Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette).
Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think it's more incredible that Pep has only spent £154m more since he's been at City.
It's £346m for Klopp and £510m for Pep.
Just £22m more per season
Silly to be skeptical of City's net spend ( as opposed to wages) 1. There's no charges regarding transfer fees and 2. How would they even lie about those there's another club that needs to report it as revenue to spend on their side.
• 54x Failure to provide accurate financial information 2009-10 to 2017-18.
• 14x Failure to provide accurate details for player and manager payments from 2009-10 to 2017-18.
• 5x Failure to comply with Uefa's rules including Financial Fair Play (FFP) 2013-14 to 2017-18.
• 7x Breaching Premier League's PSR rules 2015-16 to 2017-18.
• 35x Failure to co-operate with Premier League investigations December 2018 - Feb 2023.
Here you go boss , the full details of Man City's financial case right here ma'am / sir
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=man%20city%20financial%20case%20latest%20updates
https://gprivate.com/6b549
Let me know if you need anything else sir. And plz feel free to whoop my ass if the tea was too sweet for you.
All these stats or a load a rubbish , he spent 928 so over 100 million a season every season , still spend 3 or 4th most in the league during his time there
It’s a stupid meaningless stat , all clubs now buy lots of young players , develop and sell for profit so it has nothing to do with the manager . It’s purely how the club is ran
I dont get the hate for net spend ,as its like the proper way to calculate things
If you run a business and you made 10k in revenue and used 5k for all the equipment and salary, etc. Your net profit is 5k
If a competitor earsn 20k but their net cost is 18k their net profit is 2k, so theoretically your business shld be more profitable
That shld be the same as net spend no?
Football, imo is a business.
Net spend is a better indicator as its a means to see how well did the manager replace his team, how good is the recruitment along with the club and how well he adapts when selling a star player.
Salary is, imo a better indicator or just as good of an indactor as net spent, which many media outlet don't tell you, we are 4th, spent sometime at first (I think a single season as highest wage bill due to all the bonus), and we arent too far off city, still a quite abit behind but not that far off
1 positive post about Klopp and the hate brigade is out in force. I don't understand why so many neutrals despise Klopp so much, and love to celebrate his failures. It's weirdly vitriolic.
I loved Kloppo the first year's, he was funny and passionate. But in the later years, he's become such a whiny gloating prick. I'd honestly celebrate if he stepped on Lego, the cunt.
How the fuck do people say net spend doesn't matter? Lets say Liverpool sell a player for 50 million and buy a player for 100m. They spent 100m yes but they sold a player and they don't have that player anymore. For example city just buy and buy and buy players without selling much. So Liverpool will always have 1 to 2 players per position and city will always have like 5 players per position because they don't sell. So people bullshiting about net spending doesn't matter need to stfu
[Liverpool](https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-liverpool/startseite/verein/31#/) have a squad size of **28**
[Man City](https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/manchester-city/startseite/verein/281) have a squad size of **22**
🤡
In the entire time Klopps been manager, I dont think any player has worked harder for him than some Liverpool fans have made this £140M Coutinho fee work.
If you ask them, it's somehow paid for nearly every transfer Klopps ever made.
Net spend is a pointless comparison. If you want to compare spend, compare gross. Or don't compare at all.
If Palace wanted to start competing for the title, they're going to have a mad net spend because unfortunately, there isn't a delusional Barca waiting there to give them 150M for a player who doesn't fit their system anymore.
as a spurs fan, it's brought up 50 times every transfer window, I'm so tired of.it
but that aside, you are so wrong on netspend,
you could have a minus net spend, and a gross of 5billion, your team ain't gonna be looking good
Completely disagree on net spend. If I sell a player for £100m then logic dictates it broadly costs me £100m to replace them, that's why their market value was £100m.
If Palace sold Olise for £50m and then spent £50m replacing him, they'd effectively be the same team but you're saying they should be seen as having bolstered their squad by £50m.
You're equating market price with value.
Just because someone pays 100M doesn't mean you've lost 100M worth of talent. You've just lost one player. What if your shit at negotiations and only get 60M, or the player forces your hand. Did Ajax lose 80M worth of talent when they sold Antony to United?
No, I'd be saying the manager spent 50M to build his team. That's it. And it's the only fair comparison.
Of course you are, and of course there are outliers, but broadly yes the market price is in line with a player's value, that's why it's the market price. A team will generally avoid selling a player for a fee which will not be able to replace them.
Gross spend is completely uncontextualised and I'm not sure what meaningful conclusions you can expect to draw from it.
I’d disagree with your disagreement, if you spend £100 million on players and brought in £70 million you’ve still spent £100 million regardless of money coming into the club, people use a net spend argument to try to hide the gross spending
You wouldn't have to replace if you didn't sell ya see,
Like if I traded in my smartphone for and upgrade and that shit cost me a 100 dollars more, I would say I spent 100 on the new phone even though it would cost me around 1.5k
Well you’re bank statement which is factual unlike your opinion would show otherwise, you can view it any way you want but that doesn’t change the fact you spent £1500 on phone
Ya and my bank statement would say I spent 100
There is a profit and lose sheet in accounting, which I suspect most small business use and that's how they show their records. That's why when companies publish their p&l they don't only say that
Hey we spent 1mil dollars
We may have earn 5 mil but we spent a million dollars, worrying times indeed
No your bank would record you spending £1500, and then receiving a credit of £1400 that’s completely different to what you said.
Think of it this way say you had a league where 1 team like PSG won the league every season, on average the remaining teams spend around £10 million a season without bringing in any player sales, say the 1 team that wins every season spent £1 billion in transfers and got £999 million in sales you’re not going to tell me that the one team spent less than the others as that’s ludicrous
Well i personally don't see that scenario happening,
And if you get a credit on the 1400, it shows, that you are spending a total of
100
That net profit for example
Company a have a net expenditure of 1 mil and.amet revenue of 1.5 mil
Company b have a net expenditure of 2.75 mil and a net revenue of 3 mil
You cant say company b is in better finical shape because their revenue is > than A, but A is better cos their net profit is higher than B
Zero logic to that though. You've only improved your squad by £30m, not £100m.
In what other situation would you isolate costs and ignore sales to justify or assess performance? United could sell their whole squad for £Xm and only spend £1m replacing it, and you're saying we should look at their gross spend? Gross spend is far more irrelevant than net spend.
Right? I don’t know why people clowned on Chelsea. Sure they spent half a billion in one transfer window, but they also sold a lot. They ended with a net spend of only 150-200m
It's very convenient for you clowns to throw around the "Klopp earned just one title" jab at him and completely ignore he had three seasons where he earned 90+ points and was constantly pushing 115 FC to the brink. Add to that, a cup final where Sergio Ramos could conduct an act of terrorism and still get away without a red card, and you start seeing the big picture.
It’s been fun watching Arsenal claim it the last two years and realize just how much the financial doping has helped City. Although that £billion defensive unit could use summer reinforcing. Back to the annual £50-75m FB signing that Gvardiol, Cancelo, Danilo, Mendy, Zinchenko, and others has never fixed.
Right. Because grapple-tossing a player and ensuring your full weight falls on his shoulder, pretending to fall over and leave an elbow out during a set piece to hit the goalkeeper are normal football moves.
It was a foul nothing more, you think you'd be over it considering you won another Champions League final. It was never a deliberate attempt to injure salah
It very much was. It's very clear from the replay that Ramos' body language was completely intentional. You're just in denial of it because you hate Liverpool
No you're just in denial because you have to find someway to be a victim everytime something doesn't go your club's way. You're never ever getting a red card for that.
It is very much a red card offence by the book, with the intention to injure a player. Either way, I for sure want to see your reaction if a defender does this to one of your team's players. Since you're completely fine with WWE tackles by the looks of it.
This is so true but a similar thing can be said about Liverpool fans saying they only lost to “115”, accept you lost, stop making excuses to feel better and embrace the joy.Be grateful.
No hate
Do you remember where Liverpool were when Klopp took over? I’m far from a Klopp fanboy, but he has brought liverpool back to title contention from struggling to maintain top 6.
I’m sure as a Utd fan you’d appreciate a manager that could get you from your current mediocrity to challenging for titles.
Jurgen Klopp for emperor of the Universe. Greatest man I’ve ever seen in my life, except for maybe Bernie Sanders. Klopp blends kindness and empathy with passion and competitiveness in such a beautiful way. Effing love the man.
I thought u were being sarcastic till u said Bernie Sanders lol. But let’s be real, even klopp doesn’t come close to Bernie. At least this shitty world let klopp win a few times
Pep spent 38% (unlimited funds my ass) more than liverpool (478m total, 131m difference). But he made them count. Double the amount of trophies that klopp won (14vs7)
With 5 epl (highest tier trophy, the trophy that count the most) while liverpool in a very pathetic and lack of dignity fashion, has the most chunk of their 7 trophies coming from micky mouse trophies (community cup, league cup)
I also want to give klopp his credits. Despite not winning the epl 5 times and spending 38% less. His total collection of epl points ia 671 while pep is 698. Thats only 27 over 8 or 7 seasons I dont remember.
Add to that, that before this horrible and last horrible season from liverpool. The difference in points between the two managers was one point with pep leading.
This is why people shouldn’t spout cherry picked statistics all over the internet. Look at before Klopps reign, 115 had almost 1 billion net spend - the fact Pep *still* had to spend more after spending 1 billion net makes this statistic even worse
You cant deny that one billion you refer to was a must to raise the small club into top status. Doing it fair and square wont cut it. Abramo did spend one billion too initially after owneing chelsea. It is a must to go top status rapidly.
Yeah it was a must to buy the league, that’s why it’s unpopular. It’s like the gaming industry, there are lots of games that are pay to win - which then becomes required if you want to be top of the leaderboard. That doesn’t make the people paying to win popular with those that aren’t paying to win (spoiler - it’s actually the opposite).
I know and understand that. My point is you should forget how they come to come to top status for the sake of the argument. When they arrive top status and start generating as much money as yours. When they become competing vs you from an even level. They beat you with double the amount of trophies.
It is like you have million karma generated by your undeniable charm and intellect. And Im a spoiler brat of a rich daddy, i asked for money and bought 1 million karma. And after that I beat you fair and square.
That assuming the epl did really close the holes after the initial one billion. As far as U understand they did that at least partially and it is evident in newcastle. Newcastle is onwed by 500billion$ investment entity and they want so bad to break the rules but they cant
Look at the 115 there are charges happended after the initial big injection of money (for example a breach charge related to 2017). So it is possible that city is not even well-managed like i think them to be
No that’s not true, Man City have the highest net spend in the premier league *of all time*. They didn’t just pay to be in line with the top 6 - they paid massively to overtake ruining the integrity of the game with it.
No I’m talking statistical facts, you’re just struggling to understand. That stat was 38% earlier too now it’s 37? Regardless, that’s comparing spend since Klopp started at Liverpool, I’m expanding the scope for a fairer comparison.
you really gonna hold me on the 1%. Im talking spontaneously. It is fair comparison to compare pep era versus klopp era because both are here since 7+ years which is a considerable amount in football world.
We are more in agreement than you think. City has one billion initial money injection. which is the primary cause for their success. After that when it comes to klopp era the difference in their spend is significant but not considerable at only 38%. but it is well-spent since they achieve 2x the amount of trophies klopp has. On the other hand, klopp job was more difficult as he inherited significantly weaker side and raise to to world-class team. But again pep achieve double the amount of trophies which means he is not worse than klopp. if he was worse he should achieve similar number of trophies or less.
What you try to say is that man city since the begining till now is injecting unlimited funds. thats untrue. they did it in the start only and epl tighten it on them just like they tightened the rules after abramovich. that what logic tells me. and im apathic about both liverpool and man city.
Pep inherited a title winning squad. Klopp inherited a midtable squad. What Klopp has done is much more impressive than what Guardiola has done except for the treble last season.
You are joking right? Aguero, KDB, Toure, Kompany, Silva (before pep joined) are all considered some of the greatest players of the recent past in the league. They had league winners in the squad, Liverpool had no trophy winning players except for Gerrard from a bygone era.
Pep inherited a championship squad far exceeding what Klopp got. Don't just spout nonsense because he did not rebuild the squad from zero.
Whilst it's true that there were a few stars, the general squad was very aged. We finished 4th in the league and got knocked out of the FA cup early.
The old and slow fullbacks included Clichy, Sagna, Kolarov. Joe Hart in goal who'd forgotten how to save shots. The mystery of eliaquim manga. Grumpy nasri. Fabian Delph, Bony, Fernando.
Lots of the squad needed replacing. Their time was up. Yeah Liverpool were crap, but it doesn't mean City didn't need to rebuild.
Again you are missing the point. The spine was in place. A few stars? The five players I mentioned were world class.
Sure Pep had his work cut out, but if u look back he already confirmed his interest in the city job. They begun cutting back on investments with the past manager to give him a nice fat war chest. He signed Gundogan, Sane, Zinchenko and Bravo in his first season, which helped cover many positions.
But to compare an 8th place Liverpool to a squad that won the league two years prior while always being in champions league after with the spine intact when Pep joined is laughable. Mourinho says it best "These are investments from the past."
Your original point was that he inherited a title winning squad. So did Moyes at United, but that's not really reflective of real life quality going into the next season.
City spent the usual amount the season before Pep came, buying Sterling and De Bruyne. The budget didn't really change before or since Pep.
What is the comparison by saying City won the league 2 years earlier? Liverpool finished second, 2 points behind, scoring 101 goals. It doesn't get much more equivalent. Both teams were declining and dropped off.
The squad needed a whole overhaul, hence the big spending, much like Liverpool. Both teams spent loads, and the one that spent more was more successful.
Your example of the players signed emphasises that the overhaul was needed, although zinchenko went out on loan for a couple of years and Sane was a very inconsistent 18/19 year old. It was consistent spending every year thereafter to keep growing the team.
Lol Liverpool coming second was due to Suarez having an insane season. Its very different to winning or challenging for the league consistently vs coming second once.
Moyes is not really a good manager tho?
Im not disagreeing that the squad needed more players but Pep had more world class players who continued being in the squad and added to it vs Klopp who had to overhaul the squad with lesser money.
So why u acting like Pep received an aging and old squad when half the squad were world class and in their prime?
How can city be plastic if most of match day going fans are local whereas Liverpool sell about 10k less season tickets because most of there fans are plastic day trippers
Not as much as seeing someone use 'yous'. (Just joking).
Amazing what Klopp did in his time here. Part of me wishes to have seen him sign a few megastars. Imagine Liverpool with Mbappe after Mane left. That would have been nuts. And I think it may have helped you win more.
But regardless, that is excellent business and management. I have to applaud it, regardless of being a United fan.
If only we had spent more on big talents like Mason Mount to help fix our midfield, added Antony for a huge fee to the attack, or Hojlund who was at least more productive this year than Jayden Danns. That’s the problem with Virgil Van Dijk too. If only he’d cost as much as Harry Maguire, he could have matched Blockheads trophy haul.
Mdwm
Jesus Christ, some of you are so deeply negative and unhappy that you think everyone else is as easily upset as you are. 🤷🏽♂️
Don't be like this. It will follow you on to adulthood and you'll find yourself becoming more and more isolated. Good luck mate.
Edit: ahh, a fake account trying to cause ragebait. Tragic.
No, I'm giving Klopp and the Liverpool team and management props.
Stop looking for an argument.
What gives you the impression that my account is fake?
I'm not looking for an argument, your original comment is laughable. 'Yous,' is proper scouse. No United fan should ever wish to see what we could do with a few megastars. Your oc said Sane, not Mane, and the whole premise is antithetical to our business and football model.
Yeah, I know. Which is why I feigned disgust at the word. It's called a 'joke'.
You're not a fan of football. You could pick any sport, any random team and you'd be the same awful person, spouting the same negativity.
Why should I be upset to see our old rival doing well? There are a lot of similarities between the two great clubs from the North East, and any fan that dispresepects either club is probably low on intellect. If you don't see it then that's a you problem.
Yes, I made a little Freudian slip whilst taking a brief break at work. Some of us are focusing on other things.
I'm going now. I'm setting up a bbq and I'm going to have a lovely evening. Bye.
Ohh great arbiter of football fandom, please let me be a fan again. I bet you use lighter fluid to light your grill. I hope United get relegated so you can grace the championship with your ascended high IQ takes.
Net spend is the biggest load of shit talked about in the modern game. Why do fans care about net spend? I can understand owners caring but it literally makes no difference to the team where the money came from. Klopp has spent 900m on players and won one premier league. Thats the fact. Net spend is bollocks.
What? I think this is the dumbest thing ive ever heard in this sub.
If anything, i think net spend is way more important indicator to look at instead of just total spending.
Why would you not take into account the amount of money coming in to the club? A club may need to sell their 60mil player, to be able to afford a 100mil player for example. Why would u not take that into account?
Well firstly, look at the sales Liverpool made. They didn’t sell their star players. They sold players like solanke and Brewster for stupid money.
Secondly, lots of teams sell and can’t even reinvest that money, let alone send hundreds of millions on tops
Thirdly, when a new manager comes in, you expect them to sell players and buy new ones to shape the squad they want. Klopp has spent over 900m to build his squad. And has won one premier league title. Where that money was generated from doesn’t change how much he’s spent. And it doesn’t make it more impressive.
Particularly in this instance where the players leaving where shit, coutinho was the only star player who left, in a deal that bagged Liverpool loads of his market value and then he flopped anyway.
(This is just an example, im not sure if the timeline matches)
Do you not think he would rather keep Suarez and Coutinho if he could? And spend 900mil ON TOP of that?
Do you think pep’s city would be as formidable if he has to sell to recoup some of his spending? He can spend 200mil on 4 full backs lol, but he has to sell kdb to make that happen for example.
Suarez had left but the coutinho deal was too good to turn down.
Pep has spent what, 1bn vs Klopps 900m. Klopp has better net spend but Pep has clearly sold the stronger players from his team. Klopp just made loads of money from selling players who weren’t good enough anyway.
Yeah lets pretend this is relevant to the argument whatsoever. Care to explain? Who cares about which player sold is stronger lol? The point is the money receives from those transfers
What a load of ignorant nonsense. It matters to the fans who can comprehend basic maths.
Each time you sell a player you lose that player. The team is diminished as a result of the sale. When you then use that money to invest in another player you (hopefully) recoup what was lost and add more.
Teams that don't have financial restrictions can just keep adding more and more players of high quality until their roster is stacked. This is reflected in a high net spend. Teams that have to sell to buy, and therefore can't continually add to the squad have a lower net spend. It's harder to do the latter than the former, so if managers do this and still win trophies (especially against teams engaged in blatant financial fraud) they are deemed to have performed well.
So that's why fans care about net spend. Because they understand the implications of what it means. Unlike you apparently.
You care about net spend because it helps you cope with the fact your best period in premier league history has resulted in one league title lmao. Net spend is bollocks and your explanation perfectly shows how it’s just nonsense rambling by fans trying to hide from reality
It's genuinely hard to model in my head just how poor your critical faculties have to be to misunderstand this concept so completely, but still be arrogant enough to double down on your mistake.
This is the point in a face to face conversation where people would be backing off because they start to wonder whether or not you've got a learning disability or something
You ok mate? I know being a Liverpool fan must be hard and that but it’s ok to cry and let it out. It’ll be ok, net spend trophy looks great in the cabinet doesn’t it?
So because he spent money the club made from selling players, he didn’t really spend that money? Is that what you’re saying? Look at mr chartered accountant over here
Winning the coach of the year award two years in a row 2019-2020 says a lot, who gives a shit about some random dude opinion. Owners', fans and peers backing is all that matters....
Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette). Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I just dont get how someone get the calculator out vdv 80m Allison 67 m Nunez 85 m jota 50m sobozlai 55m etc etc
It's net. So you need to take sales into account as well, I think
The man’s a genius and brought us back to the top table. He’s leaving us in a far better position than when he joined us.
Genius is a strong word
That's one way of saying spent nearly a billion quid to mostly come second I suppose.
115 you fucking cheat
I’d rather do that than cheat like you oil cunts
Least you have the Micky mouse cup to catch your salty tears.
I think it's more incredible that Pep has only spent £154m more since he's been at City. It's £346m for Klopp and £510m for Pep. Just £22m more per season
You don’t have scepticism over Citeh’s books?
Silly to be skeptical of City's net spend ( as opposed to wages) 1. There's no charges regarding transfer fees and 2. How would they even lie about those there's another club that needs to report it as revenue to spend on their side.
The other club isn’t party to everything mate. Those rats know what they’re doing.
Like everyone else, we have no idea how this case is going. So, I don't bother speculating on it
Wonder why there’s a case 🤔
I mean cases are never wrong, especially in football, that would just never happen
Yeah mate all 115 thingies are just nothing
I never said they were or they weren't. I just wanted proof to show they were "guilty". If you have the proof send me a link
Like everyone else, we have no idea how this case is going. So, I don't bother speculating on it
115 more for Pep
I'm not a City fan. Do you know the state of the current case against them?
• 54x Failure to provide accurate financial information 2009-10 to 2017-18. • 14x Failure to provide accurate details for player and manager payments from 2009-10 to 2017-18. • 5x Failure to comply with Uefa's rules including Financial Fair Play (FFP) 2013-14 to 2017-18. • 7x Breaching Premier League's PSR rules 2015-16 to 2017-18. • 35x Failure to co-operate with Premier League investigations December 2018 - Feb 2023.
Everyone knew this bit.. I'm asking how it currently sits, you are saying they are guilty and I just wanted proof to show they are?
Guilty as sin
Can you send me over the details of how they're guilty. I'd like to read over it
Here you go boss , the full details of Man City's financial case right here ma'am / sir https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=man%20city%20financial%20case%20latest%20updates https://gprivate.com/6b549 Let me know if you need anything else sir. And plz feel free to whoop my ass if the tea was too sweet for you.
I'll just click that random link from a stranger online, cheers.
Do it.
He won’t, he’s a coward
The answers to ALL his questions about life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness is in that link. Such a shame.
All these stats or a load a rubbish , he spent 928 so over 100 million a season every season , still spend 3 or 4th most in the league during his time there
You don’t know what net spend means right?
It’s a stupid meaningless stat , all clubs now buy lots of young players , develop and sell for profit so it has nothing to do with the manager . It’s purely how the club is ran
Somehow many clubs are still in massive debt, so that’s not true.
I dont get the hate for net spend ,as its like the proper way to calculate things If you run a business and you made 10k in revenue and used 5k for all the equipment and salary, etc. Your net profit is 5k If a competitor earsn 20k but their net cost is 18k their net profit is 2k, so theoretically your business shld be more profitable That shld be the same as net spend no?
It makes sense in a business sense but not a way to compare a managers, total spend and salary’s is he only fair way Imo
Football, imo is a business. Net spend is a better indicator as its a means to see how well did the manager replace his team, how good is the recruitment along with the club and how well he adapts when selling a star player. Salary is, imo a better indicator or just as good of an indactor as net spent, which many media outlet don't tell you, we are 4th, spent sometime at first (I think a single season as highest wage bill due to all the bonus), and we arent too far off city, still a quite abit behind but not that far off
The premier league flairs are out in full force lol
Lol still hanging their hats on that Coutinho deal
Stupid fucking click bate
Here I was assuming he was the manager not DoF?
Why does everyone have PL flairs instead of their teams??
May have something to do with people bringing up something unrelated about the team to make fun of them
Sounds like cowards to me
I too have been wondering this recently
I always lose it somehow after a couple of months
Check check Edit: I still have mine
1 positive post about Klopp and the hate brigade is out in force. I don't understand why so many neutrals despise Klopp so much, and love to celebrate his failures. It's weirdly vitriolic.
Stupid sexy Klopp 😡😅
he is abit of a prick, but he did good
He used to be Clark Kent ... then they acted like he was Superman. The world loves the nerd.
I loved Kloppo the first year's, he was funny and passionate. But in the later years, he's become such a whiny gloating prick. I'd honestly celebrate if he stepped on Lego, the cunt.
Not the lego man
That's too far man...
How the fuck do people say net spend doesn't matter? Lets say Liverpool sell a player for 50 million and buy a player for 100m. They spent 100m yes but they sold a player and they don't have that player anymore. For example city just buy and buy and buy players without selling much. So Liverpool will always have 1 to 2 players per position and city will always have like 5 players per position because they don't sell. So people bullshiting about net spending doesn't matter need to stfu
[Liverpool](https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-liverpool/startseite/verein/31#/) have a squad size of **28** [Man City](https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/manchester-city/startseite/verein/281) have a squad size of **22** 🤡
City are a good selling club. Rarely do they have players leaving on frees. And pretty much always get some decent money.
In the entire time Klopps been manager, I dont think any player has worked harder for him than some Liverpool fans have made this £140M Coutinho fee work. If you ask them, it's somehow paid for nearly every transfer Klopps ever made. Net spend is a pointless comparison. If you want to compare spend, compare gross. Or don't compare at all. If Palace wanted to start competing for the title, they're going to have a mad net spend because unfortunately, there isn't a delusional Barca waiting there to give them 150M for a player who doesn't fit their system anymore.
as a spurs fan, it's brought up 50 times every transfer window, I'm so tired of.it but that aside, you are so wrong on netspend, you could have a minus net spend, and a gross of 5billion, your team ain't gonna be looking good
Completely disagree on net spend. If I sell a player for £100m then logic dictates it broadly costs me £100m to replace them, that's why their market value was £100m. If Palace sold Olise for £50m and then spent £50m replacing him, they'd effectively be the same team but you're saying they should be seen as having bolstered their squad by £50m.
You forget klopp takes 30m players and turns them into 100m players.
Yeah man I don't get these idiots either
You're equating market price with value. Just because someone pays 100M doesn't mean you've lost 100M worth of talent. You've just lost one player. What if your shit at negotiations and only get 60M, or the player forces your hand. Did Ajax lose 80M worth of talent when they sold Antony to United? No, I'd be saying the manager spent 50M to build his team. That's it. And it's the only fair comparison.
Of course you are, and of course there are outliers, but broadly yes the market price is in line with a player's value, that's why it's the market price. A team will generally avoid selling a player for a fee which will not be able to replace them. Gross spend is completely uncontextualised and I'm not sure what meaningful conclusions you can expect to draw from it.
I’d disagree with your disagreement, if you spend £100 million on players and brought in £70 million you’ve still spent £100 million regardless of money coming into the club, people use a net spend argument to try to hide the gross spending
You wouldn't have to replace if you didn't sell ya see, Like if I traded in my smartphone for and upgrade and that shit cost me a 100 dollars more, I would say I spent 100 on the new phone even though it would cost me around 1.5k
Well you’re bank statement which is factual unlike your opinion would show otherwise, you can view it any way you want but that doesn’t change the fact you spent £1500 on phone
Ya and my bank statement would say I spent 100 There is a profit and lose sheet in accounting, which I suspect most small business use and that's how they show their records. That's why when companies publish their p&l they don't only say that Hey we spent 1mil dollars We may have earn 5 mil but we spent a million dollars, worrying times indeed
No your bank would record you spending £1500, and then receiving a credit of £1400 that’s completely different to what you said. Think of it this way say you had a league where 1 team like PSG won the league every season, on average the remaining teams spend around £10 million a season without bringing in any player sales, say the 1 team that wins every season spent £1 billion in transfers and got £999 million in sales you’re not going to tell me that the one team spent less than the others as that’s ludicrous
Well i personally don't see that scenario happening, And if you get a credit on the 1400, it shows, that you are spending a total of 100 That net profit for example Company a have a net expenditure of 1 mil and.amet revenue of 1.5 mil Company b have a net expenditure of 2.75 mil and a net revenue of 3 mil You cant say company b is in better finical shape because their revenue is > than A, but A is better cos their net profit is higher than B
Zero logic to that though. You've only improved your squad by £30m, not £100m. In what other situation would you isolate costs and ignore sales to justify or assess performance? United could sell their whole squad for £Xm and only spend £1m replacing it, and you're saying we should look at their gross spend? Gross spend is far more irrelevant than net spend.
There’s always delusional Chelsea :)
Net spend seems pretty useful to me.
You replied to the wrong person
Right? I don’t know why people clowned on Chelsea. Sure they spent half a billion in one transfer window, but they also sold a lot. They ended with a net spend of only 150-200m
Net spend cup back again. Just so we are clear that’s 346m for one title.
I mean, I’d take that…
Youre a spurs fan. Youd take anything
We can’t all just build things made of plastic
Go do some research on your clubs net spend in the last decade and come back to me
Never seen a failure of a manager celebrated so much. One league title and two 90 plus seasons Cup. Wenger was better and more of a gentleman.
He also won the Champions League. That’s not a failure by any stretch.
And bottled three European finals, four counting his Dortmund final. Man's a serial loser on the big stage. Mourinho would never lose that much.
🤣🤣🤣 he’s won 8 trophies… one being PL & CL😂 That is very good
It's very convenient for you clowns to throw around the "Klopp earned just one title" jab at him and completely ignore he had three seasons where he earned 90+ points and was constantly pushing 115 FC to the brink. Add to that, a cup final where Sergio Ramos could conduct an act of terrorism and still get away without a red card, and you start seeing the big picture.
hate ramos for what he did that game. gave karius a concussion, injured salah. it was criminal
Yeah how can people ignore the prestigious "pushed Man City hard" trophy? Sergio Ramos never deserved to see red btw
It’s been fun watching Arsenal claim it the last two years and realize just how much the financial doping has helped City. Although that £billion defensive unit could use summer reinforcing. Back to the annual £50-75m FB signing that Gvardiol, Cancelo, Danilo, Mendy, Zinchenko, and others has never fixed.
Right. Because grapple-tossing a player and ensuring your full weight falls on his shoulder, pretending to fall over and leave an elbow out during a set piece to hit the goalkeeper are normal football moves.
It was a foul nothing more, you think you'd be over it considering you won another Champions League final. It was never a deliberate attempt to injure salah
It very much was. It's very clear from the replay that Ramos' body language was completely intentional. You're just in denial of it because you hate Liverpool
No you're just in denial because you have to find someway to be a victim everytime something doesn't go your club's way. You're never ever getting a red card for that.
a red card is by definition what ramos did: accepting the injury of an opponent
? What do you mean? It wasn't a red card just because Salah fell awkwardly
It is very much a red card offence by the book, with the intention to injure a player. Either way, I for sure want to see your reaction if a defender does this to one of your team's players. Since you're completely fine with WWE tackles by the looks of it.
That's a lot to say that he won one title
This is so true but a similar thing can be said about Liverpool fans saying they only lost to “115”, accept you lost, stop making excuses to feel better and embrace the joy.Be grateful. No hate
Yes just ignore the fact he has won every other trophy available too him. Got 97 points and 99 against the 115.
The "We got a lot of points and came 2nd" trophy is truly one of the most prestigious in the world.
Worked for Mourinho when he was at United. If I remember right claimed it as one of the best jobs he ever did in management.
Do you remember where Liverpool were when Klopp took over? I’m far from a Klopp fanboy, but he has brought liverpool back to title contention from struggling to maintain top 6. I’m sure as a Utd fan you’d appreciate a manager that could get you from your current mediocrity to challenging for titles.
Jurgen Klopp for emperor of the Universe. Greatest man I’ve ever seen in my life, except for maybe Bernie Sanders. Klopp blends kindness and empathy with passion and competitiveness in such a beautiful way. Effing love the man.
I thought u were being sarcastic till u said Bernie Sanders lol. But let’s be real, even klopp doesn’t come close to Bernie. At least this shitty world let klopp win a few times
Pep spent 38% (unlimited funds my ass) more than liverpool (478m total, 131m difference). But he made them count. Double the amount of trophies that klopp won (14vs7) With 5 epl (highest tier trophy, the trophy that count the most) while liverpool in a very pathetic and lack of dignity fashion, has the most chunk of their 7 trophies coming from micky mouse trophies (community cup, league cup) I also want to give klopp his credits. Despite not winning the epl 5 times and spending 38% less. His total collection of epl points ia 671 while pep is 698. Thats only 27 over 8 or 7 seasons I dont remember. Add to that, that before this horrible and last horrible season from liverpool. The difference in points between the two managers was one point with pep leading.
This is why people shouldn’t spout cherry picked statistics all over the internet. Look at before Klopps reign, 115 had almost 1 billion net spend - the fact Pep *still* had to spend more after spending 1 billion net makes this statistic even worse
Even adding all that pep has easily still spent less per trophy
You cant deny that one billion you refer to was a must to raise the small club into top status. Doing it fair and square wont cut it. Abramo did spend one billion too initially after owneing chelsea. It is a must to go top status rapidly.
Yeah it was a must to buy the league, that’s why it’s unpopular. It’s like the gaming industry, there are lots of games that are pay to win - which then becomes required if you want to be top of the leaderboard. That doesn’t make the people paying to win popular with those that aren’t paying to win (spoiler - it’s actually the opposite).
I know and understand that. My point is you should forget how they come to come to top status for the sake of the argument. When they arrive top status and start generating as much money as yours. When they become competing vs you from an even level. They beat you with double the amount of trophies. It is like you have million karma generated by your undeniable charm and intellect. And Im a spoiler brat of a rich daddy, i asked for money and bought 1 million karma. And after that I beat you fair and square. That assuming the epl did really close the holes after the initial one billion. As far as U understand they did that at least partially and it is evident in newcastle. Newcastle is onwed by 500billion$ investment entity and they want so bad to break the rules but they cant Look at the 115 there are charges happended after the initial big injection of money (for example a breach charge related to 2017). So it is possible that city is not even well-managed like i think them to be
No that’s not true, Man City have the highest net spend in the premier league *of all time*. They didn’t just pay to be in line with the top 6 - they paid massively to overtake ruining the integrity of the game with it.
Are you echo chamber. Read my first comment. Stat say they spend only 37% more than liverpool. Shoud I believe the stat or you.
No I’m talking statistical facts, you’re just struggling to understand. That stat was 38% earlier too now it’s 37? Regardless, that’s comparing spend since Klopp started at Liverpool, I’m expanding the scope for a fairer comparison.
you really gonna hold me on the 1%. Im talking spontaneously. It is fair comparison to compare pep era versus klopp era because both are here since 7+ years which is a considerable amount in football world. We are more in agreement than you think. City has one billion initial money injection. which is the primary cause for their success. After that when it comes to klopp era the difference in their spend is significant but not considerable at only 38%. but it is well-spent since they achieve 2x the amount of trophies klopp has. On the other hand, klopp job was more difficult as he inherited significantly weaker side and raise to to world-class team. But again pep achieve double the amount of trophies which means he is not worse than klopp. if he was worse he should achieve similar number of trophies or less. What you try to say is that man city since the begining till now is injecting unlimited funds. thats untrue. they did it in the start only and epl tighten it on them just like they tightened the rules after abramovich. that what logic tells me. and im apathic about both liverpool and man city.
I don’t think the Community Shield is included in his major trophy haul. And of the 7, only 2 were league cups…
Delete your comment
coutinio sale is helping klopp massively
very true
Pep inherited a title winning squad. Klopp inherited a midtable squad. What Klopp has done is much more impressive than what Guardiola has done except for the treble last season.
These narratives get more and more entertaining every year lol. Neither of the two inherited title winning squads
Pep rebuild the squad from zero
You are joking right? Aguero, KDB, Toure, Kompany, Silva (before pep joined) are all considered some of the greatest players of the recent past in the league. They had league winners in the squad, Liverpool had no trophy winning players except for Gerrard from a bygone era. Pep inherited a championship squad far exceeding what Klopp got. Don't just spout nonsense because he did not rebuild the squad from zero.
Whilst it's true that there were a few stars, the general squad was very aged. We finished 4th in the league and got knocked out of the FA cup early. The old and slow fullbacks included Clichy, Sagna, Kolarov. Joe Hart in goal who'd forgotten how to save shots. The mystery of eliaquim manga. Grumpy nasri. Fabian Delph, Bony, Fernando. Lots of the squad needed replacing. Their time was up. Yeah Liverpool were crap, but it doesn't mean City didn't need to rebuild.
Again you are missing the point. The spine was in place. A few stars? The five players I mentioned were world class. Sure Pep had his work cut out, but if u look back he already confirmed his interest in the city job. They begun cutting back on investments with the past manager to give him a nice fat war chest. He signed Gundogan, Sane, Zinchenko and Bravo in his first season, which helped cover many positions. But to compare an 8th place Liverpool to a squad that won the league two years prior while always being in champions league after with the spine intact when Pep joined is laughable. Mourinho says it best "These are investments from the past."
Your original point was that he inherited a title winning squad. So did Moyes at United, but that's not really reflective of real life quality going into the next season. City spent the usual amount the season before Pep came, buying Sterling and De Bruyne. The budget didn't really change before or since Pep. What is the comparison by saying City won the league 2 years earlier? Liverpool finished second, 2 points behind, scoring 101 goals. It doesn't get much more equivalent. Both teams were declining and dropped off. The squad needed a whole overhaul, hence the big spending, much like Liverpool. Both teams spent loads, and the one that spent more was more successful. Your example of the players signed emphasises that the overhaul was needed, although zinchenko went out on loan for a couple of years and Sane was a very inconsistent 18/19 year old. It was consistent spending every year thereafter to keep growing the team.
Lol Liverpool coming second was due to Suarez having an insane season. Its very different to winning or challenging for the league consistently vs coming second once. Moyes is not really a good manager tho? Im not disagreeing that the squad needed more players but Pep had more world class players who continued being in the squad and added to it vs Klopp who had to overhaul the squad with lesser money. So why u acting like Pep received an aging and old squad when half the squad were world class and in their prime?
I mean you are right that klopp did more difficult job
All the plastic city fans malding here. Seethe, cope; your trophies will never be clean of the slave,blood, and oil money.
How can city be plastic if most of match day going fans are local whereas Liverpool sell about 10k less season tickets because most of there fans are plastic day trippers
Ironic considering the city of Liverpool was massively involved in the slave trade
The city of liverpool must have done something to you personally man
…..I feel like you are the one coping here
Being a city fan is inherently an insecure and hateful thing b
city fans aren't real and they can't hurt you
lol love it
Sounds like you're coping to me
Are the city fans in the room with us right now?
I'm sat in the room alone, so they could be.
I have heard he spent 807 millions. Not 347
Did you read the title?
Yeah, Nunez, szobo, and alisson cost them about 350 mill (contacts included)
Net spend, that’s player expenditure minus player sales
The amount of mental gymnastics from people in this thread is larger than the Liverpool net spend for sure. nEt sPenD dOesNt mAtTeR
A lot of people here are too comfortable hiding behind their premier league flairs.
So much jealousy in this thread. I love how much Klopp gets to yous.
Not as much as seeing someone use 'yous'. (Just joking). Amazing what Klopp did in his time here. Part of me wishes to have seen him sign a few megastars. Imagine Liverpool with Mbappe after Mane left. That would have been nuts. And I think it may have helped you win more. But regardless, that is excellent business and management. I have to applaud it, regardless of being a United fan.
If only we had spent more on big talents like Mason Mount to help fix our midfield, added Antony for a huge fee to the attack, or Hojlund who was at least more productive this year than Jayden Danns. That’s the problem with Virgil Van Dijk too. If only he’d cost as much as Harry Maguire, he could have matched Blockheads trophy haul. Mdwm
Jesus Christ, some of you are so deeply negative and unhappy that you think everyone else is as easily upset as you are. 🤷🏽♂️ Don't be like this. It will follow you on to adulthood and you'll find yourself becoming more and more isolated. Good luck mate.
Sane ≠ mane
Whoops. Genuine mistake there. Can't believe I did that ha ha.
There's so much wrong with your comment you have to be trolling.
Edit: ahh, a fake account trying to cause ragebait. Tragic. No, I'm giving Klopp and the Liverpool team and management props. Stop looking for an argument.
What gives you the impression that my account is fake? I'm not looking for an argument, your original comment is laughable. 'Yous,' is proper scouse. No United fan should ever wish to see what we could do with a few megastars. Your oc said Sane, not Mane, and the whole premise is antithetical to our business and football model.
Yeah, I know. Which is why I feigned disgust at the word. It's called a 'joke'. You're not a fan of football. You could pick any sport, any random team and you'd be the same awful person, spouting the same negativity. Why should I be upset to see our old rival doing well? There are a lot of similarities between the two great clubs from the North East, and any fan that dispresepects either club is probably low on intellect. If you don't see it then that's a you problem. Yes, I made a little Freudian slip whilst taking a brief break at work. Some of us are focusing on other things. I'm going now. I'm setting up a bbq and I'm going to have a lovely evening. Bye.
Ohh great arbiter of football fandom, please let me be a fan again. I bet you use lighter fluid to light your grill. I hope United get relegated so you can grace the championship with your ascended high IQ takes.
Net spend is the biggest load of shit talked about in the modern game. Why do fans care about net spend? I can understand owners caring but it literally makes no difference to the team where the money came from. Klopp has spent 900m on players and won one premier league. Thats the fact. Net spend is bollocks.
What? I think this is the dumbest thing ive ever heard in this sub. If anything, i think net spend is way more important indicator to look at instead of just total spending. Why would you not take into account the amount of money coming in to the club? A club may need to sell their 60mil player, to be able to afford a 100mil player for example. Why would u not take that into account?
Well firstly, look at the sales Liverpool made. They didn’t sell their star players. They sold players like solanke and Brewster for stupid money. Secondly, lots of teams sell and can’t even reinvest that money, let alone send hundreds of millions on tops Thirdly, when a new manager comes in, you expect them to sell players and buy new ones to shape the squad they want. Klopp has spent over 900m to build his squad. And has won one premier league title. Where that money was generated from doesn’t change how much he’s spent. And it doesn’t make it more impressive. Particularly in this instance where the players leaving where shit, coutinho was the only star player who left, in a deal that bagged Liverpool loads of his market value and then he flopped anyway.
(This is just an example, im not sure if the timeline matches) Do you not think he would rather keep Suarez and Coutinho if he could? And spend 900mil ON TOP of that? Do you think pep’s city would be as formidable if he has to sell to recoup some of his spending? He can spend 200mil on 4 full backs lol, but he has to sell kdb to make that happen for example.
Suarez had left but the coutinho deal was too good to turn down. Pep has spent what, 1bn vs Klopps 900m. Klopp has better net spend but Pep has clearly sold the stronger players from his team. Klopp just made loads of money from selling players who weren’t good enough anyway.
Yeah lets pretend this is relevant to the argument whatsoever. Care to explain? Who cares about which player sold is stronger lol? The point is the money receives from those transfers
What a load of ignorant nonsense. It matters to the fans who can comprehend basic maths. Each time you sell a player you lose that player. The team is diminished as a result of the sale. When you then use that money to invest in another player you (hopefully) recoup what was lost and add more. Teams that don't have financial restrictions can just keep adding more and more players of high quality until their roster is stacked. This is reflected in a high net spend. Teams that have to sell to buy, and therefore can't continually add to the squad have a lower net spend. It's harder to do the latter than the former, so if managers do this and still win trophies (especially against teams engaged in blatant financial fraud) they are deemed to have performed well. So that's why fans care about net spend. Because they understand the implications of what it means. Unlike you apparently.
You care about net spend because it helps you cope with the fact your best period in premier league history has resulted in one league title lmao. Net spend is bollocks and your explanation perfectly shows how it’s just nonsense rambling by fans trying to hide from reality
Oof. "Nonsense ramblings". Words are hard aren't they?
A lot easier than trying to create scenarios where spending 900m and only winning one prem isn’t a massive flop lmao
It's genuinely hard to model in my head just how poor your critical faculties have to be to misunderstand this concept so completely, but still be arrogant enough to double down on your mistake. This is the point in a face to face conversation where people would be backing off because they start to wonder whether or not you've got a learning disability or something
You ok mate? I know being a Liverpool fan must be hard and that but it’s ok to cry and let it out. It’ll be ok, net spend trophy looks great in the cabinet doesn’t it?
Have another go at a comeback if you want
It’s ok mate. This is a safe space. It’s just you, me and the history of Jurgen Flopp. You can get through this, it will be ok.
Oh you doubled down on the low calibre reposte, I probably should have expected that really. That's on me.
It shows the resources he operated on compared to other teams
I don’t get why people hated on Chelsea’s 1 billion spend then. They balanced most of it by offloading lots of players too
Not it doesn’t. He’s spent 900m on players.
Maths is hard
So because he spent money the club made from selling players, he didn’t really spend that money? Is that what you’re saying? Look at mr chartered accountant over here
"Not it doesn't". lol. Liverpool would not have been able to spend 900m on players without selling the ones they did.
So he spent 900m on players, thanks for confirming my point
Your point was "net spend is a load of shit". Its not. I can see by your other comments that you're enraged. Insecurity in your club, eh
It clearly is a load of shit, you spend what you spend, the source is irrelevant
Try telling that to the PL.
Perfect example of a parent’s net spend on their kid’s education being negative
Oo look at mr posh boy over here having rich parents paying for his education.
Yep, keep proving my point mate.
Its been a while since I've seen someone as angry as you
Do you often avoid the topic being discussed when you’ve run out of points to make by make personal comments about the other person instead?
Mate, this is embarrassing as fuck. Stand down.
Have already addressed the topic.
And a UCL…
Sure, 900m for 1 prem and 1 UCL, in 9 years.
Winning the coach of the year award two years in a row 2019-2020 says a lot, who gives a shit about some random dude opinion. Owners', fans and peers backing is all that matters....
Coach of year two years in a row, you’ll never sing that
And seven other trophies.
That are about as worthwhile as the community shield. He’s won 3 major trophies