Let me explain why this Benteke deal is so daft and dangerous.
The current financial reality of the club means we cannot compete with the big spenders at the top of the league, City, Chelsea, even the Mancs. When things go wrong, we can't just fix it by writing a cheque for another expensive player, like those clubs can do. We definitely can't compete in terms of wages either.
When FSG came in they were telling us how they were going to run the club much better, stop paying exorbitant wages to players, especially to players who didn't deserve them, they were going to start running the club as it should be run financially, and clean up the disaster they inherited from the yanks.
So they had this model. Buy young players, cheaply, develop them, sell them for a larger profit; reinvest that money into the team, and build for the future; stop being taken advantage of in the transfer market; eventually qualify for CL, consolidate yearly CL qualification, use CL funds to reinvest in the squad. Thus, the club would start to "pay for itself." Fewer mistakes, smarter investments, etc etc.
I don't know if this model is viable. What I do know, is that we haven't actually even tried it. You can't say "it doesn't work" or "it does work," because FSG haven't been true to this approach.
Let's take two examples: Lovren and Benteke.
In 2013, Lovren was purchased by Southampton for £8.5m.
In 2014, we purchased him *from* Southampton for £20m.
In 2012, Benteke was purchased by Villa for £7m.
In 2015, we have now purchased him for £32m.
Now let's think about this for a second. Does it really make sense that Lovren suddenly became TWICE the player in one season that he was at Lyon? of course not!
As for Benteke, we bought Borini for £10m the same summer that Villa bought Benteke for £7m. Just think about that for a second. And it's not even about availability; we bought Borini nearly two months before Villa bought Benteke. So Benteke WAS on the market; we just chose to buy Borini instead.
Fast forward three years and Borini is dead wood, while we've now paid £32m for a player who was available for £7m in 2012.
Do you not see the problem? If our club were just a bit more competent, they could've scouted and found cheaper alternatives with (allegedly) higher potential. And don't give me this bollocks about not coming to us---if Lovren and Benteke would've gone to Saints and Villa respectively, there's no way in hell they would've said no to us. So that means we would have had Lovren and Benteke for around £15m, total, instead of £52m.
Does that mean they would've been successful? Absolutely not! maybe they would've been, maybe not. But the key difference is: if they would've both flopped, we would've only been out £15m, instead of £52m. £15m is a hit we can take; £52m is not.
This is why this is so frustrating. At £7m Benteke is a very, very low risk. At £32m plus £140K a week, that is a MASSSIVE risk.
I'm already wondering now which players that have been signed on the cheap this summer are we going to try to buy next summer. Looking back over the years, what other cheap deals did we miss that could've been ours? How about Cabaye? he was bought in 2011, for £4m, by Newcastle. We could've had Cabaye for £4m!!!!
THIS is why deals like Benteke are NOT good for us. Because the alleged plan that FSG wanted to implement---they only do it occasionally. I would have no problem if we had a clear cut transfer policy, where we only buy players under 25, for no more than, say, £15m. It may or may not be successful, but at least we would know where we stand. We wouldn't have head scratchers like a 27-year old Lallana for £25m. And we wouldn't be taken for mugs by clubs like Villa who then make a £25m profit on a player we could've had if we had just put in some effort in 2012.
THAT is the problem I have with this. Where were our scouts in 2012 when Benteke was available but we chose Borini? where were our scouts in 2013 when Lovren was available for £8.5m and we passed up on it? or when we, desperately needing a DM for years, let Wanyama go to Saints for £12m? I mean really, who would you rather have, Joe Allen for £15m or Wanyama for £12m?
I have no idea how Benteke is going to turn out for us. What I do know is that we would have much lower risk if we were just as smart as the small clubs who sign these players before we do. We absolutely COULD have signed Benteke in 2012; if he turned out sh*te, okay, it was a small fee anyway. But we didn't, and now we spent a massive amount of money on a player who could've been a minor risk, but now is a massive one.
Logged