quality player shouldn't exclude him from being considered as the right player [which I believe has been happening from 2012 'til now, as FSG sought/seek 'value for money' for their investors].