₦airaland Forum

AnfieldFan:
The point is a team hasn't done it before....Every other thing is speculative....
Teams who are massively successful over a short period of time have spent big...
If Newcastle becomes a top 6 club in England over the coming years, it won't be because they built a world class 11 for free...
Exceptions happen whereby 2-3 players move to a club for free, but it's because they club has already tested success and massively structured their teams to get the most optimal money value...

Players move for free if you offer them huge salaries

if Newcastle offer Pogba Mbappe Sule, Tolliso Rudiger Christensen Azpi Dybala Aubameyang each 500K per week, They will likely challenge for the title, By Spending big you can choose to spend on big salaries and not on transfer fees

Who said it cant be done? Madrid will end up spending maybe 200M over 2 seasons and have a world class team with Pogba Mbappe Alaba for free when the normal market value of those 3 alone probably exceeds 500M

Team A(Madrid) buys Pogba Mbappe Alaba for free
Team B will buy the same Mbappe Pogba Alaba quality and spend 500M

Team B has spent more than A for exact same quality

Kantebets:
extra curricula bawo
Bayern dodged a bullet bro
Even Pulisic that has been called out here has better EPL goals returns than CHO

I am not defending CHO per se. I am only proposing possible reasons for his failures and one of that may not be that he was always a scam. I, personally, would swap Sterling for him under the current manager.

All this long yarns to absolve Apariola of breaking the bank

raumdeuter:
Money attracts players and by money I mean salary.

There was a time Etoo after winning CL left to Anzhi Machakchala with some other players

Neymar DiMaria Mbappe Cavani Thiago Silva Zlatan Verrati all left top clubs to PSG a club established in 1970.

Clubs have financial muscle to sign players the point is Madrid can assemble a top class team of peak players with just 200m while Newcastle might spend 900m to assemble an inferior team

Money attracts players, nobody's disputing that..
You're saying a team shouldn't be judged on money spent because a team can assemble a world class team on free transfers..
Problem is, this hasn't happened yet, a few world class players here and there doesn't invalidate the money pumped into the squad...

Secondly- If money is all that matters, then when a club was established shouldn't be a criteria Used in judging the quality of players going to that club...

Thirdly- Madrid can assemble a world class squad without spending as much as Newcastle because it's a football powerhouse and has the competitive advantage...
PSG offered Mbappe as much as Madrid did but he still declined opting for Madrid which is my point, for a team like Newcastle to become like Madrid , you can't do so on a free transfer wishlist..
You spend big both player wise and manager wise and compliment with wages...

We are deviating entirely, net spend is one of the viable methods of judging a club relative to it's competitors....
I'm pretty sure if not for Pep, we wouldn't be having this debate...

AnfieldFan:
You don't need to go far, Man United is an example...
Good recruitment team, competent manager and level of competition in the league are all factors...

The point is, does spending big have an effect on success trophy wise?

Tbh, there is no constant factor that affect team success more than time, this net spend is just a lazy attempt at ignoring all variables. I would rather you give me free Messi, hazard, Coutinho, Thiago silva, Alaba and marcelo, pogba,varane, ronaldo than you buy me the 100m Grealish, 75m declan Rice, 150m Harry kane, 80mMaguire, 72m kepa of this world. The former I believe would impact their team more than the later even though they were brought free.

Ibime:
All this long yarns to absolve Apariola of breaking the bank

Choose one


100m Grealish or a free Messi?

50m shaw or free Alaba ?

Android22:
The underlying issue was that Netspend does not factor wage bill. Believe me, every club's wage bill is incentivized. As City did not win the UCL last season, many of the figures you saw there would not be maxxed out.

Liverpool has the most incentives of any top club in EPL, Virgil's wage bill is not 300 and above whereas D'Bruyne's own is but I don't want to dwell on that...
City pay more in annual wages than Liverpool bases solely on First team players..
Secondly, Liverpool has a much larger squad..

popizaino:
Tbh, there is no constant factor that affect team success more than time, this net spend is just a lazy attempt at ignoring all variables. I would rather you give me free Messi, hazard, Coutinho, Thiago silva, Alaba and marcelo, pogba,varane, ronaldo than you buy me the 100m Grealish, 75m declan Rice, 150m Harry kane, 80mMaguire, 72m kepa of this world. The former I believe would impact their team more than the later even though they were brought free.

Ancelotti signs Mbappe for 0
Klopp signs Luiz Dias for 50M

Klopp is a checkbook manager

popizaino:
Choose one


100m Grealish or a free Messi?

50m shaw or free Alaba ?

How bout none

raumdeuter:
Players move for free if you offer them huge salaries

if Newcastle offer Pogba Mbappe Sule, Tolliso Rudiger Christensen Azpi Dybala Aubameyang each 500K per week, They will likely challenge for the title, By Spending big you can choose to spend on big salaries and not on transfer fees

Who said it cant be done? Madrid will end up spending maybe 200M over 2 seasons and have a world class team with Pogba Mbappe Alaba for free when the normal market value of those 3 alone probably exceeds 500M

Team A(Madrid) buys Pogba Mbappe Alaba for free
Team B will buy the same Mbappe Pogba Alaba quality and spend 500M

Team B has spent more than A for exact same quality

They problem is Newcastle isn't the only club willing to offer these wages..
Madrid are
PSG are
Chelsea are
City are
These players knowing the wages are the same move to clubs competing currently for trophies...

Before Newcastle builds up to that level, they must spend big to actually be able to compete...
Chelsea did..
City did...
Pasg did..
Madrid did...
This is the way football is...
Assembling a team of 11 superstars on a free while possible hasn't been done so to say amount spent isn't a factor when judging relative to opposing teams is erroneous..

donjazet:
I'm transferring from molde to Valencia for 62 million.

Your own good nah...see upgrade

I'm supposed to move for £42million

raumdeuter:
Ancelotti signs Mbappe for 0
Klopp signs Luiz Dias for 50M

Klopp is a checkbook manager

Even that Diaz Porto were first of all quoting 70-80m for Liverpool and totenham but due to good negotiations and Porto not wanting to lose him for less in the summer they agreed to the deal, Had it been pep was interested and bought him higher than 50m, All hell would be let loose

kendrick93:
How bout none

Yes take 72m Sancho then

popizaino:
Choose one


100m Grealish or a free Messi?

50m shaw or free Alaba ?

This is a new phenomenon of the last 12 months.

When Apariola was spending, his rivals weren't building up their squads with free transfers.

Anomalies don't invalidate established trends. There is a correlation between spend and success, simple.

popizaino:
Tbh, there is no constant factor that affect team success more than time, this net spend is just a lazy attempt at ignoring all variables. I would rather you give me free Messi, hazard, Coutinho, Thiago silva, Alaba and marcelo, pogba,varane, ronaldo than you buy me the 100m Grealish, 75m declan Rice, 150m Harry kane, 80mMaguire, 72m kepa of this world. The former I believe would impact their team more than the later even though they were brought free.

People are making the mistake of NetSpend over 1 season which isn't how it works...
It's curated over a period of time...
Your club Chelsea wouldn't be this successful if not for Abramovich and his disregard of profiting from Chelsea... Chelsea has one of the highest NetSpend's in Europe since 2000 till date and have trophies to compliment that...
Trying to dismiss NetSpend because of agenda is disingenuous...

raumdeuter:
Ancelotti signs Mbappe for 0
Klopp signs Luiz Dias for 50M

Klopp is a checkbook manager

Superb Strawmanning....

AnfieldFan:
They problem is Newcastle isn't the only club willing to offer these wages..
Madrid are
PSG are
Chelsea are
City are
These players knowing the wages are the same move to clubs competing currently for trophies...

Before Newcastle builds up to that level, they must spend big to actually be able to compete...
Chelsea did..
City did...
Pasg did..
Madrid did...
This is the way football is...
Assembling a team of 11 superstars on a free while possible hasn't been done so to say amount spent isn't a factor when judging relative to opposing teams is erroneous..

You don't need 11 on a free just a few is enough imagine instead of paying 300m for Mbappe you get him free which allows you to spend on other areas whereas another coach spends 300m to get the equivalent of Mbappe

Ibime:
This is a new phenomenon of the last 12 months.

When Apariola was spending, his rivals weren't building up their squads with free transfers.

Anomalies don't invalidate established trends. There is a correlation between spend and success, simple.

Master strawmanners when you dismantle all their arguments...
Once it's Pep, it's like Logic suddenly flies out the window...

Ibime:
This is a new phenomenon of the last 12 months.

When Apariola was spending, his rivals weren't building up their squads with free transfers.

Anomalies don't invalidate established trends. There is a correlation between spend and success, simple.

We will come back to this at the end of the season when man united shows their trophies won

raumdeuter:
You don't need 11 on a free just a few is enough imagine instead of paying 300m for Mbappe you get him free which allows you to spend on other areas whereas another coach spends 300m to get the equivalent of Mbappe

A better question, City's entire team costs more than Mbappe and Halland, you can even throw in Alaba to make it 3 world class players..
Now remove the players that currently play these positions for Norwich and insert the three aforementioned world class players...Do you think Norwich finishes above City?

popizaino:
We will come back to this at the end of the season when man united shows their trophies won

I've already addressed this when I laid down my arguments...

AnfieldFan:
Master strawmanners when you dismantle all their arguments...
Once it's Pep, it's like Logic suddenly flies out the window...

Manipulators like to hammer on anomalies till they become established data sets in the minds of stupid people. Apariolas are only deceiving themselves with their long yarns. Writing long thesis to dance around the real intent of their long yarns, which is to plant in your mind that Apari Billion dollar spend doesn't matter.

AnfieldFan:
Liverpool has the most incentives of any top club in EPL, Virgil's wage bill is not 300 and above whereas D'Bruyne's own is but I don't want to dwell on that...
City pay more in annual wages than Liverpool bases solely on First team players..
Secondly, Liverpool has a much larger squad..

Your response is defensive and obviously mostly false - the team with 3 (soon to be 4) EPLs in 5 (6) years will pay out more bonuses than the other with 1 in the same 5(6) years. Then Liverpool squad being larger is the 'rules for thee but not rules for me' argument because when you listed how much City had spent on transfers, they have bought significantly more players per the overall transfer fee compared to all the other teams. Pablo Mari that was just loaned out by Arsenal, Douglas Luiz in Aston Villa are 2 players whose names are amongst those listed as the players City spent billions on even when those players never played one game for City. And there are like 15-20 other names like that.

Ibime:
This is a new phenomenon of the last 12 months.

When Apariola was spending, his rivals weren't building up their squads with free transfers.

Anomalies don't invalidate established trends. There is a correlation between spend and success, simple.

Its not a new phenomenon, Its been going for a long time

That was why Chelsea was able to get Bayern captain Ballack for free when his market value was over 30M
That was why Arsenal was able to get Spurs Captain Campbell for free when the fair market value will be close to what Ferdinand went for
That was why Bayern was able to get Lewandoski for free when his market value will be close to what Juve paid Napoli for Higuain

Juve around 2018 to 19 arranged Can Rabiot Ramsey Khedira all for free

AnfieldFan:
A better question, City's entire team costs more than Mbappe and Halland, you can even throw in Alaba to make it 3 world class players..
Now remove the players that currently play these positions for Norwich and insert the three aforementioned world class players...Do you think Norwich finishes above City?

As a start what will be the fair market value of Mbappe, Halland and Alaba?

Kilishihunter:
Even that Diaz Porto were first of all quoting 70-80m for Liverpool and totenham but due to good negotiations and Porto not wanting to lose him for less in the summer they agreed to the deal, Had it been pep was interested and bought him higher than 50m, All hell would be let loose

Tottenham were being told to pay 60M flat but they let Liverpool take the player for initial 37.5M. The same player would register different "transfer fee" if he had gone to a different club.

Ibime:
There is a correlation between spend and success, simple.

I am yet to see where this was gainsaid.

AnfieldFan:
They problem is Newcastle isn't the only club willing to offer these wages..
Madrid are
PSG are
Chelsea are
City are
These players knowing the wages are the same move to clubs competing currently for trophies...

Before Newcastle builds up to that level, they must spend big to actually be able to compete...
Chelsea did..
City did...
Pasg did..
Madrid did...
This is the way football is...
Assembling a team of 11 superstars on a free while possible hasn't been done so to say amount spent isn't a factor when judging relative to opposing teams is erroneous..

The wages PSG offer are more than regular clubs can, Same you can expect for Newcastle. And for a noveau riche club to attract players you have to spend more than market value.
Wages are why Messi and Ramos captain of 2 biggest club in world fotball went to PSG for free

The same reason Etoo will head over to Anzhi to join a club he never heard of 12months earlier

Android22:
Your response is defensive and obviously mostly false - the team with 3 (soon to be 4) EPLs in 5 (6) years will pay out more bonuses than the other with 1 in the same 5(6) years. Then Liverpool squad being larger is the 'rules for thee but not rules for me' argument because when you listed how much City had spent on transfers, they have bought significantly more players per the overall transfer fee compared to all the other teams. Pablo Mari that was just loaned out by Arsenal, Douglas Luiz in Aston Villa are 2 players whose names are amongst those listed as the players City spent billions on even when those players never played one game for City. And there are like 15-20 other names like that.

The irony in accusing me of lying when I'm right...City doesn't need to shell out incentives because the pay players well enough on base salaries already...
City's incentives to the best of my knowledge is tied to trophies ..

Liverpool's incentives are tied to player performances...(If Arnold assists in 4 consecutive matches, he gets (*) amount, if Allison saves 5 shots per match, he gets (*) amount, Bobby gets 20k for each 5 goals scored) etc...

Now you brought up salaries, I'm talking salaries but you've shifted to players City have moved on which has no bearing on this debate because Liverpool and every other club has also moved on players within that time period. Also, the players moved on most times didn't go for free which also factors into the NetSpend. Liverpool having a larger squad means higher number of people earning wages...

raumdeuter:
As a start what will be the fair market value of Mbappe, Halland and Alaba?

It's totally up to you, or maybe, let's use transfer market...
But the question still stands because they are 3 world class players, answer the question...

AnfieldFan:
People are making the mistake of NetSpend over 1 season which isn't how it works...
It's curated over a period of time...
Your club Chelsea wouldn't be this successful if not for Abramovich and his disregard of profiting from Chelsea... Chelsea has one of the highest NetSpend's in Europe since 2000 till date and have trophies to compliment that...
Trying to dismiss NetSpend because of agenda is disingenuous...

I am saying it is not all that matters and it is not the most important factor. Things like getting the right manager and time is more or greater than that netspend.

raumdeuter:
The wages PSG offer are more than regular clubs can, Same you can expect for Newcastle. And for a noveau riche club to attract players you have to spend more than market value.
Wages are why Messi and Ramos captain of 2 biggest club in world fotball went to PSG for free

The same reason Etoo will head over to Anzhi to join a club he never heard of 12months earlier

Simple...City did this, they are successful...
Chelsea did, they are successful...
(Coaches are included, getting quality coaches)
In essence, Money spent influences success gained..

If Newcastle spend big over the next 10 years, sooner or later, they will become competitors...