Comparative Transfer Spending

I suppose it's a fine line in getting the right player who is of the right age and character etc..but it's not impossible and we have proved that with Coutinho and Sturridge.

There's no denying that both have been excellent signings mate and it proves that there are players out there for reasonable fees that can and will improve our starting 11. 

The problem when buying potential rather than quality is the hit ratio is much lower, so it'll take longer, leaving us open to the better players moving on, and we'll go through a much higher turnover of players trying to find those gems.

Doing it our way, getting more quality into the squad is an ever evolving target, like trying to fill a leaky bucket with water. 

Yeah I know and if the thread was about the whole "puzzle" rather than comparative spending I'd have commented on that in even more depth.
Indeed it is which is why I only commented on it... "All the great coaching, tactical nous and team spirit in the World will only take you so far... better players guarantee sustained success." 

Anyhow... thanks for the support.

Then I must have misunderstood your context because it appeared you where saying cash = trophies.

Then I must have misunderstood your context because it appeared you where saying cash = trophies.

Cash does equal trophies.

The best teams in any top league are the ones who spend the most on players and wages.

There will be the occasional anomaly, but that's statistically expected.

Cash does equal trophies.

The best teams in any top league are the ones who spend the most on players and wages.

There will be the occasional anomaly, but that's statistically expected.

Not always. Ask Herr Klopp. You strike me as a football fan of the post Abramovich era.

Not always. Ask Herr Klopp.

Couldn't he be best described as "the occasional anomaly" tho'?

Now that he's took to selling his best players, without replacing them with 'better', it might, indeed, be a good idea to ask him. Or you could just ask Señor Pep Guardiola instead... "What's it like to be unbeaten and 17 points clear of Herr Klopp, with 14 games left; knowing that another one of his best players is coming to you in the Summer?"   

Then I must have misunderstood your context because it appeared you where saying cash = trophies.

Here's exactly what I said: "The team with the best players consistently win most titles/trophies. When those players go into decline and aren't replaced the team declines...  All the great coaching, tactical nous and team spirit in the World will only take you so far... better players guarantee sustained success. Like it or not the best players tend to cost the most money... At some point be it after 3 years [now], 5 years or 10 years [if we have ambition] we are going to have to spend bigger on individual players."

There's nothing untrue or inaccurate about what I said so I'm happy enough if you want to equate cash with trophies and (better still) if you want to debate the parts of my post which, you believe, aren't accurate. 

but cash doesn't equal trophies, ask Wigan, Birmingham and Swansea.

Why not ask Chelsea, Man U, Man City, Barcelona or Bayern instead Al? 

"The team with the best players consistently win most titles/trophies...  better players guarantee sustained success."

Why not ask Chelsea, Man U, Man City, Barcelona or Bayern instead Al? 

"The team with the best players consistently win most titles/trophies...  better players guarantee sustained success."

Truth, and no amount of romance and bluster can escape that. Sadly enough.

Why not ask Chelsea, Man U, Man City, Barcelona or Bayern instead Al? 

"The team with the best players consistently win most titles/trophies...  better players guarantee sustained success."

While I agree completely , the decline and fall of the manc empire suggests that other factors can also have a huge bearing on the success or failure of a club.  The mancs won the league at a stroll last season (11 points clear of second). Same players different manager and they are already 15 points off the top.

Like Liverpool when Kenny left (the first time) or Leeds when Revie left, it shows that having the best players is not always enough. Although personally I don't think the mancs had the best players last season, but perhaps the best team?

We have tried to be shrewd in recent transfer windows which will do no harm but good.  We need to maintain that we work hard in trying to invest wisely in the transfer market to bridge some of the gap against the big spenders.  Whilst recently we have been at a massive disadvantage with no champions league.  We really need to make deals happen quicker.  Obviously some deals can be more complicated than others.  But apart from being shrewd we need to be persuasive and quick and if there is any poncing about waiting for different offers we should make a point of making it public that we moved away from the deal and definitely not going back.  In trying to make it clear that our deals can't be dragged too long or we'll go for another option.

Now that he's took to selling his best players, without replacing them with 'better', it might, indeed, be a good idea to ask him. Or you could just ask Señor Pep Guardiola instead... "What's it like to be unbeaten and 17 points clear of Herr Klopp, with 14 games left; knowing that another one of his best players is coming to you in the Summer?"   

I'm not saying that the Dortmund way will always prevail against the big money giants. Don't know how it can be suggested that I said anything more that, despite the difficulties, the big money men can still be overcome. Note the word 'always' in my previous post BBB. Klopp in contrast didn't have to spend much on bringing Lewandowski to the club and instantly turned him into a top class striker. Plenty of players bought by Klopp where he has transformed them such as Kagawa, Hummells, Pisczckek or even more cheaply by developing players within the Dortmund ranks such as Sahin. Klopp will find the bargains and the talents again within to repeat what he has achieved without the need to spend millions. If Guardiola and Bayern thinks he has put Klopp and Dortmund down then they can think again especially with the likelihood that Pep won't be there for much longer than 3-4 years. Not a man to be dismissed and an example to be made of. I do think highly of Klopp and he is just evidence that intelligence over money can still succeed.

I'm not saying that the Dortmund way will always prevail against the big money giants. Don't know how it can be suggested that I said anything more that, despite the difficulties, the big money men can still be overcome.

Yeah... occasionally, not always. 

Note the word 'always' in my previous post BBB.

I have, indeed, noted the word "always" in your previous post FMS; as in "Not always". I also note that in noname's post he admitted "There will be the occasional anomaly" [or "not always", if you prefer].

I now note that your "not always" and his "occasional anomaly" are the same thing. So it's all good.