Final Net Spend Values

So these are the updated net spend numbers of the top 6 clubs in the PL via TransferMrkt updated as of the close. Tribunal fees are counted as free transfers until the final number is determined.

Liverpool

Total market value arrivals       £80.10
Total market value depart         £37.75

Net transfer                                £42.35



Chelsea

Total market value arrivals        £126.10
Total market value depart         £110.50

Net transfer                                 £15.60


Manchester United

Total market value arrivals       £147.96
Total market value depart        £7.65

Net transfer                               £140.31


Manchester City         

Total market value arrivals     £219.87
Total market value depart      £75.02

Net transfer                            £144.85



Arsenal

Total market value arrivals   £47.70
Total market value depart    £61.83

Net transfer                           £ -14.13


Tottenham Hotspur

Total market value arrivals  £66.60
Total market value depart   £89.64

Net transfer                          £-23.04



In order of the all important net transfer final positions

Manchester City        £144.85
Manchester United   £140.31
Liverpool                    £42.35
Chelsea                      £15.60
Arsenal                      £-14.13
Spurs                         £-23.04

Only stat im concerned with is the fact we have done nothing about our weak spot.

Only stat im concerned with is the fact we have done nothing about our weak spot.

CB is a serious concern of mine also...really the only one I had going into this window once Salah was done.

As others have said, it makes no sense as to why we did not even try to bring in a younger CB to groom while we waited to try again on VVD.

Only the manger and a select few will ever know the answer though.

Thought I'd add our net spends since FSG took over:-

2011/12  +£39m
2012/13  +£54m
2013/14  +£23m
2014/15  +£47m
2015/16  +£32m
2016/17  -£5m
2017/18  +£42m (so far)

Liverpool average: £33m per season

Compared to our rivals' average over the same period:

Man City: £93m per season
Man Utd: £88m per season
Chelsea: £31m per season
Arsenal: £27m per season

Only stat im concerned with is the fact we have done nothing about our weak spot.

I bet Michael Edwards' wife tells him to go the shop to buy some milk and proceeds to scans the shelves, buys a tin of beans, cereal, bread, some fruit and veg, pays at the till and leaves the shop...forgetting the milk.

Thought I'd add our net spends since FSG took over:-

2011/12  +£39m
2012/13  +£54m
2013/14  +£23m
2014/15  +£47m
2015/16  +£32m
2016/17  -£5m
2017/18  +£42m (so far)

Liverpool average: £33m per season

Compared to our rivals' average over the same period:

Man City: £93m per season
Man Utd: £88m per season
Chelsea: £31m per season
Arsenal: £27m per season

Well to be fair, we haven't got the money like Utd and City so it seems appropriate?!

So these are the updated net spend numbers of the top 6 clubs in the PL via TransferMrkt updated as of the close. Tribunal fees are counted as free transfers until the final number is determined.

Liverpool

Total market value arrivals       £80.10
Total market value depart         £37.75

Net transfer                                £42.35



Chelsea

Total market value arrivals        £126.10
Total market value depart         £110.50

Net transfer                                 £15.60


Manchester United

Total market value arrivals       £147.96
Total market value depart        £7.65

Net transfer                               £140.31


Manchester City         

Total market value arrivals     £219.87
Total market value depart      £75.02

Net transfer                            £144.85



Arsenal

Total market value arrivals   £47.70
Total market value depart    £61.83

Net transfer                           £ -14.13


Tottenham Hotspur

Total market value arrivals  £66.60
Total market value depart   £89.64

Net transfer                          £-23.04



In order of the all important net transfer final positions

Manchester City        £144.85
Manchester United   £140.31
Liverpool                    £42.35
Chelsea                      £15.60
Arsenal                      £-14.13
Spurs                         £-23.04

You only went and did it...

You only went and did it...

Somebody was going to 

Well to be fair, we haven't got the money like Utd and City so it seems appropriate?!

In all seriousness it is, people need to realise that we simply do not have the financial muscle of the Manchester clubs. I'm still pissed off we didn't get a CB though, even one on loan would do.

In all seriousness it is, people need to realise that we simply do not have the financial muscle of the Manchester clubs. I'm still pissed off we didn't get a CB though, even one on loan would do.

You're making out we had a tenner. Don't care what they've got. We've got sufficient funds.

You're making out we had a tenner. Don't care what they've got. We've got sufficient funds.

Have you looked at the clubs books, how do you know what the budget was beyond reading tweets from ITK's?

In terms of departures, £0 lost for us in terms of value to the squad.

Where is all that TV and CL money going if we supposedly lack the funds?

You have mid-table clubs and Premier League minnows smashing their transfer records and signing players for sums that were previously unthinkable for them, but a club of our stature can't even afford a top class CB?

Bollocks. Bullshit. Brickleberry.

CB is a serious concern of mine also...really the only one I had going into this window once Salah was done.

As others have said, it makes no sense as to why we did not even try to bring in a younger CB to groom while we waited to try again on VVD.

Only the manger and a select few will ever know the answer though.

I find the "bring a young CB to groom" idea a peculiar one. With plenty of talent in the youth department, isn't that where we groom already? Any CB that was going to be brought in needed to be a starter, and immediately better than anything we have. That cuts down the options right there. I'm frustrated this Van Dijk deal didn't come off, but I'm not sure just grabbing whatever slapper was keen at 4am in the club is the right move either.

I find the "bring a young CB to groom" idea a peculiar one. With plenty of talent in the youth department, isn't that where we groom already? Any CB that was going to be brought in needed to be a starter, and immediately better than anything we have. That cuts down the options right there. I'm frustrated this Van Dijk deal didn't come off, but I'm not sure just grabbing whatever slapper was keen at 4am in the club is the right move either.

Just not to aware of talent at that position in the youth set-up...we have not seen any taken on tour nor touted (not counting Gomez btw)...just think a fella like Tah at Leverkusen would have fit the bill as a decent Sub and someone you could build with along with VVD.

A good OP, some interesting figures, but I don't see the point, with all due respect.
And that's only because I have a bit of tunnel vision when it comes to these things.

My only concern is "have we improved the team/squad".

To me, the answer is yes.

In terms of departures, £0 lost for us in terms of value to the squad.

And putting it another way, a net gain, perhaps in more than monetary terms with Sakho gone.

I have a hard time believing he's that bad, but apparently Klopp thinks he is, and it's his team, so there you go.

I enjoy Klopps role; he has the power, and apparently, he's not afraid to use it.

but I don't see the point, with all due respect.

To some it means everything Swab....I just posted it as a way to look at what the clubs I consider our biggest rivals in the top spots accomplished.

Think City massively overpaid on FB's, while I think Spurs once again managed to keep it's spine intact and got a helluva deal on Walker.

To some it means everything Swab....I just posted it as a way to look at what the clubs I consider our biggest rivals in the top spots accomplished.

Think City massively overpaid on FB's, while I think Spurs once again managed to keep it's spine intact and got a helluva deal on Walker.

Yeah, I know, and if I fail to understand it as a way of expressing quality in a team, that's my issue, no one elses.

I think about signings, but not in terms of cost, rather in terms of contribution, and I think we're doing well, and catching up.

Yeah, I know, and if I fail to understand it as a way of expressing quality in a team, that's my issue, no one elses.

I think about signings, but not in terms of cost, rather in terms of contribution, and I think we're doing well, and catching up.

One of the reasons I think Spurs have done so well as of late is they're ability to keep the team together and only lose 1-2 players a year and integrate the new players into a system that is already functioning well as a squad.

You can lose 1-2 first team players a year and be fine if the rest of the squad is a cohesive unit...its the massive turnover that burns you.

I agree though we are catching up.

Have you looked at the clubs books, how do you know what the budget was beyond reading tweets from ITK's?

You think we don't have much money to spend if we want to?

Net spend is bogus when taken in to consideration in isolation.

Anyhow...

Sold no one of significance and added to our squad - a positive.

Still needed a CB - a negative.

Still positive we'll be in the top 3 at the very least. Our attack will cover for our defensive deficiencies but for next season that has to be addressed 100%.

Now let's talk F***ing footy and not numbers for the love of Christ

Let's look at one window in isolation; not too shabby; eh? 😂😂😂

"Ah but... ah but... I'm only giving you the info. Not trying to twist anything"

Spending £500m on [value for money] mediocrity or £500m on top talent: there's the difference. "Next year"; right? 🙄

but I'm not sure just grabbing whatever slapper was keen at 4am in the club is the right move either.

But.... sometimes, just sometimes that slapper turns out to be the best night of your life 

To some it means everything Swab....I just posted it as a way to look at what the clubs I consider our biggest rivals in the top spots accomplished.

It really is irrelevant to compare net spend against 'rivals' because it depends where they are and what they need in comparison.

The question is did we solve what we had to prior to this window irrespective of net..

Answer. Sorry it's got to be a no so therefore the window has ultimately been another failure.

I'm happy with a couple of the players in, I think they are really really good players in terms of Salah and Chamberlain but the squad still has issues that we haven't sorted and that makes it a letdown

It really is irrelevant to compare net spend against 'rivals' because it depends where they are and what they need in comparison.

The question is did we solve what we had to prior to this window irrespective of net..

Answer. Sorry it's got to be a no so therefore the window has ultimately been another failure.

I'm happy with a couple of the players in, I think they are really really good players in terms of Salah and Chamberlain but the squad still has issues that we haven't sorted and that makes it a letdown

Yep it was a failure mate

It really is irrelevant to compare net spend against 'rivals' because it depends where they are and what they need in comparison.

The question is did we solve what we had to prior to this window irrespective of net.

Spot on buddy. For e.g. we could sell a world class striker (the catalyst for all attacks) and spend twice as much on okay players in all other positions but...

If you buy pish in the one area you're now lacking [striker]; it doesn't matter how much you spend.

The lads we brought in this window, good as they are in their own right, aren't exactly what was needed. They are the type you look to AFTER you've addressed the big issue, in my opinion, obviously.

The proof of the pudding will always be in the eating and i genuinely hope i am wrong but right now; that window was a big anti-climax. 😕

Let's look at one window in isolation; those two games we won against Hoffeneim will cover our out lay no matter how dismally we do in the group stages where we'll earn over £50m in gate, tv money and for just turning up..

Have you looked at the clubs books, how do you know what the budget was beyond reading tweets from ITK's?

Shouldn't need to have to analyse books to realise that in order to be successful (and I believe we are supposed to be one of the top 10 richest clubs) you need to invest each transfer window.

Being as we spent zero each of the last two windows it would not be too difficult to presume that the budget for both of those windows (and I mean more than £10) plus the budget for this window should be available.

We are basically just falling further away each transfer window that goes on in terms of squad value.

You think we don't have much money to spend if we want to?

I do actually think we have money to spend but we are not in a position or mindset to piss money up the wall and I respect that. Take the Lemar deal for example, £75 million for a mostly unproven player in this market would be ok'ish but £90 is really taking the piss, that is one hell of a lot of money in a massively inflated market and you could only sanction that if you desperately needed the player, like Arsenal, but we don't, we have plenty of attackers already.
The only position/player I'm annoyed about is VVD, but I really do think that is more a case of Southampton being idiots in how they conduct their business. It makes zero sense for them not to sell him, and that was heart ruling the head, I'm astonished the new owners allowed it. Yes you could make the same argument about us and Coutinho, but the situation is quite different.

I think the broader question here is has the window been a success? Did we significantly strengthen ourselves, compared to our rivals? In that you'd have to say it was mixed. We strengthened our attack, but we failed to add creativity to the middle of the park - yes we kept Coutinho but that's not an achievement in itself, and Keita will only join next Summer - but the one glaring weakness in the team went untouched.

That in itself wouldn't be quite so bad if we'd been priced out of a deal or players hadn't wanted to come but we had the money and we had the player who wanted to come and because we were so busy chest thumping, Edwards' fu**ed the entire deal up and now we're left with Matip, Lovren, Klavan and Gomez for Center Back which, when you consider we sold Sahko, means we start the season weaker in that key area than we finished the last one. So it was mixed, at best, and we're left waiting for that Statement signing to be made.

I think the broader question here is has the window been a success? Did we significantly strengthen ourselves compared to our rivals? In that you'd have to say it was mixed. We strengthened our attack, but we failed to add creativity to the middle of the park - yes we kept Coutinho but that's not an achievement in itself, and Keita will only join next Summer - but the one glaring weakness in the team went untouched.

That in itself wouldn't be quite so bad if we'd been priced out of a deal or players hadn't wanted to come but we had the money and we had the player who wanted to come and because we were so busy chest thumping, Edwards' fu**ed the entire deal up and now we're left with Matip, Lovren, Klavan and Gomez for Center Back which, when you consider we sold Sahko, means we start the season weaker in that key area than we finished the last one. So it was mixed, at best, and we're left waiting for that Statement signing to be made.

I'd take Gomez over Lucas at CB any time and Sakho didn't play for us last season, so how are we weaker??

I read so many articles at the start of summer we would spend not £100 million but £200 million.....

we spent p**s all in the end.

I don't know why we ever expect any different. Always the same with this club and it's why we only win one carling cup every 5 years at the moment.

Because we no longer have the option to play him.

He was a poor option at CB, I would say we are exactly where we were last season in terms of defence.

Could we / should we have bought a CB ? Yes (if it was VVD)

As we didn't, it just means we have to win every game 4-3 or 5-4 now until Jan window opens

I'd take Gomez over Lucas at CB any time and Sakho didn't play for us last season, so how are we weaker??

Because we no longer have the option to play him and because we didn't buy a replacement for him. Let me explain. It's not that Sahko was the answer to our problems but he was one of four Center Backs on the books. Was he better than Klavan? Yes. Was he more experienced than Gomez? Yes. We should have been looking for an upgrade on Klavan and a replacement for Sahko. We didn't sign one nevermind two, and now we rely on someone we know isn't very good and someone we know isn't very experienced, to be back up to someone who is prone to making rash decisions. However, if you think we're stronger for having failed to land Van Dyke and selling Sahko then knock yourself out. It's all opinions at the end of the day but I doubt you'll find many who agree with you.

Sold no one of significance

Lucas Leiva did play 31 games last season.  You'd have to look to see how many of them were covering at centre-back.  But I'd say 31 appearances in a 45 game season was significant.

And a certain proportion of people think that Mamadou Sakho was LFC's best centre-back - not everybody but plenty - so I'm not buying that sweeping statement.

I think the broader question here is has the window been a success? Did we significantly strengthen ourselves, compared to our rivals? In that you'd have to say it was mixed. We strengthened our attack, but we failed to add creativity to the middle of the park - yes we kept Coutinho but that's not an achievement in itself, and Keita will only join next Summer - but the one glaring weakness in the team went untouched.

That in itself wouldn't be quite so bad if we'd been priced out of a deal or players hadn't wanted to come but we had the money and we had the player who wanted to come and because we were so busy chest thumping, Edwards' fu**ed the entire deal up and now we're left with Matip, Lovren, Klavan and Gomez for Center Back which, when you consider we sold Sahko, means we start the season weaker in that key area than we finished the last one. So it was mixed, at best, and we're left waiting for that Statement signing to be made.

No, we started the window with the weakest squad in top 6 and we ended it with the weakest squad in top 6..we'll have to rely again on Jürgen getting the best from these players and hope Mane, Coutinho and Matip will not get long term injuries so that we can clinch again a 4th spot.

No, we started the window with the weakest squad in top 6 and we ended it with the weakest squad in top 6..we'll have to rely again on Jürgen getting the best from these players and hope Mane, Coutinho and Matip will not get long term injuries so that we can clinch again a 4th spot.

Glad to know that the weakest squad in the top 6 is somehow able to beat those other, superior squads in the top 6 more often than not.

You seriously think our squad is worse than Arsenal's atm? A team with literally no balance and the solidity of a paper bag?

Big negative not bringing in a CB and hopefully we don't pay too much on that till January but you look at all other positions and we have more depth everywhere.

Only stat im concerned with is the fact we have done nothing about our weak spot.

Which one Brian ? 

 

Because we no longer have the option to play him and because we didn't buy a replacement for him. Let me explain. It's not that Sahko was the answer to our problems but he was one of four Center Backs on the books. Was he better than Klavan? Yes. Was he more experienced than Gomez? Yes. We should have been looking for an upgrade on Klavan and a replacement for Sahko. We didn't sign one nevermind two, and now we rely on someone we know isn't very good and someone we know isn't very experienced, to be back up to someone who is prone to making rash decisions. However, if you think we're stronger for having failed to land Van Dyke and selling Sahko then knock yourself out. It's all opinions at the end of the day but I doubt you'll find many who agree with you.

Was there any chance of Klopp EVER playing Sakho, NO, end of argument, move on.

No, we started the window with the weakest squad in top 6 and we ended it with the weakest squad in top 6..we'll have to rely again on Jürgen getting the best from these players and hope Mane, Coutinho and Matip will not get long term injuries so that we can clinch again a 4th spot.

Rubbish statement, do you really think our SQUAD is significantly worse than Chelsea, Spurs or Arsenal?
Lets look at our squad and you tell me the weaknesses please:

GK: Migs, Karius, Ward (all of them very decent goalkeepers, not world class but decent)
CB: Matip, Lovren, Klavan, Gomez (Matip is very good, Lovren and Klavan are good, YES they are, and Gomez is already good and will only get better and better)
RB: Clyne, TAA, Gomez
LB: Moreno, Robertson, Milner
CM: Henderson, Can, Wijnaldum, Lallana, Grujic, Chamberlain
AM/F: Mane, Salah, Coutinho, Firmino, Sturridge, Solanke

We all agree it would have been great to get another top top CB but other than that I think our side looks very strong at the moment, arguably as storng as its been in many years, there's plenty of cover and I haven't even included the next gen players like Woodbourne and Kent into this equation.

I totally disagree and do not come up with net spending because Klopp had his targets and he almost got them all. The only one that did not happen and I honestly am sad about it is VVD. Lemar was never mentioned before as target and we just went to sniff around.

klopp got his primary targets bar one:

Bought:
Salah
Keita (we did want we could)
Robertson
Solanke (Klopp was influenced by our scouts, was not his target)
Alex OC

Failed big time with VVD because he should have been here from pre-season if Liverpool staff did not get excited very earlier. Southampton we never to sell him after that, for sure not to us since they did not report us.

Should we kick Trent & Gomez out to get a 'proven' quality right-back I really think that Klopp's way of doing thing is correct (maybe par Sakho's situation. I would have sold him since he wasn't in the team).

We can't get everything our way. That's life.

I took my post from the owners thread.

What the F**k has football become at all.

Was there any chance of Klopp EVER playing Sakho, NO, end of argument, move on.

In which case we're still weaker for not having bought a replacement. This isn't rocket science. Klavan isn't good enough. Gomez isn't experienced enough. Matip and Lovren aren't consitent enough. We lack leadership and organisation at the back. Whether we kept Sahko or sold him is irrelevent, we needed to strengthen and we didn't. The only thing his staying (and being played) or leaving effected was the number of defenders we needed to buy. Therefore we're weaker for not doing so. No matter how you want to look at this, no matter who went out or who stayed, we have the weakest back line of the top six.

Rubbish statement, do you really think our SQUAD is significantly worse than Chelsea, Spurs or Arsenal?
Lets look at our squad and you tell me the weaknesses please:

GK: Migs, Karius, Ward (all of them very decent goalkeepers, not world class but decent)
CB: Matip, Lovren, Klavan, Gomez (Matip is very good, Lovren and Klavan are good, YES they are, and Gomez is already good and will only get better and better)
RB: Clyne, TAA, Gomez
LB: Moreno, Robertson, Milner
CM: Henderson, Can, Wijnaldum, Lallana, Grujic, Chamberlain
AM/F: Mane, Salah, Coutinho, Firmino, Sturridge, Solanke

We all agree it would have been great to get another top top CB but other than that I think our side looks very strong at the moment, arguably as storng as its been in many years, there's plenty of cover and I haven't even included the next gen players like Woodbourne and Kent into this equation.

Questions marks over Ward, Gomez,Solanke and Grujic as they haven't proven themselves over a more sustained period of time.
The only area we can compete with the rest of the top 6 head to head is going forward and that's with all players staying fit..maybe you agree with me as you felt the need to put aditional explanations in brackets for the defenders but none for the others.
And I'm saying all this with a title challenge in mind..if you say it with another top 4 challenge and cup semi final/final year maybe the squad is good enough..barely..as it was last year.

Because we no longer have the option to play him and because we didn't buy a replacement for him. Let me explain. It's not that Sahko was the answer to our problems but he was one of four Center Backs on the books. Was he better than Klavan? Yes. Was he more experienced than Gomez? Yes. We should have been looking for an upgrade on Klavan and a replacement for Sahko. We didn't sign one nevermind two, and now we rely on someone we know isn't very good and someone we know isn't very experienced, to be back up to someone who is prone to making rash decisions. However, if you think we're stronger for having failed to land Van Dyke and selling Sahko then knock yourself out. It's all opinions at the end of the day but I doubt you'll find many who agree with you.

I feel safer with Klavan in the back four than when Lovren is in.

Think he looks a lot more comfortable and Matip looks better with him as his partner.

Let's look at one window in isolation; not too shabby; eh? 😂😂😂

"Ah but... ah but... I'm only giving you the info. Not trying to twist anything"

Spending £500m on [value for money] mediocrity or £500m on top talent: there's the difference. "Next year"; right? 🙄

Not holding your breath are you Bubbs?

YNWA

Questions marks over Ward, Gomez,Solanke and Grujic as they haven't proven themselves over a more sustained period of time.
The only area we can compete with the rest of the top 6 head to head is going forward and that's with all players staying fit..maybe you agree with me as you felt the need to put aditional explanations in brackets for the defenders but none for the others.
And I'm saying all this with a title challenge in mind..if you say it with another top 4 challenge and cup semi final/final year maybe the squad is good enough..barely..as it was last year.

For heavens sake when you look at the fringes of any squad then the quality is a bit questionable but all those players I listed are capable and good players, yes the attackers are probably better than the defenders but our defence really isn't as bad as some like to think it is. I think we'll do very well this year and i can't wait to get back to the football next weekend.

Only my opinion of course but this window tbf is a bit of a mixed bag, and no where near what I was expecting, the simple fact is our net spend favours FSG yet again and one has to wonder that another 2-3 similar windows might actually be enough for JW and his buddies to wave the white flag and F**k off back to a very exuberant Boston tea party,

All you number crunchers out there may be able to work out how much profit would FSG make if they decide that a decade of profiteering will suffice their avaricious appetite,

Although commendable that messers Salah, AOC, Solanke, Robertson have arrived and the deal for Naby next season, I still regard this window as a fail,

Imagine had they bottled the advances of the Barca bully boys, I think it's fair to say that we'd all  or most would be spitting feathers irrespective of Phil's immaturity ,

The positives are , we have enhanced our attack, strengthened midfield,

The Negative is we haven't strengthened where we should have and are now dependent on key defenders going throughout the whole campaign unscathed, can't see that happening can you ?

Unless we can land VvD In Jan we will be exposed and vulnerable and most probably will leak goals.


YNWA

For heavens sake when you look at the fringes of any squad then the quality is a bit questionable but all those players I listed are capable and good players, yes the attackers are probably better than the defenders but our defence really isn't as bad as some like to think it is. I think we'll do very well this year and i can't wait to get back to the football next weekend.

No doubt...every squad has weaknesses, Christ one significant injury in Chelsea's squad and they are hurting...same goes with Spurs and Arsenal....City and the scum have better depth than most but yes every club has question marks.

The way I look at it now, do we have a strong enough squad to win the League and Champions League? No in my opinion, a couple of injuries to key men and we'll be in trouble, just like we were last season without even having Europe to worry about.

Our bank balance is extremely healthy, which will please a few on here as that seems to take presidents over the quality of the players on show, but given that we're competing in four competitions this season, it wouldn't been better to use some if that money to further strengthen the squad. Jürgen could regret the decision not to, just like he did last season.

Lucas Leiva did play 31 games last season.  You'd have to look to see how many of them were covering at centre-back.  But I'd say 31 appearances in a 45 game season was significant.

And a certain proportion of people think that Mamadou Sakho was LFC's best centre-back - not everybody but plenty - so I'm not buying that sweeping statement.

I'd say he's not really a centre back. He doesn't have the skills to play their at a premier league level long term. He's not a significant loss.

No doubt...every squad has weaknesses, Christ one significant injury in Chelsea's squad and they are hurting...same goes with Spurs and Arsenal....City and the scum have better depth than most but yes every club has question marks.

Yup, ironically of all the Top six, I think Chelsea are the ones we've gained ground on the most. Ours wasn't brilliant but they had a terrible transfer window. Lukaku, Barkley, AOC, Llorenete, Van Dyke, Alves and Sandro all turned them down in favour of other clubs, two of which were us. We didn't do enough business, that's clear but there are certainly positives to take away from this window.

We didn't do enough business, that's clear but there are certainly positives to take away from this window.

Hits the buttons that statement...I don't think whatever business is done in any window that everyone is 100% happy; If it weren't for the VVD fiasco we would all probably feel pretty content about what we did; I give it a 6.5-7/10 simply because I believed we needed another 1-2 CB's.

Yup, ironically of all the Top six, I think Chelsea are the ones we've gained ground on the most.

Funny you hit  on this buddy as I was talking to a mate earlier about the same thing, however I also went on to say that I think we're significantly better than Arsenal, that Spurs won't have the seasons they've had in the last 2-3 with Wembley playing a massive part in that.

If you ask me? It's us or the Manchester clubs with Chelsea just behind (due to squad depth) for the league so as disappointing as missing out on VVD is... we can win this f**ker and in the least we should be cementing our place in that top4

We aren't spurs who need to go beyond to get there... we're f**king Liverpool football club and if we start to turn this ship round like we have then players will fall over themselves to sign for us.. Kieta  has proven that by signing for next season  not knowing where we will be.. . Well I'm with f**king Naby.... this is the place to be

Be confident

We are moving forward and it's a matter of time until we lift trophies to back that up. Klopp wiĺl deliver I'm sure

If you think about it, FSG are smart. We got Ox, Arsenal didn't replace him.. they are weaker and we are stronger.
Buying Lemar would only make us stronger and not Arsenal weaker.
FSG are happy finishing 4th every season over Arsenal and couldn't care about any higher, nice revenue.. not so much less than 1st but can spend a lot less.
TV deal money, play some CL games...etc...
It can be really profitable spending little like 10% of our revenue and finishing fourth every season.
It's obvious what is next here...
Why didn't we sign Lemar? because we already have his replacement.
We refused to sell Coutinho and got Kieta for next year.
Next season Coutinho goes and Kieta comes.
Why didn't we get a CB? Because by beating a dead horse, aka trying to sign VVD looks like we tried.
We didn't really try, or we would have signed another CB.

Funny you hit  on this buddy as I was talking to a mate earlier about the same thing, however I also went on to say that I think we're significantly better than Arsenal, that Spurs won't have the seasons they've had in the last 2-3 with Wembley playing a massive part in that.

If you ask me? It's us or the Manchester clubs with Chelsea just behind (due to squad depth) for the league so as disappointing as missing out on VVD is... we can win this f**ker and in the least we should be cementing our place in that top4

We aren't spurs who need to go beyond to get there... we're f**king Liverpool football club and if we start to turn this ship round like we have then players will fall over themselves to sign for us.. Kieta  has proven that by signing for next season  not knowing where we will be.. . Well I'm with f**king Naby.... this is the place to be

Be confident

We are moving forward and it's a matter of time until we lift trophies to back that up. Klopp wiĺl deliver I'm sure

Great post.

One thing you touched on that I think is important as too what we heard during this window and even now.

Keita wanted Liverpool
VVD only want's to go to Liverpool
AOC turns down Chelsea because he wanted Liverpool
Lemar supposedly only has eyes for Liverpool.

With the league and players all so flush with money I think a lot of them are saying to themselves...Where can I go and enjoy my football?..Where can I go where the manager is stable in his job and give me what I need to be my best?..What club seems to have an upward trajectory.

Hell even Ross Barkley would rather stay in Liverpool then go to London...

If you think about it, FSG are smart. We got Ox, Arsenal didn't replace him.. they are weaker and we are stronger.
Buying Lemar would only make us stronger and not Arsenal weaker.
FSG are happy finishing 4th every season over Arsenal and couldn't care about any higher, nice revenue.. not so much less than 1st but can spend a lot less.
TV deal money, play some CL games...etc...
It can be really profitable spending little like 10% of our revenue and finishing fourth every season.
It's obvious what is next here...
Why didn't we sign Lemar? because we already have his replacement.
We refused to sell Coutinho and got Kieta for next year.
Next season Coutinho goes and Kieta comes.
Why didn't we get a CB? Because by beating a dead horse, aka trying to sign VVD looks like we tried.
We didn't really try, or we would have signed another CB.

Buying Lemar, a player Arsenal were in competition to sign, would have prevented them from getting stronger. He would also have made us stronger than AOC. Buying AOC and Lemar would have been a double whammy to Arsenal. Buying to prevent your rivals from getting stronger is a classic Fergusson tactic, and one we could learn from.

Buying Lemar, a player Arsenal were in competition to sign, would have prevented them from getting stronger. He would also have made us stronger than AOC. Buying AOC and Lemar would have been a double whammy to Arsenal. Buying to prevent your rivals from getting stronger is a classic Fergusson tactic, and one we could learn from.

Right before transfer deadline and everyone wanted to come to Liverpool, possibly because we thrashed Arsenal 4-0. Lemar was never going to go to Arsenal. Arsenal are near relegation zone and lucky they aren't in it. There 4-3 win over Leicester has prevented that. Arsenal seem average now. It might just be a top 5 with Liverpool, Chelsea, City, United and Spurs. Arsenal will be around Everton's level maybe?

A good OP, some interesting figures, but I don't see the point, with all due respect.
And that's only because I have a bit of tunnel vision when it comes to these things.

My only concern is "have we improved the team/squad".

To me, the answer is yes.

I'm not sure we have improved , yes our midfield and attack are excellent but the thorny issue of defence has not changed a bit, it is even worse now that sakho has been sold and no replacement for him. We've all known for ages that Sakho would not return as did Klopp and the owners and they decided at the last minute to pull the plug on him.

Lucas Leiva did play 31 games last season.  You'd have to look to see how many of them were covering at centre-back.  But I'd say 31 appearances in a 45 game season was significant.

And a certain proportion of people think that Mamadou Sakho was LFC's best centre-back - not everybody but plenty - so I'm not buying that sweeping statement.

Plenty would be looking back on him fondly because Lovren is so bad.

Watch the second Dortmund game and see why Sakho wasn't the answer, either.

And he didn't play a game last season. How could he be classified as significant?

Got this off FB ....seems about right, although thought Solanke was 8 million.

When and why did net spend become so important?

Just more evidence that football is no longer a sport and instead is just a business.

Got this off FB ....seems about right, although thought Solanke was 8 million.

The Solanke deal has got to go to tribunal mate so no figure at all can be attributed to it

We thought 3 they want 10 I believe so it's likely somewhere in between

When and why did net spend become so important?

Just more evidence that football is no longer a sport and instead is just a business.

It became important when it was first used as a stick to beat Rafa with, and is now doing the same job on FSG.

When and why did net spend become so important?

Just more evidence that football is no longer a sport and instead is just a business.

It's an important indicator of investment in the squad, however, one that should begin to narrow the more your squad gets closer to your manager's ideal. We should, and natrually did , have a higher net spend than Spurs, for example, because Spurs where further ahead of us in their development. City had the most because City needed a near total rebuild. All that being said, some people misuse it in the manner Swab suggested.

It's an important indicator of investment in the squad, however, one that should begin to narrow the more your squad gets closer to your manager's ideal. We should, and natrually did , have a higher net spend than Spurs, for example, because Spurs where further ahead of us in their development. City had the most because City needed a near total rebuild. All that being said, some people misuse it in the manner Swab suggested.

Means something to Chelsea now also it seams.

Chelsea missing out on Romelu Lukaku, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and Co proves that times have changed at Stamford Bridge... Roman Abramovich's new transfer rules mean they no longer go the extra mile


More than any other individual, Roman Abramovich changed the financial landscape of the modern Premier League transfer market, creating the feverish moneypit it has become today.

In his first year as Chelsea owner in 2003, the club's outlay on players grew from £500,000 to £153million and the spend-spend-spend era throughout English football was under way.

But times have changed at Stamford Bridge as the failure to land established targets Romelu Lukaku, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Fernando Llorente and Ross Barkley have underlined in the current window.

Having once swept all rivals aside – remember the British transfer record fees for Andriy Shevchenko and Fernando Torres, the pursuit of Ashley Cole and gazumping of Tottenham for Willian – Chelsea now operate within strict rules laid down by Abramovich and enforced by his eyes and ears at the club, director Marina Granovskaia, chairman Bruce Buck and director of football Michael Emenalo.

Now established as a European super-power, the business model is paramount at Chelsea with a cap on a spending and revenue streams from loaning players out. And if the manager is unhappy about missing out on transfer targets or having a relatively small squad as a consequence, then so be it.

It's not a new idea for Abramovich. He has regularly changed managers while keeping a core group of players and senior executives in place.

Where some see a managerial revolving door, others see a stable structure and results, five Premier League titles including the 2010 Double and a Champions League, suggest the Londoners have got it right.

Yet times are changing and Conte and many supporters will be worried by developments in this transfer window.

Yes, Abramovich can still sign off on big deals and the capture of Alvaro Morata from Real Madrid, rising to £70million, was the second-biggest in the window behind Lukaku.

But Chelsea will no longer go the extra mile to make deals happen. They will not forsake loan fees to help Conte have a big enough squad. Hence when the Italian was scratching around for players on the opening day against Burnley, Kurt Zouma, Tammy Abraham, Ruben Loftus-Cheek and others were already elsewhere

Time will tell if Chelsea's policy still works. But the undeniable fact at the end of the August window is that they missed out on key targets. They were all for different reasons but for 2017-18 Lukaku will be wearing the red of Manchester United, Llorente the white of Tottenham and Oxlade-Chamberlain the red of Liverpool, instead of the blue of Chelsea.
#As for Barkley, his late u-turn about moving to Stamford Bridge on deadline night summed up the whole chaos of the window.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4844204/Chelsea-owner-Roman-Abramovich-changed-transfer-rules.html#ixzz4rXW4AI9C
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook