25 Oct 2010

Rafa Benitez vs. Alex Ferguson - *Gross/Net transfer spending comparison* (2004-2010)

How does Rafa Benitez's transfer spending during his entire reign (2004- 2010) compare to Alex Ferguson's spending at Manchester United over the same period?

I recently posted an article focusing on Benitez's transfer spending stats, and predictably (and amusingly) the Pro-Benitez Net Spend Cult triumphantly focused only on net spend as an indicator of his transfer market success. They were overjoyed because the figures showed that Benitez's net spend over 6 years was only £10.5, which meant they could then go around saying things like the following:

"What an amazing manager! No wonder he couldn't compete - he only had £10.5m a year to spend! Benitex was obviously never given enough money to spend at Liverpool"

Such an irritating thought process!

Anyway, this comparison with Ferguson will illustrate once again how the net spend argument is a fallacious and meaningless way to judge transfer spending.

NOTES

1. Liverpool and Man United have slightly different accounting years:

Liverpool: 31 July - 31 July
Man United: 30-June - 30 June

2. Transfer spending is accounted for in club accounts and all accounts between 2004 and 2009 are available.

3. Unfortunately, the accounts for 2009-10 are not yet available for either club. Luckily, Benitez's transfers for that period are recorded in the 'post balance sheet events' section of the 2009 accounts. For Man United's transfers during the same period, I have gone to the next best source: the official United website, which is obviously a trustworthy source.

4. Benitez Transfers: 31/7/2009 to 31/7/2010

* Only transfers where an actual fee was received/paid included.

IN: Albert Aquilani, Sotiris Kyrgiakos, Jonjo Shelvey + Daniel Ayala - £22.6m
OUT: Xabi Alonso, Andrea Dossena, Andrei Voronin + Nikolay Mihaylov - £31.2m

5. Ferguson Transfers: 30/6/2009 to 31/6/2010

* Only transfers where an actual fee was received/paid included.

IN: Antonio Valencia + Gabriel Obertan - £22.6m
OUT: Cristiano Ronaldo, Frazier Campbell + Danny Simpson - £84.2m

6. Roy Hodgson's transfer spending is NOT included in the analysis. All his transfers (invliving actual fees) took place after the 31 July accounting deadline.

7. This particular comparison is regularly requested by visitors to this site. It is NOT an attack on Rafa Benitez (if it's an attack on anyone, it is the Net Spend Cult).

Rafa Benitez vs. Alex FERGUSON: 2004-2010

Benitez v Ferguson - transfer Spend 2004-10

As you can see, these figures make an absolute mockery of the cretinous net spend argument:

* Over the last 6 years, United have a lower net spend than Liverpool (LFC: £10.5m | United £6.6m)

* According to the standard argument of Net Spend Cult (as repeatedly applied to Benitez), United have only actually spent £40m over 6 years, and £6.6m per year. I never knew a transfer spend of only £6.6m was needed to win three league titles and and the Champions League!

* How can United's success be possible?! Liverpool have a higher net spend, but according to the Net Spend Cult, Benitez was never able to compete/was never given enough money etc. If that's the case, then using that logic, United ALSO never had enough money to spend.

* Irrespective of net spend, United also have a much lower gross spend than Liverpool, which means in real terms, they've spent less on players over the last 6 years.

* Rather miraculously though, despite having a lower gross and net spend than Liverpool, United have been more successful. How can this be possible?! It's a miracle, surely?

Using the net spend argument as an indicator of a Manager's success in the transfer market is complete and utter nonsense, and anyone who uses it to the exclusion of other more valid arguments is - in my view - massively deluded.

Now - just watch the other excuses roll in:

* "But what about Ronaldo! His 80m fee skews the figures". Size of fee is irrelevant. If you take out Alonso's fee from LFC's figures then Benitez's net spend looks even worse.

* "But what about salaries - surely you have to include those"

* "But what about the money United spent before 2004"

* "But Benitez had bad owners to deal with"

and blah blah blah....

It is absolutely WRONG to argue - as the Net Spend Cult does - that Benitez was not given enough money. As this comparison with Ferguson shows, he WAS. Benitez spent much more than Ferguson over 6 years yet United outperformed Liverpool in the league time and time again.

Only someone completely divorced from reality would further argue that Ferguson has spent only £40m in the last 6 years/£6.6m per year, But this is precisely what the net spend cult argue when it comes to Benitez!

I now await the excuses and circular arguments that will inevitably be expounded by members of the Net Spend Cult.

NB. Not everyone who argues in favour of Net Spend is part of the Cult; only those who repeatedly come up with lame arguments/excuses to suggest that Net Spend is the only indicator of transfer market success.

Jaimie Kanwar


353 comments:

  1. Jaimie, as you well know, your basis of this article only makes sense if both clubs start from the same position. If the United side in 2004 is markedly better than the Liverpool side of 2004 (which, of course, it was) then subsequent net spend is only building on that base squad. Liverpool would have to spend considerably more than United to bring the squad up to the same level.

    In the 02/03 season United had bought the most expensive defender ever, in Rio Ferdinand, for £28m. This player continues to be an integral part of their squad even now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This completly ignores the fact that Liverpool needed to be re built from scratch when Rafa took over, Fergie had already built his Utd team and was in a maintaince phase, merely having to add 1 or 2 players per year. Good to see you have finally outed yourself as a United fan.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Haven't you got some films to watch or something?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, Kraken, but Jaimie tends to see past those facts.. :P

    ReplyDelete
  5. plus what makes teh figures so impressive for fergie is teh sale of ronaldo, take that out of the equation and its a fairer reflection

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ya, United has a better squad than us in 2004. Let not forget they have being successful since 1993 and building onward since then. They have players like scholes,giggs,neville brothers, beckham etc...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Interesting article. I may not agree with everything you say on this site but can't fault your research Jaimie. One question for you: Would you say the fact that RB had to alledgedly sell before he brought impacted the players he eventually got as compared to AF who could buy without worrying about balancing the book? A lot of transfers are timing and if you are waiting to sell before you can buy sometimes you miss out.

    ReplyDelete
  8. All i think what Jaimie is trying to point out is the fact that RAFA has wasted huge amounts of money. With rafa he liked to go for 2 or 3 players that cost 6 million a piece rather than go for one good player around the 18 mill mark. The truth is, RAFA has wasted far too much and I for one have always said this. It doesnt take a genius that Torres was already a good player to buy and is a safer bet than buying lots of ngogs :)  


    In addition most of his buys except a couple have made a profit when sold on. Hes not a very good business man, but why should he care when its not his pocket :D

    ReplyDelete
  9. Has Rafa banged your girlfriend, wife or mother, just curious like, you really seem to hate him.

    ReplyDelete
  10. And so it begins: every possible excuse under the sun will be advanced, including the old chestnut that United were in a better position in 2004.

    I don't dispute that - what I'm trying to get across here is the ridiculousness of the net spend argument.  After my last article, Benitez fans were ecstaticly proclaiming that he'd only spent 10.5m a year and thus couldn't compete etc, but Ferguson's net spend over the last 6 years is only 6.6m!  Only an idiot would argue that he'd not had enough money to compete; that he's oly actually spent 6.6m a year.

    But keep the excuses coming - these figures prove categorically that the stupid net spend argument is nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  11. In 2005 I bought a 1 bed flat for £80k, 6 months later I changed up to a 1 bed starter home for £125k, 18 months later I got a nice 2 bed bungalow for £199k. In 2008 I bought a 3 bed semi with a nice garden for £249k. 

    Unfortunately my cretinous friend with a big trust fund from Daddy and a nice farmhouse in the country can't seem to understand that my semi must be better than his farmhouse because I've spent over £600k in the property market whereas he only spent a little over half a million.

    Can it be true that I am rubbish at buying houses because I've ended up in a semi and he's got a country pile even though I've spent a lot more than him?

    ReplyDelete
  12. The depth of denial is truly astounding.  You'll come up with anything to defend Benitez, won't you?!  Liverpool needed to be rebuilt from scratch?  Absolute lies.  How could a team that needed to be 'rebuilt from scratch' win the CL in Benitez's first season?!

    You're basically dissing the talents of players like Smai Hyppia, Riise, Gerrard, Carragher, Hamann etc who were at the club when benitez took over.

    And grow up already - I am not a United fan.  Along with this inaccurate 'rebuild from scratch ' excuse, is that the best you can do?

    ReplyDelete
  13. How predictable. Should we then take out Alonso's sale from LFC's figures?!  That would make Benitez's figures much worse.  You just want one rule for Benitez and another for everyone else, i.e. whatever rule makes Benitez look good, let's use that.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Actually my friend has just explained it's worse than that! 

    He sold a few acres of trees he'd planted a few years ago on some land his uncle had left him for several hundred grand. 

    The rich just get richer eh?

    ReplyDelete
  15. yea RB made mistakes. We all know when he was given the opportunity to spend big he brought in quality. Torres, Masch are good examples. However he was never given that freedom to spash out huge amounts on players regularly. The board did not want to approve 18m for Barry. A player that would have solved most of our problems on the left, and guess what, Alonso would still be with us. The fact of teh matter is you cannot build a great team by selling to buy. Chelsea, Manu, Arsenaland now ManC and Spurs do not have this problem like we did. he was not well supported by teh board.

    Sadly, when you buying 6m playesr today it can be a hit or miss, because your WC players will all come in at a much much higher prmium.

    ReplyDelete
  16. And what does that have to do with amount of money spent/recouped in the last 6 years?  Nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Dude, be reasonable. What is the point of throwing such abuse? This is uncalled for. If you do not agree with his posts, dont reply or visit the site.

    Jaimie - kick the Rupret bugger out

    ReplyDelete
  18. i was wondering when the cliched 'if I bought a house' argument would surface.  yet another lame, irrelevant excuse.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It's the rote response of Benitez fans who refuse to enter into civilised debate.  before this thread is out I'll be labelled a 'manc in disguise' and countless other things.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good response, your CSE in logic comes in handy again!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Rafa Benitex v Ranieri/Mourinho/Grant/Ancelotti would be interesting

    ReplyDelete
  22. According to this, Jamie is the only fit person to coach Liverpool. Net Value 0, Net gain 0... Full proof plan. We will still lots of kits too. Yours will be the  favorite. I would buy a jersey for my dog with your face and name on it....surely Surely Jamie will be the number 1 hit Dogs Jersey in the world soon. Your face will be an instant remedy for Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Constipation.. Only problem is....Oh yeah Jersey ....We can contract out our jersey to Chow brand and get lots of money as sponsorship. 

    ReplyDelete
  23. I think you're wasting your time. Your argument is too logical and sensible to have any impact on our host.

    ReplyDelete
  24. <p>According to this, Jamie is the only fit person to coach Liverpool. Net Value 0, Net gain 0... Full proof plan. We will still lots of kits too. Yours will be the  favorite. I would buy a jersey for my dog with your face and name on it....surely Surely Jamie will be the number 1 hit Dogs Jersey in the world soon. Your face will be an instant remedy for Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Constipation.. Only problem is....Oh yeah Jersey ....We can contract out our jersey to Chow brand and get lots of money as sponsorship. 
    </p>

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yes Jamie but you forget that Ferguson had been building a team since 1986. He was building his team for 18 years before Rafa even arrived. When Benitez came on board in 2004 Liverpool would have needed major changes to the team to get it anywhere near as strong as Man United. Of course Benitez would have needed to spend more.

    So by your reckoning Benitez should have been able to build as strong a sqaud as Uniteds on an extra 4.5million net spend a year even though Fergie had his empire well built by then.

    Your arguement is ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Jamie ... people are not in denial ... the fact is if you are building a team you need lots of signings .... if you are tweaking a team you need the odd one or two .... would be interesting to see the number of actual signings and u might understand what i mean

    Nonetheless quite an eye opening article and once again confrims (sadly) the genius of SAF

    So Thankyou

    ReplyDelete
  27. Man U had a squad with more net worth than Liverpools Alonso was more than half the price of Ronaldo.

    ReplyDelete
  28. So are you saying Rafa should have been able to build a squad as strong as United in the 6 years Rafa was at Liverpool on an extra 4 million net a year?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Jamie - your comment "He was backed to the hilt with money each every year." Do you honestly, hand on heart believe that?

    ReplyDelete
  30. just a quick question, why are the figures for net spend 2006-2007 different from the figures in your post http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2010/10/tom-hicks-interview-analysis-part-2-did.html. This post 15.6m other post at 9.6m?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:07 pm, October 25, 2010

    Everyone has always said you were a Manc! You do everything you can to prove it!

    ReplyDelete
  32. How ridiculous this article is: See "Pay As You Play: The True Price of Success in the Premier League Era". tomkinstimes.com.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:08 pm, October 25, 2010

    Andy you are an arse-licking turd!

    ReplyDelete
  34. If you've got 5k to buy a car and I've got 10k then you'll think I am a genius at car buying when you see what I pull up in next to your heap.

    ReplyDelete
  35. It has everything to do with it. Fergie didn't have to spend as much cos he already had a bunch of stars playing for him. Man U at that point were the spoilt child of football always getting the players they wanted because of all the money they had. Shame they owe so much - looking forward to their loan recall's.  

    ReplyDelete
  36. We all know when he was given the opportunity to spend big he brought in quality
    Right.  So what about Keane, Johnson, Aquilani and Babel?  That is 67m wasted right there.  When Benitez spent big he got it right twice, not all the time as you suggest.
    Benitez was given 289m to spend!  He chose to buy the wrong players, no one else.  Who twisted his arm to spend a combined 35m + on Dossena, Riera, Lucas, Pennant, Kromkamp and Morientes?!

    ReplyDelete
  37. I've already done that analysis.  I'll post it tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Like what kraken said, United has being successful under Alex since 1993 and has being in maintenance phase. I agreed Rafa had bad transfers and i also believed he did not have a large sum of money to splash(Unlike chelsea or City) at one go. By comparing Rafa with Ferguson this way just doesnt make sense.

    ReplyDelete
  39. you may not be a man u fan but you are a nob

    ReplyDelete
  40. You never wrote an investigative article on H&G previous ownership of a football ...We have already conceded you are a genius.....Hoping to get banned from this forjm...According to this, Jamie is the only fit person to coach Liverpool. Net Value 0, Net gain 0... Full proof plan. We will still lots of kits too. Yours will be the  favorite. I would buy a jersey for my dog with your face and name on it....surely Surely Jamie will be the number 1 hit Dogs Jersey in the world soon. Your face will be an instant remedy for Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Constipation.. Only problem is....Oh yeah Jersey ....We can contract out our jersey to Chow brand and get lots of money as sponsorship. 

    ReplyDelete
  41. you are a lame irrelevant tit

    ReplyDelete
  42. you are a lame irrelevant tit!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:14 pm, October 25, 2010

    Andy, don't suck up to Jaimie. You do have to ask what Rafa ever did to Kanwar

    ReplyDelete
  44. Nice to see you had to wait for the Ronaldo sale for your argument to make sense.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:16 pm, October 25, 2010

    You might not be a Manc but nothing suggests you're a Liverpool fan either.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Why are you still going after Benitez 4 months after he left you sad bell end? You released this same 'article' months ago, move on Jaime FFS. Compare Benitez's gross / net spends to Mourinho's, who was rebuilding his squad at the same time, not just adding the odd player as was SAF. And yes, if you have to, take both Ronaldo's and Alonso's figures out of the equation and then let's compare final figures. You're acting as if Rafa raped your mum and made you watch you sad blurt.

    ReplyDelete
  47. No, not at all.  I'm simply arguing that using net spend as an indicator of a manager's success in the transfer market is total nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:18 pm, October 25, 2010

    Jaimie, have you thought about getting a life?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Since United sold Ronaldo they haven't won anything. Your figures therefore defeat your own argument, which is presumably that success is not dependent on net spend. Your own figures show this is patently false. In the years 2006-2008, Ferguson's average net spend is a lot higher than Benitez's and is matched by corresponding success. What your figures show, rather concisely, is that even proven successful managers like SAF struggle when they are forced to operate on a limited budget like Benitez was.  

    ReplyDelete
  50. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:19 pm, October 25, 2010

    Because he's a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Well said Dan, this analysis was only ever going to throw up one result

    ReplyDelete
  52. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:20 pm, October 25, 2010

    Shut up you boring little man.

    ReplyDelete
  53. The fact is that over 6 years, Benitez was given 289m to spend, at an average of 48m a year.

    Is that not being backed?

    That is much more than most other teams bar Chelsea and (in the last couple of years) Man City.

    How anyone can argue that Benitez has not had money to spend is beyond me.

    I guess the 289m is a fantasy; it doesn't exist?

    ReplyDelete
  54. don't know why you keep banging this drum? no one is suggesting that benitez used more money the bacon face. we are simply saying he didn't get enough to build a year-on-year competitive squad, which your numbers confirm.

    ReplyDelete
  55. go read tompkin's article, more complete and less anger, definitely more enjoyable.
    Get some help Jaimie, why are you so angry?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:22 pm, October 25, 2010

    You're like some sort of semi-mucous life form

    ReplyDelete
  57. Those figures are for the Hicks and Gillett era only.  H+G bought Liverpool in february 2007; any transfers carried out between July 31 2006 and 6 February 2007 had to be deducted as they did not take place under H+G.  This explains the difference.  This post is for Benitez's entire reign at LFC, so all transfers for 2006-7 will be included.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Jaimie is a Kanwar5:23 pm, October 25, 2010

    And you have a go at Rafa isn't predictable.Yawn, yawn!

    ReplyDelete
  59. The argument makes perfect sense without the Ronaldo sale.  And if what you say is true, why did I not post this in July last year when Ronaldo was actually sold?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Jamie I think that we all know that RB made some dodgy buys but what your failing to make a point of is that RB was not spending big money on 1 player he was spening smallish amounts on unknwon players hoping they would be bargains.

    Like has been said already SAF already had a strong squad together so the buys he made where to just strengthen the squad.

    The more you continue with the blinkered and one sided attack on RB the more I am beggining to the believe that you are in fact a United fan on a wind up as the rest of the forum using community say you are.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Oh he removed a post...there's a change

    ReplyDelete
  62. Even if you take out Ronaldo and Alonso's figures then Uniteds net Spend is greater than RB's.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I like to read jaime articles but this one comparing Ferguson & Rafa is really ridiculous

    ReplyDelete
  64. Hi MnM - I disagree that Benitez had to sell to buy.  Where is the evidence.  I'd be interested to know who you thin Benitez 'had' to sell to buy the following:

    * Keane - 20m
    * Aquilani - 18m
    * Johnson - 17m
    * Mascherano - 18.6m
    * Torres - 20m
    * Babel - 11.5m

    That's an awful lot of selling to afford those players.  Who did we sell, and for what price to be able to buy that lot?

    ReplyDelete
  65. Cant we talk about tactics for once? You seem to be a bit thin on the ground for that type of analysis here..obviously a numbers guy what with Purslow as your avatar

    ReplyDelete
  66. <span>Interesting.  However as other people have stated, Rafa came to Liverpool in 2004, whilst Ferguson had been working away at United for years before hand.  You are comparing a total squad overhaul to routine maintenance.  It's the equivalent of servicing a good car compared to scrapping it and buying a brand new one.</span>

    <span>Also if you take into account the youth set-up at united, they have been able to bring through players good enough for the first team while Liverpool's were not existent.  This also brings to light another argument that Rafa had to spend money not only on his first team squad, but the youth and reserve set up too which is now paying off.</span>

    ReplyDelete
  67. <span>Interesting.  However as other people have stated, Rafa came to Liverpool in 2004, whilst Ferguson had been working away at United for years before hand.  You are comparing a total squad overhaul to routine maintenance.  It's the equivalent of servicing a good car compared to scrapping it and buying a brand new one.</span>  
     
    <span>Also if you take into account the youth set-up at united, they have been able to bring through players good enough for the first team while Liverpool's were not existent.  This also brings to light another argument that Rafa had to spend money not only on his first team squad, but the youth and reserve set up too which is now paying off.</span><span></span>

    ReplyDelete
  68. How do these figures confirm that Benitezdidn't get enough money?!

    289m over 6 years is not enough?

    Almost 50m a year (average) is not enough?

    How much IS enough?  400m?  500m?  And what if Benitez got 500m but sold 400m worth of players giving him a net spend of 100m?  You would then still argue that he hasn't had enough!  This again is why the net spend argument is utter nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Aquliani was bought with Alosnso money.
    Johnson was brought in on money owed to the club from the Crouch deal
    Torres was brought of the back of winning the CL and getting to the final of the CL.


    These facts that you over look do suggest that you are infact blind of facts or you infact are not aware of the facts and therefore adds to the opinion of many that you are a United fan on a wind up.

    ReplyDelete
  70. You refer to your readers as "cretinuous" and "ridiculous" and any other hyperbolic insult you can think of and then complain when they robustly question you.  The bottom line is that you have an emotive, visceral and irrational dislike of RB and that determines your attitude to everyone else.  If they are anti-Rafa - like Purslow and Ferguson they are good.  If they are prof-Rafa like the vast majority of LFC fans, then they are cretinous and stupid.

    The rationalist, objective pose you adopt does not fool anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Hi Jamie,
    this was a great read and very revealing. I would be very interested in looking at the past 10 years. It is plain obvious that Rafa spent poorly in the transfer market, and I respect thoroughly what everyone else is saying too. My point is that Ferguson spent very heavily and took some significant losses on the likes of Veron, and invested heavily in Rooney, and Rio.
    I also believe that Houllier spent unwisely at Liverpool too, and I absolutely don't want huge amounts of money given to Hodgson to spend. We should cut our losses now, and install Oneil who BTW has invested very wisely in players we were reported to have had an interest prior to them having been signed by Villa.
    Paul  

    ReplyDelete
  72. So that's what you're clinging onto now? :) The latest in a long line of excuses is 'But if you take out Ronaldo and Alonso's fees, United have a bigger net spend'.

    Great.  Why do't we just make up the figures instead!  The we could manipulate it and create whatever net spend figure we wanted...

    ReplyDelete
  73. Kraken is right. the earth was not flat when you start your analysis... (or when you finish). Your basic methodology is flawed - just because you are labouring to prove a (fallacious) point once again.

    Why look at gross outlays without considering what you recoup? If you gave exactly the same money to two investment managers and one invested and held the same stock while the other traded day in and day out - you would only care what they ended up with at the end - the NET gain.

    And you, sir, are an intelligent person but are just trolling for response.

    You have always avoided the obvious. The value of the team when you start the analysis and when you finish  - is CRITICAL. Yet you ignore it.

    If you ignore that dynamic well - you are as one-dimensional as your critics paint you - but then perhaps that is deliberate ?

    ReplyDelete
  74. Well considering that your own figures proves that Benitez was an accountants wet dream as he was having to juggle between players in and out no wonder he couldn't build a decent squad.

    But I suppose with you being so blinkered in your attack on Benitez then you refuse to accept that.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Right folks the relative positions of the club need to be considered in the round.

    Net spend
    If net spend is being considered then every transfer needs to be considered.
    However Ferguson would have you believe he didn't spend the Ronaldo money because he didn't see value in the market. That would lead to the belief the Ronaldo money is in his back pocket for spending.  Perhaps following the Rooney debacle the missing Ronaldo money will become available.  For the majority of the period that the comparison has been drawn the RoNaldo figure could not be included and taking the last year out of the equation a different result is achieved, A MUCH DIFFERENT RESULT.  

    Match receipts
    We are losing a reported £1,000,000 per match against what Man U are taking over how long?
    The need for a new ground has been tying the hands of the club and stifling transfer activity and the paying of wages.

    Youth development
    Whether through a lack of priority, an inability to attract talent, an inability to develop talent the youth set-up has had no real impact on the first team for a decade. Compare United's.  What value has that added to the strength of Utd's team.

    Say what you want about Rafa's achievements.  Minus Ronaldo over the first 5 years Rafa spent less.  He struggled to get control over transfers and when he did we became a selling club.  He wanted control of the youth set-up and only at the end of the term did he achieve this.

    Can we put all this to bed and move on?  Keep quiet, even in this IT age and do it the Liverpool way.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Why is it ridiculous?  because it doesn't conform with your POV?  Because it doesn't place Benitez in a good enough light?  Because it's not a eulogy to Benitez?

    If you want to continue to be able to post on this site, please refrain from posting pointless comments like this.  if you disagree with the article, argue your point.

    ReplyDelete
  77. It'safact and it is in fact you who are making up facts and figures to further your own argument, so don'ttry to avoid the issue that you have been proven to be wrong! :-D

    ReplyDelete
  78. If you continue to post snide comments, your posts will be deleted, as per the comment policy. 

    ReplyDelete
  79. Are you going gaga?
    N'gog cost £1.5m and was 20. The lad has loads of potential and will be a great buy long term, so really bad example.

    Rafa did want to make bigger purchases, but often, these were not supported, for example rafa identified Dani Alves as his right sided solution at £10m from Sevilla, but was not given funds so bought Pennant for £6m instead! He also wanted Barry (not Keane) but again was not supported.

    ReplyDelete
  80. You'll make yourself ill Jamie5:45 pm, October 25, 2010

    For God sake Jamie move on......
    Rafa was a manager obviously adored by a lot of LFC fans. You can't change that.
    He was part of one of the greatest nights in our history. 
    But he has gone - rightly or wrongly moved on.
    I suggest you do the same sad lad.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Sorry Jaimie

    It has EVERYTHING to do with your argument.

    If you start off with a very expensive squad and end with a not so valuable one (aging/lacking individual brilliance) - while I start with an average squad and end with a more valuable one (several world-class players and a load of depth especially amongst my youth squad - for example) - then would it surprise anybody that I had a slightly higher NET spend than you??? (Although apparently you would be bamboozled...).

    And don't get me started on the other reason that players sign for a club... errr... salary...??? Could that have anything to do with what you are trying to prove? No surely that is totally irrelevant...?????

    Jaimie, Jaimie, Jaimie - you CAN't believe this stuff that you write can you?

    I await for your enlightenment on your own personal Road to Damascus...

    ReplyDelete
  82. It's common knowledge Rafa's transfers were poor. Alot of the players he brought in were simply not fit to wear the shirt. It would be an interesting comparison to see who's transfers were actually successful over the same period rather than focusing on the money. There seems to be a greater turnover of players at Anfield.  Hicks and Gillett may have backed Rafa but they let the club down in so many other ways (stadium, jurgen klinsmann, all the bickering etc). I dont think some fans can seperate the issues. I for one am glad to see the back of all of them and I truly hope the new regime can fair better. Y.N.WA.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Right - so please enlighten everyone by listing the facts and figures that I've apparently made up.

    Don't say such silly things without proof.  I haven't made anything up - the figures from directly from the club's accounts...or did they club make them up too?

    ReplyDelete
  84. A fairer analysis may be from say 1991 for liverpool and united which is when both were in transition. Liverpool with an ageing squad needing to be replaced while united were building to win their first title in 27 years.

    ReplyDelete
  85. United Squad 2004/2005
    Tim Howard - Join 2003
    Rio Ferdinand - Join 2002
    Gary Neville - Join 1991
    Philip Neville - Join 1993
    John O Shea - Join 2000
    MicKael Silvestre - Join 1999
    Roy Keane - Join 1993
    Paul Scholes - Join ? (i know before 2004)
    Ryan Giggs - Join 1981
    Christian Ronaldo - Join 2003
    Ruud Van Nisteroy - Join 2001
    Solskjaer - Join 1996
    Darren Fletcher - Join ? (i know before 2004)

    Players join during 2004
    Rooney
    Saha
    Rossi
    Alan smith
    Heinze

    You see, it really make no sense to compare that with Rafa

    ReplyDelete
  86. 10mil net/year, is simply not enough to build a all conquering team. benitez did well with what he got. i would say that, given the team he inherited, 30 mil net/year would be around the figure needed to really build year-on-year 10m net for the january transfers and 20m net for the summer transfers. less would be ok, but 10m net/year is simply to low for where liverpool wanted to be, no matter who occupied the manager chair. 

    ReplyDelete
  87. Aquliani was bought with Alosnso money. 
    Maybe, but the point here is that Alonso did not HAVE to be sold.  Benitez forced him out; he wanted to leave.

    Johnson was brought in on money owed to the club from the Crouch deal 
    Proof please.  Another media myth based on supposition and no proof whatsoever. 

    Torres was brought of the back of winning the CL and getting to the final of the CL.

    And what does this have to do with the argument that Benitez had to sell to buy?
    One final thing: The next time you (or anyone) accuse me of being a Man United fan, I will ban you permanently.  If you can't debate without saying stupid things like that then I don't want you on the site.

    ReplyDelete
  88. No unfortunately they just prove that closing your eyes and screaming very loudly just drowns out any response.

    Read any elementary accounting text. Cashflow is "interesting" in isolation but tells you nothing at all about "value created or dispersed".

    Opening net asset value plus net spend versus net closing asset value = wealth creation - or wealth reduction. All you have to do is look at +ve versus -ve.

    C'mon Jaimie - stop yanking our chain!

    ReplyDelete
  89. If you remove Ronaldos fee and Alonso'sfee from both results then SAF has a Net spend greater than RB by £24 million.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Please, for the love of God, let it go.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Right.  So Benitez had 20m to spend on Keane; 18.6m for Masch; 18m for Aquilani; 18m for Johnson; 20m for Torres, but he was not allowed 10m for Alves?! 

    You're just rolling out the same old cliches fed to you by the press.  Please proivide evidence that Liverpool lost out on Alves because of lack of money.  please provide evidence that Benitez did not want Keane.

    The way Benitez's supporters twist the truth and basically make stuff up really is something to behold.

    ReplyDelete
  92. I think the easiest thing to look at is to ask any set of fans from a club that finishes/finished 7th and ask if they would have liked to have had a manage that net spent £10mil a season, spent £200+ mil in total, won a ECL, got to another ECL final, won the FA Cup and came within 4 points of winning the league, ALL within 6 years then I bet you they all say that manager is a god.

    If Hodgson goes and does something half as good as that we will all worship him.

    But of course Benitez is crap for some reason or other....oh yes he bought Keane who is well rubbish, oh and Lucas...... in fact those acheivements don't really count if he bought Lucas....

    ReplyDelete
  93. Hey, why don't we go back to 1959 when Bill Shankly was appointed?  Actually, scrap that: let's go all the way bac to 1892!  That would be the fairest analysis, wouldn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  94. And i have not even include the sales of some of the United players before 2004, Beckham etc

    ReplyDelete
  95. Right Jaimie, you dont think that previous amounts of money being spent should be considered in the arguments as to whether Rafa wasted money or not. Well here is one for you. 

    At this time, Chelsea are sitting top of the Premier League. They won the league and cup double last year and look a strong bet to do well in the Champions League, League and Cups again this year yet they have spent very little over the course of the last 4 seasons. Why are they still at the top of the league then? Because Jaimie, they spent the money previously and do not need to buy that many players now because they are already at the club, in much the same way that United were before Rafa joined Liverpool!!!! Cole, Essien, Cech, Bosingwa, Carvalho, Ferreira, Kalou, Drogba, Anelka, Lampard, Obi Mikel were all purchased 3-4 years ago and longer yet Chelsea didnt win the league for 3 years having won it previously and won it last year. Last year, they won the league because they were able to tweak their team and had a new coach in who was able to bring the best out his players. United had spent massive amounts of money on the likes of Rooney, Berbatov and Ferdinand because they are able to go out and spend £30m on a player without having to sell £25m to finance it! Benitez did not have the best record for signing players but look at United now, they can spend £8m on a player such as Hernandez even though they have no idea how he will do this season. Fair play to the lad he has done well so far but it is the same with Ronaldo, Liverpool could not afford to purchase a player like Ronaldo for a fee of £12M because we had to strenghten the 1st team rather than the reserves. Rafa spent a lot of money on a lot young players in the hope that even 2 or 3 would make it. Look at our right back situation. When Rafa came, he needed a right back so he bought Josemi. Finnan then showed huge improvement and became 1st choice. Josemi was replaced with Kromkamp. Kromkamp played mostly right midfield and we needed a winger, so we looked at the market. Dani Alves was available so we went after him and but for £2m, he would have been a Liverpool player but our board would not pay what Sevilla wanted so we had to settle for Pennant instead. Issue is, is that when Benitez identified players for the 1st team, he rarely got it wrong. Agger, Skrtel, Reina, Torres, Alonso, Masch, Kujt even Arbeloa but we could not go out and sign these players without selling off someone first. United, Chelsea, City and even Arsenal are able to purchase 1st team players without necessarily selling another one to fund it. Arsene Wenger is different as he has a unique eye for youngsters with the aid of his scouting department but if United need a new keeper after van der Sar, they will go and buy one and not have to sell anyone to fund it. When Ferdinand goes, United will spend millions to replace. There are 2 players at United at the moment who could easily have been Liverpool players now, Evra and Vidic but we were outbid by United who could afford those players at the time. You make it sound like Benitez was given vast amounts of money all in the one go but he wasn't. He had to try and build a team gradually. The problem he had though was that when money became an issue in 2008, he had to start selling first choice players and was not given the money to continue to develop the squad underneath which is why our first XI will give anyone a game but our 2nd choice players will not win us games. United can rely on playing Scholes and Giggs intermittently because they were there beforehand yet can still win you games. There is no doubt that Rafa made mistakes but so has Ferguson, so did Mourinho. Rafa though could not afford to make those mistakes and ultimately, his two big signings [...]

    ReplyDelete
  96. No - my figures (i.e. the CLUB'S OFFICIAL FIGURES), show that Benitez had 289m over 6 years to spend, the majority of which he wasted on crap.

    ReplyDelete
  97. No - I refer to the net spend cult as cretinous in my article, not to any individual poster.  And I do not dislike Benitez at all - it is not personal; just because you say it is doesn't make it so.  Every argument I have ever advanced about Benitez has been based solely on his managerial role.  I have never personally attacked, insulted or denigrated the man.  Just because you and others can't hack your deity being analysed doesn't mean I dislike him.

    I have no doubt he's a nice man in real life but this is not the issue.  I'm concerned only with his performance as Liverpool FC manager.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Hi Paul,

    Thanks for your comments.   I have the figures for the last 10 years, and I will post that particular comparison soon. In the meantime, here are Gerard Houllier's gross/net spend figures:

    http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/12/exclusive-liverpool-fc-net-spend.html

    ReplyDelete
  99. Why should we remove those fees?  Just so you can manipulate the figures so that Benitez has a lower net spend?!

    Why don't you just make up the figures yourself - that way you can twist things in whatever way you want :)


    I personally prefer to stick to the facts from the club's accounts, but that's just me.

    ReplyDelete
  100. If 10m is not enough to build a successful team, then how did Ferguson manager 3 titles and a CL on 6.6m net a year?

    And it is NOT 10m a year.  Are you suggesting that all the players Benitez bought cost - in real terms - 10m a year?  Gosh, I never knew you could spend 20m on one player with just 10m! You should patent that secret.

    The money recouped does not change the fact that Benitez had 289m to spend on players over 6 years.  That is the reality.  That is real money that passed from LFC to other clubs for the services of players.

    ReplyDelete
  101. One of the goals of this site is accurately cataloguing financial info about LFC.  This article has never been posted  before; it contains info that will be useful to LFC fans, and figures that need to be out there to ensure accurate info is available.

    So no, I will not let it go.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Rafa inherited a weak squad, and over 6 years made it stronger. Utd in 2004 had a very strong squad and over the past 6 years has gradually gotten weaker. Neither team look capable of winning a title for the next few years at least.

    Both need to sign top quality players or find some youth players who are ready to step up or watch City and Chelski become the dominant force in the premiership.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Hi Jamie

    I think the onlyway you can judge Rafa's transferspending is to compare the squad he inherited to the squad he left us with, only then will you be ableo judge whether or not he has spent well and got value for money ........

    ReplyDelete
  104. sorry seem to have a dodgy space bar but you get the point

    ReplyDelete
  105. <p><span>2004-2005 please subtract 13mil as Cisse not Rafa's signing.....that brings his net spend to about 15mil in his first season.....</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span>Important points without ronaldo sale (which was a stupid price for a good player but a stupid price nevertheless) AF figures would not look as good.....plus rooney and ferdinand (60mil – two players that would make all the difference to this liverpool squad…i.e. could you imagine Aguerro and suarez in our squad but not accounted for in the above figures</span>
    </p><p><span> </span></p>

    ReplyDelete
  106. <p><span>Rafa has brought alot crap...lets face it he has..but who hasn’t….alot of his crap signings have been free or next nothing anyway…..but it's not like we have not been linked or attempted to buy better players it's just that when we go for them we lose out on them cause were slow to pounce or don’t have the funds.....i.e. simao, alves, vidic, ronaldo, bosingwa, evra the list can go on and on....</span>
    </p><p><span> </span></p>

    ReplyDelete
  107. No Jaimie, you always do this. One person steps over the line and you tar everyone with the same brush. You always selectively pick your battles. Lambast the ones that are esay, but never reply to the ones that actually debunk your arguments.

    Anyway, Rafa is gone now, stop banging on about him and try to concentrate what is happening now. Why after a game do you never talk about it, do you actually like football or just like talikng about "Facts" and figures. Seriously, it's time to talk about football, stop living off Rafa. It almost seems as if Rafa did not exist you'll have nothing to talk about. I'll lambast Rafa for the likes of Voronin and Degen, but thank him for Istanbul, Torres, Reina and making Stevie G the player he is today. Time to move on from Rafa Jaimie, it's getting tedious.

    ReplyDelete
  108. <p><span>Worst signings? I have ordered them from worst to best</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span>Strikers:</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Andriy Voronin</span> – FREE; we should not be signing free’s</span>
    </p><p><span>Robbie Keane – Terrible signing, Rafa was heavily criticised for leaving him on the bench…Harry Redknapp re-signed him and guess what he is on the bench more often then not but nothing is said to Harry….media blowing things out of proportion when it comes to Rafa</span>
    </p><p><span>Fernando Morientes – Was past his best when he arrived….but at 6.3mil it’s not like there were too many other options….only other transfer I would have taken at the time was Yakubu for 7.5mil</span>
    </p><p><span>GOD – was never going to reach the heights of his previous run at the club but who cares!!!!</span>
    </p><p><span>Craig Bellamy – Shame this guy has an attitude problem…but he tried hard for us….but the pressure got the better of him….great performance vs Barca though….</span>
    </p><p><span>Peter Crouch – Laughing stock of English football…..if he was 2 foot shorter, he’d be better than rooney…….!!!!</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Dirk Kuyt</span> – Was brought as a striker who delivered when put in front of goal but is more affective right midfielder…..</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Fernando Torres</span> – we all know that this guy is the worlds best…..i hope he gets his move to barca or alike….he is too good for us at the moment!!!!!</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span><span>Milan Jovanović</span> - Not fair to judge but FREE anyway</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span>Youth:</span>
    </p><p><span>Besian Idrizaj - RIP</span>
    </p><p><span>Jordy Brouwer – Still with reserves</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Lauri Dalla Valle</span> – Now left but looked promising</span>
    </p><p><span>Krisztián Németh – Was overhyped</span>
    </p><p><span>David Ngog – 21yrs old and looks good….in a more confident team he could be an excellent prop….but he should not bear the pressure of being 2<sup>nd</sup> to Torres so young….i.e. macheda, sturidge etc…come on when the games are [...]

    ReplyDelete
  109. <p><span>Midfielders:</span>
    </p><p><span>Antonio Nunez - rubbish</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Mark Gonzalez</span> - rubbish</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Jermaine Pennant</span> – too big for him to cope with….</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Sebastian Leto</span> – unlucky work permit issues</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Ryan Babel</span> – Hope this geeza steps up…but something tells me he won’t</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Lucas Leiva</span> – I can’t defend him no more….he looks asleep</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Mohamed Sissoko</span> – Wish he was still hear ahead of Lucas</span></p>

    ReplyDelete
  110. No cos you only care about Benitez

    ReplyDelete
  111. well that his purchased players were crap, is really subjective and just an opinion. personally i think agger, kiri, maxi, lucas, torres, aquilani, reina, johnson, crouch, garcia, alonso, mascherano and arbeloa were all good players. thats my opnion. my opnion is also, that 100m net for these players is fairly cheap. im sure there are a couple i forgot too. Im not trying to disguise the FACT there were SOME crap buys along the way (like for all managers), but to say the majority were crap is a bit agenda driven.

    ReplyDelete
  112. <p><span><span>Maxi Rodriguez</span> - FREE</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Alberto Aquilani</span> – When I look at the current team we have a lack of creativity….so why has roy sent this guy to Juve……???</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Boudewijn Zenden</span> – FREE excellent semi to get us into the Final 2007</span>
    </p><p><span>Luis Garcia – need I say more legend</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Albert Riera</span> – Don’t care what anyone says this guy was good for us…skillful</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Yossi Benayoun</span> – Judas….but excellent player</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Javier Mascherano</span> – Monster miss him…but he had to go….he will move from barca to inter next summer</span>
    </p><p><span>Xabi Alonso – The BEST distributing midfielder on the planet….so crisp…..Rafa was right to try and sell him though cause he was making so many errors in midfield…but the season after he had a point to prove and proved it and Rafa said ‘…maybe I should put more of my team up for sale….’</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span><span>               </span></span></p>

    ReplyDelete
  113. <span><span> Youth:</span></span>
    <p><span><span>Miki Roque</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>Paul Anderson</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>Nabil El Zhar</span></span>
    </p><p><span>Astrit Ajdarevic</span>
    </p><p><span>Francisco Durán</span>
    </p><p><span>Bruna</span>
    </p><p><span>Pacheco – looks good</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Jonjo Shelvey</span> – looks good</span>
    </p><p><span></span> 
    <span></span>
    </p><p><span>Defenders:</span>
    </p><p><span>Josemi Rey - Turd</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Mauricio Pellegrino</span> - FREE</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Jan Kromkamp</span> - Turd</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Gabriel Paletta</span> - Turd</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Andrea Dossena</span> – Waste of money looked lost on the pitch….tried though</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Philipp Degen</span> - FREE</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Álvaro Arbeloa</span> – was very good shame he did not sign a new contract and then we could have sold him for millions more than we did</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Sotirios Kyrgiakos</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>Martin Skrtel</span> – Solid but error prone still young</span>
    </p><p><span>

    ReplyDelete
  114. You are the one who is doctoring the facts, I am giving the facts as they infact are.

    ReplyDelete
  115. <p><span><span>                </span>Youth</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Antonio Barragan</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>Jack Hobbs</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>David Martin</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>Mikel Domínguez</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>Emiliano Insúa</span></span>
    </p><p><span><span>Daniel Ayala</span></span>
    </p><p><span> </span></p>

    ReplyDelete
  116. Cisse was signed in May 2004; his figures are not included in Benitez's transfer spend, which begins on 31 July 2004.

    ReplyDelete
  117. <p><span>Goalkeepers:</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Scott Carson</span> – Better than Foster and cheaper</span>
    </p><p><span>Pepe Reina – The worlds best….</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Charles Itandje</span> - Wanker</span>
    </p><p><span><span>Diego Cavalieri</span> – Decent backup but prefer jones as he makes up our homegrown quota</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span>We need to improve our scouting network…..</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span>Missed opportunities:</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span>If our scouting network was half decent we could have picked up the following:</span>
    </p><p><span> </span>
    </p><p><span>If we found Scot Carson surely we were looking at these 2 as well:</span>
    </p><p><span><span>·<span>   </span></span></span><span><span>James Milner</span> from <span>Leeds United</span> to <span>Newcastle United</span>, £3.6m </span>
    </p><p><span><span>·<span>   </span></span></span><span>Aaron Lennon form Leeds United to Tottenham Hotspur, £1m</span></p>

    ReplyDelete
  118. That is not a snide comment. Is this not a football website. This isn't The Economist so how about some football. You can't shut someone down for wanting to talk about the game we love.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Benitez did not make the squad stronger.  The squad was weaker when he left, hence the 7th place finish, and the consequent problems Hodgson is having as a result of poor squad.

    ReplyDelete
  120. It was a known fact that RB was going to buy Barry on the back of the money from Alonso's sale, the fact that Alonso never went was the reason that Barry never came.  Now if the board had done what United and Chavs board would have done and told RB that they will buy Barry without RB having to sell Alonso then Alonso wouldn't have had his nose put out of joint.  What situatin would we be in now if we had both Alonso and Barry, we would have finished 4th at least last year.Don'tget me wrong I am not defending RB trying to sell Alonso but the facts are facts.

    And it was published when Pompy went to court over their accounts that they owed LFc money from the Crouch deal and Johnson was used as a make weight.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Jamie.. your articles are excellent. Well thought out, well researched and intelligently delivered. I think the negative rersponse here is due to the narrow path you have taken. I realise you are just presenting the facts to clear up any confusion by focusing on a particular thing ..and you hope poeple will make up their own minds. 

    I agree with you.. Rafa did have the money and in some cases didnt spend it wisely. In saying that I do think believe there is merit in the argument (excuses) that Rafa had to make money from sales before he could buy which would have impacted negatively on his plans. I also think there is milkeage in the view that Rafa had a full rebuild to take on whereas SAF was only tweaking his alreday established squad. Rafa needed to spend more to get up to pace. 

    ...But since your article is presenting only one point.. that Rafa spent more than Fergie..I agree.

    keep it up Jamie.. its great to have some intelligent writing on LFC.

    ReplyDelete
  122. As for the comments about who you support it'sjust your blinkered approach and way of looking at things.

    You make an argument that RB wasted money on stupid buys which 99% of the people agree with, but you refuse to look at the circumstances surrounding those deals.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Yeah but as you have proven he still did have to juggle between buying and selling which no matter what way you look at it left us with a weakend team.  Not all was the boards fault but you can't place all the blame on RB.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Yes if only to present one point, it's true Rafa spent more than Ferguson. But without taking into account that Ferguson already have an establish squad make it really hard to digest.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Jaime,

    I completely disagree with your assertion that this analysis shows the fundemental flaw in the net spend analysis.  Indeed I believe that this analysis shows a far bigger, more fundemental issue facing the two clubs you have chose to use for your analysis.

    Whilst I will argue that Utd were in a better position in 2004 than Liverpool and therefore should not have needed as much money (net) as Liverpool, and I will also agree that Utds numbers are skewed by a single large transaction (Ronaldo). 

    The point I want to make is more related to the ownership structure of the two clubs and what has happened since the collapse of the debt markets for both Utd and Liverpool.  Both clubs are owned by shareholders who acquired via highly leveraged takeovers.  Glazer was in some respects smarter than H&G by negotiating longer repayment schedules, but also keeps much of his cost off the income statement by paying interest via a high rate PIK instrument.  H&G negotiated their loans on relatively short terms and needed to extend.  Both Utd and Liverpool have been crippled over the last 2 years with interest payments and what the net spend analysis shows is that neither club has been given sufficient funds to succeed in the Premier League.  Ask the question - Is United stronger now than they were in 2004?  I would answer not.  Rio is older and keeps breaking down, Giggs, Scholes and Nevile will need to hang up their boots soon, Berbatov has scored a few goals this season, but will become invisible again when the weather turns cold, and Utd have no strength in depth.  They will not even get a sniff at the premier league this season as other teams will exploit their weaknesses.  The same is true of Liverpool.  Both squads have been starved of funds versus the other progressive clubs in the EPL and it is showing.  Had you used as a comparitor one of the clubs that has emerged onto the scene within the EPL, then I think the analysis would be sound.  Check out Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal and Tottenham - I believe that their net spend analysis will show that both Utd and Liverpool have been underfunded.

    On a seperate point - I think Utd are going to fast approach the same sort of meltdown that Liverpool have just faced.  Check out when their next big tranche of debt is due for payment and if the markets remain as they are now in June 2011, they will also have a power struggle as Glazer starts to starve the club of cash to strengthen the balance sheet as he searches for new lending, and then will follow the power struggle if he can not re-mortgage....

    ReplyDelete
  126. this article is pointless and it smacks of stupidity. Let it go ffs

    ReplyDelete
  127. the simple fact is, if benitez was a bad manager, why did 2 of the best teams in europe want him as manager? suppose they wanted him to come and waste lots of there money.

    how many top europe teams have tried to poach AF? 

    it is so obvious you have a problem with benitez, its laughable you say your being objective, but your just benitez bashing like the rest of the british press. get over your self and get a new hobby. I suppose you are part of the crowd like AF and SA who think roy is doing a great job so far.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Somehow, I feel Jaimie Kanwar is arguing for the sake of argument. Not much point to continue arguing with him seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  129. "
    Maybe, but the point here is that Alonso did not HAVE to be sold.  Benitez forced him out; he wanted to leave.  "
    Would that have happened if Benitez had more money to spend? If it's Chelsea or ManU, surely he could have easily bought Barry without having to try sell Alonso.

    ReplyDelete
  130. Like most managers, Benitez has his fair share of good and bad buys. Jose Mourinho with 30m Shevchenko, Alex Ferguson with 30m Berbatov, and these are the managers who won the league in recent years.

    Cant really say he is particularly astute, neither can we say he is particularly bad in the transfer market.

    I would say most of his early buys are pretty good-for-value. But the last 2-3 seasons we have seen some particularly bad buys.

    ReplyDelete
  131. I think first a big thank you to Jaimie, for taking the time not only to research but to post the figures and write HIS OPINIONS.

    Jaimie, honestly I think you deserve much credit for your articles as they contain a great deal of fact and figures which have clearly been researched by your good self.

    However, I do believe that there is something that you are not acknowledging enough and that does not mean you have to change your opinion in anyway either. The fact is that LFC and Man Utd were at different places at the time RB took over and where a manager feels that a squad requires an overhaul and that can be looked at by how much of GH's squad was left in tact within three years. RB wanted to buy youth in as well and therefore you can argue in RB's opinion the squad was in need of rebuilding. It was clear that prior to him arriving LFC were not expecting to finish in CL places only to be contesting. After a couple of seasons under RB we were expecting CL place and long run in CL. That I do not think can be argued.

    The net spend argument is relevant and the fact that AF has a lower net spend I believe shows up a few things. The first which you have acknowledged is that his squad was already complete with the need to tweak players here and there. However, on the long term AF also has a club that is and was at that time servicing massive debts and therefore could not have the money to buy without selling and highlights the qualities that AF undoubtedly has as a manager. AF managed to win titles and leagues through high expenditure at the start then tweaking his squad as necessary and combined with his managerial know how kept Utd top.

    RB with a squad which was clearly not as good as Utd managed to with a slightly higher but not greatly higher net spend produce a squad which was expected to finish in CL places as the so called top 4 and also go to latter stages of the competition also through his managerial know how. He and the club had a bad season which is only known to those directly involved and by and large RB was a success. I can understand equally passionate fans like you Jaimie want one thing and one thing alone like all of us and that is LFC winning everything and doing it looking good.

    I am a RB fan and I can admit the football was not pleasing on the eye all the time but it got the results which raised our expectations. I know urge everyone to forget these debates about the past. If RB was to come back lets talk about that then but for now lets confine the RB era with the rest of LFC past which is in the past. Look forward people. RB did well as did AF with their net spends being so low in comparison to other teams with higher net spends and AF had the advantage of an established winning squad which RB did not!

    RH is the current manager and I am not his fan at all but while he is at LFC we should analyze his performance as boss and compare him to RB if required or other newby managers in a similar position. RH is not, in my eyes a manager that will take us forward nor would he be a person to even stabilize the club. Hopefully I am totally wrong on RH.

    Jaimie once again thanks for your well researched facts and figures and I wish people would stop being abusive, you dont have to agree with an opinion but then dont insult it either.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Yes, you present accurate facts. As well as flawed logic and biased opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  133. your article is about net spend and i did say BUILD a squad. if you sell something for 20m and buy something else for 20m you have built for the measly sum of f*ck all. you have just maintained the status quo. benitez has built for £100m net over 6 years (which is also what your article implies); contrasted to the fact that ronaldo alone cost 80m. Benitez will get you Alonso, Masch, Torres and Reina for 80m net and you'll still have money to spare on a few duds.  
    the answer to the question about bacon face winning 3 titles, from an economical perspective, is all over this topic. i'm not gonna answer it differently then everyone else already have. If you cannot find it come back, and i'll copy/past it for you. also it is a bit worrying that, as a liverpool supporter, you are so quick to pull out examples of what a great manager sir alex is. 

    ReplyDelete
  134. Whatever that make Rafa bad, let's use it, right? Jaimie? Isn't this the purpose of this freaking blog? 

    ReplyDelete
  135. you all miss the point...
    £10.4m per seaon is nothing.. both clubs in same boat..there declining due to owners past and present. Liverpools prob is they started lower squad wise.

    ReplyDelete
  136. Presumably Ferguson was just given a squad packed with expensive players for free then Jaimie, not to mention Veron? Of those still there: Rooney £30m, Ferdinand £30m, Berbatov £30m, Carrick £18m, Hargreaves £24m, Nani £18m, Anderson £18m, Valencia £18m. If you can't and won't see how that makes your argument ridiculous then you've finally lost the plot.

    I'd love to know in what way Rafa offended you so that you feel the need to constantly insult and belittle a Champions League winning Liverpool manager who ISN'T EVEN AT THE CLUB ANY MORE.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Hi Jamie,

    You present statistics in a way to undermine Benitez. I guess your facts are true about net spend, but when someone says take ronaldo(clearly a one-off nonsene price) & alonso out of the equasion you moan about rewriting the rules. When someone says Fergie had a much better squad to build on 6yrs ago, you ignore that and stick to your tantra of net spending blahblah. The problem with you is that you try to look like the neutral guy with all the facts at your hand, but it's clear that you have an agenda against Benitez and you grab every chance that he wasn't good enough. That's your own opinion you are entitled to it, but if you ask me you just ridicule yourself by trying to look so clever and neutral etc. I read your posts quite often, but I don't remember you writing too much positive facts about Rafa, even though there are shitloads of stuff. The harder you try hiding behind 'your facts', the more biased you look like and you're loosing your own credibility. I suggest you get off the anti-Rafa bandwagon because you're going to loose most of your followers. Why do you hace to slate Rafa all the time, when you could have plenty of option to do that with Hodgson. Probably because everyone does that and you want to be different? That will not make you authentic, you know that?

    ReplyDelete
  138. AF was maintaining and improving an already treble winning side. He had the added advantage of a solid nucleus of home grown players already at the top level, such as Giggs, Scholes etc and proven performers in addition to that such as Solkjaer and Keane, These were the basis of his team and are unaguably great performers. Even though I can't stand him, even Gary Neville was an excellent right back who cost nothing- His brother, now Everton captain, was a backup player. Starting  with this backbone Ferguson was able naturally, to buy marquee players, the luxury types that turn a good side into a great one. No need for bargain buy players to deliver immediately- Fletcher for example was a nothing bit part player till recently, after being there for over 6 years.

    Hence AF can splash out on Britain's (or was it the World's) most expensive defender, £30m+ Ferdinand , £32m for Rooney £26m for Veron . £30m+ for Berbatov etc That is not the situation Liverpool found themselves in. Your dislike of Benitz means that your objectivity is compromised to the point of ridicule. Rafa made some rank poor decisions in the transfer market. But he was comprehensively outbid or overruled on a number of ocassions, especially when chasing Alves, Barry, and Silva, and was bidding for them before they became really expensive.  Did AF do any better than RB with Aquilani  when he spent £18m on Hargreaves? the guy is a good player, but has hardly played for 3 years, and missed a large part of his first 2 years at the cub and will now fetch very little if anything wheras Aqua does have some value, reducing his cost to the club; even his wage bill is off the books at the moment when Hargreaves isn't.

    Carrick,  £18m still there. Anderson, £17m still there. Nani, £14m still there. Anderson, £17m still there., Valencia £16m  still there. Rooney £32m still there. Ferdinand £30m still there. Berbatov £30m still there.....

    Try that with  Liverpool's big buys...........

    * Torres - 20m, still there 
    * Johnson - 17m still there* Keane - 20m  er.....
    * Aquilani - 18m er....  
    * Mascherano - 18.6m-  oh dear And not ONE £30m player. The basic squad wasn't strong enough, too many postions to fill/improve

    Best you can come up with then is Babel ... the rest are hardly big buys, the biggest of them was probably the lamentable Dossenna , maybe Morientes.Hardly seems a fair comparison to me......

    ReplyDelete
  139. Hi Jamie,

    You present statistics in a way to undermine Benitez. I guess your facts are true about net spend, but when someone says take ronaldo(clearly a one-off nonsene price) & alonso out of the equasion you moan about rewriting the rules. When someone says Fergie had a much better squad to build on 6yrs ago, you ignore that and stick to your tantra of net spending blahblah. The problem with you is that you try to look like the neutral guy with all the facts at your hand, but it's clear that you have an agenda against Benitez and you grab every chance that he wasn't good enough. That's your own opinion you are entitled to it, but if you ask me you just ridicule yourself by trying to look so clever and neutral etc. I read your posts quite often, but I don't remember you writing too much positive facts about Rafa, even though there are shitloads of stuff. The harder you try hiding behind 'your facts', the more biased you look like and you're loosing your own credibility. I suggest you get off the anti-Rafa bandwagon because you're going to loose most of your followers. Why do you hace to slate Rafa all the time, when you could have plenty of option to do that with Hodgson. Probably because everyone does that and you want to be different? That will not make you authentic, you know that?

    ReplyDelete
  140. Did he make bad buys? YES Did he make good buys? YES. Like every other manager in the transfer market. Already given my opinion on the NET/GROSS debate so not going there again.

    Got us closer than anyone else has in 20 years and gave us some great nights along the way as well. Could another manager have done better with what he had? Going back over transfers with the beneift of hindsight is the easiest thing in the world; we can all see now that Keane was a bad buy but at the time I didn't hear too many protesting against him signing. Same goes for Babel.

    Still don't get why so many want to be so negative about his tenure- for every one that thinks he did no wrong there's one that thinks he did nothing right as well- same arguments go round and round...

    ReplyDelete
  141. Another Rafa bashing article? Can we not have your next Hicks piece where you prove he was economical with the truth but 'isn't a liar'. They are good for comedy value.

    ReplyDelete
  142. Your argument is simplicity and superficial at best. It may be true on the surface if you just compared the hard cold figures. But situations are much more complicated. You have also got to look at the values of the respective squads as well. 

    Let's look at Liverpool and Manchester United squads from 2004. Only Jamie Carragher and Steven Gerrard remained. For United, they still have <span>Rio Ferdinand </span>
    <span>Gary Neville, John O Shea, Paul Scholes, Ryan Giggs, Darren Fletcher and Rooney. </span>

    <span>The depth and quality of squad have already been in place for many years. So what Sir Alex needed to do is merely to add more quality. But for Rafa, he not only have to struggle to add quality but quantity/depth as well. </span>

    And beyond that, United can afford to spend 30m pound for a defender and a 28m flop in Veron where no one would rise an eye-brow, not to mention the likes of Djemba Djemba, Klebertson and Billion. Whereas Liverpool could only rise the bar in the 20m pound market for the likes of Fernando Torres in 2007/08, admittedly under Hicks & Gillett (though where that money came from is another debate). 

    So if you need to replace two mid-fielders, two fullbacks, two wingers, two strikers and a goalkeeper in the first team alone for example when you can only afford 11 or so million per head, you don't always get the quality of a Reina or an Alonso or Agger or Kuyt or Arbeloa or Garcia, do you? 

    Yes, you are right. Rafa Benitez might have spent more money than Ferguson, but I think even you would agree that his money is stretched, simply because he had to spend on more players. Fans been speculating all seasons gone by about David Villa, David Silver and the likes, these type of players would certainly add quality and depth to the squad. It's this type of quality money we are talking about. 

    But why compare only with Manchester United? What Spurs and now Manchester City? Have their spending amounted to anything yet? 

    ReplyDelete
  143. I think you know better why fans are arguing about the net spend to defend Rafa. It is because people like you who are using how much Rafa spent to attack him. 

    ReplyDelete
  144. Haha I KNEW there must have been a reason you posted very low net spend figures in the previous blog, and this is the best u can do?

    What you HAVE proved and I am grateful to you for doing so is that Rafa was given about £4m a year in comparison to Fergie to catch a squad already many tens of millions of pounds more expensively assembled, a team that had alrady won the league many times and a squad many thought should have even won the champions league more times than it had. £4m pounds a year to catch Man U is an impossible task even you can figure out that one. The fact that Rafagot so close to them in winning the league with such a small budget proves what an exceptional manager he is.

    Thank you so much for clearing that one up :)

    ReplyDelete
  145. Haha I KNEW there must have been a reason you posted very low net spend figures in the previous blog, and this is the best u can do?

    What you HAVE proved and I am grateful to you for doing so is that Rafa was given about £4m a year in comparison to Fergie to catch a squad already many tens of millions of pounds more expensively assembled, a team that had alrady won the league many times and a squad many thought should have even won the champions league more times than it had. £4m pounds a year to catch Man U is an impossible task even you can figure out that one. The fact that Rafa got so close to them in nearly winning the league with such a small budget proves what an exceptional manager he is.

    Thank you so much for clearing that one up :)

    ReplyDelete
  146. Jamie,

    Again good facts and data from the accounts and but you shouldn't of tried to conclude at the end saying

    "According to the standard argument of Net Spend Cult (as repeatedly applied to Benitez), United have only actually spent £40m over 6 years, and £6.6m per year. I never knew a transfer spend of only £6.6m was needed to win three league titles and and the Champions League!"

    As some people have already pulled you up on if your starting position is much stronger then you don't need to spend. For example if I have the Barcelona team now I probably don't need to spend anything for the next five years. We shouldn't knock Fergie's achievements but I bet you this Man U have spent more than most in the 90's when they were most successful followed by Chelsea in the 00's. Next will be City and if you carry on your studies I bet the correlation between money spent and success is pretty evident.

    Rafa did a good job with what he had and the circumstances and you can see the quality only now when he has left the club. After all the CL win alone justifies any arguement as Chelsea are still dreaming of this and Ferie has only won it twice in all is time (and they were luckier than the Liverpool final)

    ReplyDelete
  147. This poor squad he was left with, is that the one you tipped for top 4? So they were, in your opinion, a squad could finish top 4 but then have been mismanaged? Or is it the inter managers fault?

    ReplyDelete
  148. This poor squad he was left with, is that the one you tipped for top 4? So they were, in your opinion, a squad could finish top 4 but then have been mismanaged? Or is it the inter managers fault?

    ReplyDelete
  149. Interesting reading

    Could you please do the same exercise for the period 1998-2004?

    ReplyDelete
  150. interesting.

    Could you do same exercise for 2000-2004?

    ReplyDelete
  151. Whose depth of denial is more astonishing? Credit to Benitez for winning CL with the so-called "Houllier" team. Are you saying that Liverpool need not re-building? That the likes of Traore, Baros, Cisse, Diao, Biscan, Cheyrou, Le Tallec. and even Kwell were good enough? Proof is that are these players making a name for themselves elsewhere now? 

    And aren't you critics of Rafa never failed to rubbish the CL title is nothing and the holy grail of Premiership title is everything? Do you seriously think that the squad that Rafa inherited and the subsequent squads that he struggled to build are good enough to challenge the only two clubs that share the title in the last 6 seasons? 

    Critics like you seem to think that the so-called Benitez-loyalists are a bunch of blind fools who would defend him as if he is a saint without sins. If that's what you think, which you seem to suggest, then your degree of intelligence is telling. 

    In which case, then there is no point in explaining to you the reasons why Benitez fans defended him so. 

    ReplyDelete
  152. If I'm doctoring the facts then explain how.  Just repeating it doesn't make it true.  No facts have been doctored; you're just trying to deflect attention from the issue by lying.  So: how have I doctored the facts? 

    ReplyDelete
  153. It is YOU bringing the negative connotations to this article, not me.  No other site posts accurate, factual transfer info about LFC.  It is important that this information is out there to counter the endless inaccurate info out there.  If you don't like that, you don't have to visit this site, do you?

    ReplyDelete
  154. The Roy Hodgson Brigade9:05 pm, October 25, 2010

    The following FACTS remain...

    1. Rafa wasted money over a six year span and when he left he never improved on the squad he took over.

    2. Rafa is not hear anymore. :-D

    3. Now Roy is the battering ram for those who cannot fault Rafa.

    4. Rafa WON nothing in his last 4 years.

    5. Most of Rafa's followers have stated that he overachieved but then also call him a tactical genius? :-$

    6. He made an ass out of himself in the media and tried to make an ass out of Sir Alex but got served his own tripe on a plate at the end of 08-09.

    You know what 6 are enough, my fingers are getting tired typing about Rafa.
    The only thing I need to know is that he is GONE and will NEVER return. :-D  

    OK, so lets wait for those who eat, sh*t and sleep Rafa to ask me how old I am again... :-D

    ReplyDelete
  155. Yes, but if the figures were different and United had a higher net spend than Benitez then this article would cease to be pointless.  Basically:

    * Anything that makes Benitez look good = Great article!

    * Anything that makes him look bad = Pointless article.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Get over it.  Accept that I have a different opinion to you, and I am entitled to it.  My views on Benitez are not a *personal* attack - they are an attack on his managerial reign.  There is a difference, even if you and others try and make out it's personal (which it plainly isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Your response to Rupert is just as low clase, by labeling all Benitez fans with a single stroke!

    ReplyDelete
  158. I am not the biggest Rafa fan but more for the boring tactics and strange subs, than his spend and feel that its unfair to compare him to Fergie.

    Fergie had many years without sucess during the start of his time with united. At which time he was building a youth system which pushed him to the start of his sucessful period. ( Was Rafa not trying to emulate this by gaining more control of the academy) 
    A number of key players at united have come through their youth system, and still do. This was all based on the ground work put in, in the late eighties/early ninties.

    Also Fergie has has some terrible buys over the years and for big money too. People like Veron, Berbertov, Anderson, Smith. So even the best of managers get things wrong

    ReplyDelete
  159. Your response to Rupert is just as low class, by labeling all Benitez fans with a single stroke!

    ReplyDelete
  160. Don't tell me what I should and should not post.  I'll say again: I write what *I* want to write.  If you don't like it, don't come to this site.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Fact Rafa won the CL

    Fact Roy has never and I doubt he ever will

    How old are you again?

    ReplyDelete
  162. Torres9 - this site is different to other LFC sites.  Every site posts game reviews etc.  I'm not really interested in that.  I prefer to focus on specific issues, whether its specific incidents things that happen in games; financial stuff, or anything else.  Why should I do what every other site does? Anyway, talking about games happens on the Facebook page. 

    Benitez is still relevant to discussions about LFC.  Once a manager leaves there is still lots of retrospective analysis to be done on his reign, and that includes compiling facts and figures (such as transfer spending).  No one else is compiling accurate, factual transfer figures - this is one of the reasons why there is so much inaccurate info out there about LFC's finances.  I want to change that; and if you or anyone else doesn't like that then don't visit the site.

    ReplyDelete
  163. The Roy Hodgson Brigade9:20 pm, October 25, 2010

    Predictable... :-D
    I see you could only comment on my last line which we didnt wait long for :-D

    Next please...

    ReplyDelete
  164. Torres9 - If you read my post properly, it says 're your earlier (now deleted) post.  i.e. I'm referring to a post that has been removed already.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Ferguson IS a great manager.  He is the greatest manager of the modern era.  That doesn't mean I support Man United.  I didn't post this article to highlight what a great manager he is; I posted it as part of a series of articles re rafa Benitez's transfer spending.  If you are not mature enough to understand how you can support one team but have respect for the manager of another team then that's your problem.  Why don't you stick to just making your points instead of making silly insinuations about Man United?

    ReplyDelete
  166. That's your interpretation of my logic/opinions. Doesn't make you right.  And you only think that because my views are different to yours.  If my opinions matched yours you would be singing a different tune.  Get over it already. 

    ReplyDelete
  167. No, your intention isn't about accurate and factual transfer info about LFC. Your intention is clear for all to see. It was my mistake to visit this site. It's curiosity that brought me here by the title of this article which appear on the Walkon site. I regretted that decision. 

    ReplyDelete
  168. So it is all about opinion then? Not the facts and figures which you put up, they are all nonsensical? 

    ReplyDelete
  169. if you're going to paraphrase me, try and get it right.  I said that with some astute additions, both in the summer AND January, Liverpool would finish in the top 4.

    You are confusing first team with SQUAD.  Benitez's first team is/was pretty decent, but the squad was chock full of crap.  No decent second striker; no wingers; no real consistent creativity outside of Gerrard; comparatively sub-par defenders (insua/Johnson etc).

    Hodgson can take the core of Benitez's team (Gerrard, Torres, Carragher, Reina, Agger etc); clear out the dead-wood, and make some good additions.  If he's able to do that then LFC will finish in the top 4.

    ReplyDelete
  170. You asked for evidence when it suited you. Where is the evidence then that Rafa forced Alonso out? You like media supposition, don't you. 

    Here is one for you. Do you know why Alonso left? Because according to most experts, Liverpool were a one-man (Steven Gerrard) team evolved into a two-men (Gerrard & Torres) team. Alonso didn't exist, he wasn't wanted. Why should he stay? 

    ReplyDelete
  171. if you can't post your points without the personal commentary about me, the don't bother.  I'm not interested in your opinion of me; I'm interested in your views on LFC.

    What are you suggesting re AF - that the fact he hasn't been poached by top Euro teams means he isn't a good manager?!

    And Benitez was not poached; he was no longer wanted as manager at LFC, so he had to leaave.

    ReplyDelete
  172. Actually you said we would finish in the top 4 because of a bleeding trend you noticed. Forgive me if I don't share your confidence based on historical results.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Actually you said we would finish in the top 4 because of a bleeding trend you noticed. Forgive me if I don't share your confidence based on historical results.

    ReplyDelete
  174. Thanks for your comments.  Why is it when I compare Liverpool to United, people inevitably always come back with 'but what about comparing Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal and Spurs?

    Well, as luck would have it, I have already done those analyses (albeit for 2004-2009 only):

    http://www.liverpool-kop.com/search/label/gross%2Fnet%20spend

    You will obviously say that United + LFC have been underfunded because you know that City and Spurs have had big cash injections.

    But looking back through United's spending over the last 6 years: between 2006 and 2009 (when United won 3 league titles and the CL), Liverpool spent MORE during that period that United, who had a negative net spend in 2007-8.

    Chelsea also spent more money than United in that period, AND spent more prior to 2004 building their squad.  How then is it possible for United to beat them to the title 3 years in a row?

    I think United will be there or thereabouts at the end of the season.  There's no point writing them off after 9 league games.  Same goes for LFC.

    ReplyDelete
  175. I plan on doing that very soon :-)

    ReplyDelete
  176. <span>I wanted to see to what extent the value of the squad that you inherit does make an impact. I thought that to compare apples to apples you need to compare ManU/LFC relative transfer records during 1987-1993 (i.e., when Liverpool were at the helm and ManU were in pursuit) and then do the same and compare Benitez's record to that of Ferguson during the period Benitez was in charges (i.e., essentially the period during which ManU were at the helm and LFC in pursuit).  The idea basically was to see how much has the team that needed to close the gap spent compared to the team in poll position. </span>
    <span> </span>
    <span>I took the 1987-1993 data from the following websites: </span>
    <span> </span>
    <span>http://www.red11.org/mufc/fergie.htm</span>
    <span> </span>
    <span><span>http://www.lfchistory.net/</span></span>
    <span> </span>
    <span>based on those websites, ManU net spend was 17,468,000 pound while LFC net spending were 9,658,000 pound. </span>
    <span> </span>
    <span>A few caveats – in some cases there were mentions of players being sold without the price being included, since they names did not ring a bell I assumes they were not big time transfers that would make a difference. The website may include incorrect information and if there are inaccuracies I apologize. They way the numbers pan out is that in terms of net spending, during 1987-1993 ManU spent 1.8 times the money paid by LFC during that time. The Ferguson-Benitez net spent comparison included in this post provides that Benitez spent 1.57 times what Ferguson spent during the same period (63 million v. 40.1 million).  </span>

    ReplyDelete
  177. Yes - Benitez was only given 4m a year. Torres, Keane, Aquilani, Johnson, Mascherano, Babel, Dossena etc all cost only 4m a year.

    You're right - Benitez was a genius in the transfer market!  Who else could've got all those players for only 4m a year?

    *shoots self*

    ReplyDelete
  178. Makonya - I'm not interested in your opinions about *me*.  Please stick to making points about football.  As for ;losing credibility'?  I couldn't care less.  I'm not here to affirm the views of others, or to pander to people.  And as for 'loosing most of my followers'? Let them leave.  This isn't a popularity contest, and I don't write about LFC to win favour from people.  If no one visited this site it wouldn't make any difference to me - I would still write.  If I'm so interested in cultivating a following then I wouldn't take regular breaks from the site, the last of which was almost 6 months. 

    People still don't get that I'm not like most other LFC writers; I don't have advertising on the site; I don't care what people think of me, and I'm not it in for praise/validation.

    I just state my views.  People will either read, or they won't.  Agree, or disagree.  It's that simple.

    And I do not present stats to undermine Benitez; I present stats to accurately catalogue LFC's finances, something which no one else has bothered to do.  I've presented transfer figures for Gerard Houllier and Roy Evans too;  and many of the stats I've presented from the past have presented Benitez in a GOOD light.

    The facts are the facts.  they are neither positive or negative.  it's the interpretation of others than give the stats subjective meaning, not me.

    ReplyDelete
  179. Jaimie,

    I see these figures include the fee for Ronaldo which, as I am sure you are well aware, was almost equal to the sum paid for the entirety of Newcastle Utd the same year. This is what statisticians, as I am also sure you are well aware being a man of mathematics, call an "anomalous entity". Something that, if taken into account, gives a given set of data an erroneous appearance. This is not to say the entity did not, or indeed cannot occur, but it would be extremely misleading to use this in a comparative manner. As such, no fair tabular comparison of Benitez and Ferguson's net transfer spending can be obtained as the data contains this anomaly.

    To give a fairer comparison I suggest you place all fees for Benitez Transfers In, Benitez Transfers Out, Ferguson Transfers In and Ferguson Transfers Out in separate bar charts for each season and remove the upper and lower quartiles of each (again I'm sure you know how to do this). Then use the averages of what is left to calculate your values again. It should show a fairer representation (though not an accurate value I might add) of the net transfer spends for each manager. This is common technique used by many mathematicians worldwide to show trends and compare sets of data and so should give your article some more substance

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  180. I merely used ngog as an example, and i dont believe he has much potential either but thats another matter. LFC have for a very long time always bought far too many crap players. Of course all managers buy crap, depends on how much is bought is the big question. 

    ReplyDelete
  181. Jamie,quick question about your understanding of football clubs financial accounting-what IAS standard do player acquisiitions fall under and what is your understanding of the implications of said standard for Assets being bought and sold (payments not being made all in one go and all that).......

    Also, you should look up 'The <span>Swiss Ramble' if you want to go down the financial side of football journalism. </span>

    ReplyDelete
  182. Jamie you should go and check out The Swiss Ramble for an example of impartial financial football journalism- your posts tend come across as agenda driven (with figures shoe horned into please your agenda)

    ReplyDelete
  183. Excellent point, Jag.

    I totally accept your point that United were in a different place when Benitez took over.  Ferguson had already spent money on building a league-winning squad, and that's fair enough.

    That doesn't change the fact that over the last 6 years, Benitez spent more (both gross and net) than Ferguson.  Those figures should be looked at it isolation to understand why the net spend argument is futile and meaningless.

    Re leaving Benitez in the past: I personally feel that there is still much to be learned from his managerial reign; there is still lots of important analysis to be done, and I feel it is more than warranted.

    I don't post this stuff to have a go at Benitez; people think that because I include my personal opinion with the factual stuff.  It is importsant to have accurate figures out there about LFC; I present the facts so people can make up their own minds.

    Like you, I am not the greatest fan of Roy Hodgson, and I really hope he pulls it together, but for now, I don't see any point in comparing his reign to Benitez's.  RB's first league season was also atrocious (5th place finish; 14 defeats).  I think the time to fairly compare is at the end of this season, but I know many people will disagree with that.

    ReplyDelete
  184. Excellent points, Jag.  
     
    I totally accept your point that United were in a different place when Benitez took over.  Ferguson had already spent money on building a league-winning squad, and that's fair enough.  
     
    That doesn't change the fact that over the last 6 years, Benitez spent more (both gross and net) than Ferguson.  Those figures should be looked at it isolation to understand why the net spend argument is futile and meaningless.  
     
    Re leaving Benitez in the past: I personally feel that there is still much to be learned from his managerial reign; there is still lots of important analysis to be done, and I feel it is more than warranted.  
     
    I don't post this stuff to have a go at Benitez; people think that because I include my personal opinion with the factual stuff.  It is importsant to have accurate figures out there about LFC; I present the facts so people can make up their own minds.  
     
    Like you, I am not the greatest fan of Roy Hodgson, and I really hope he pulls it together, but for now, I don't see any point in comparing his reign to Benitez's.  RB's first league season was also atrocious (5th place finish; 14 defeats).  I think the time to fairly compare is at the end of this season, but I know many people will disagree with that.

    ReplyDelete
  185. <p>Jamie, I regularly read your blog and find it more refreshing and fact based than most others. You are RIGHT, the net spend over the last six years are higher for Liverpool than Manu. However, we are not comparing winning teams, are we? United have nothing but a League Cup since the departure of Ronaldo. They surely don't look as winners this year either. Heck, even Rooney was thinking about leaving too, due to lack of ambition in the transfer market. I think, we should discount transfers after the 2008/9 season to compare money spent vs success at the field. 
    </p><p> 
    </p><p>Also, i think a net spend on £60 million on new players is not a whole lot of money over his reign for 6 years. Hardly enough to maintain a decent squad, and not even remotely enough to build a Legue winning side. We got really close once, and we were in two champions League finals...winning one! What a few million more on the team rather than interest payments could have done...
    </p><p> 
    </p><p> 
    </p>

    ReplyDelete
  186. My evidence for Alonso being forced out comes from the man himself.  In a televised interview after he left, Alonson admitted that Benitez's pursuit of Gareth Barry forced him to reassess his position at the club, and ultimately led to him leaving. 

    Alonso stated:
    <span>"Last summer when the club proposed that I had to be sold to buy new players it was a difficult moment and decision to accept;</span> but I accepted it as a professional. <span>That moment changed my mind, from that moment it was time for a change".</span><span>

    Read more: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/09/proof-that-rafa-benitez-was-responsible.html#ixzz13POUbW1q</span>
    The video is contained in the article above.

    ReplyDelete
  187. My proof comes from the man himself. In a televise interview after he left, Alonso admitted that Benitez's pursuit of Barry was the reason he left:<span><span></span></span>

    <span><span>"Last summer when the club proposed that I had to be sold to buy new players it was a difficult moment and decision to accept;</span> but I accepted it as a professional. <span>That moment changed my mind, from that moment it was time for a change".</span></span><span></span>

    <span>Read more: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/09/proof-that-rafa-benitez-was-responsible.html#ixzz13POUbW1q</span>

    The video is contained in the article above.

    ReplyDelete
  188. Looking at the numbers, it made absolute sense!

    ManU stopped winning last season when they stop spending. This season, yet again, they do not look like champions, and in fact, looks worse than last season.

    Finally, ManU enjoyed Tevez's services for free, since he was on loan. Ofc, that can be considered as great managerial skill for getting him free.

    ReplyDelete
  189. Jaimie,

    I see you have included the transfer fee for Ronaldo in your results which, as I am sure you are aware, was almost equal to the sum that the entirety of Newcastle Utd was sold for that same year. As I am also sure you are aware, obviously being a man of mathematics, a world record transfer fee is what statisticians would call an "anomalous entity". That is, a datum within a set of data that is so far removed from the trend that it distorts perceptions when taking averages (an exaggerated example would be the set of data 5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5000000 - the average of this is 454550 despite the majority of the data being 5). This means that there is no fair comparison between Benitez and Ferguson in terms of transfer spending as this anomalous entity did indeed occur.

    To give a clearer and fairer picture I suggest a common method used by statisticians worldwide. Place the transfer fees for a given season into 4 categories, Benitez In and Out, and Ferguson In and Out and place them into ranges (£0-5m, £5-10m, £10-15m, etc) on a frequency plot. Calculate the upper and lower quartiles of these ranges and remove these transfers from the data. Use the transfers that are left to calculate new values for net spends and then repeat the process for each season and take an average of these. This should give a much clearer indication as to what each manager roughly had as his annual transfer budget and so give some substance to your article.

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  190. Jamie. Since you agree that United were in a different place when Benitez took over why is it such a problem that Benitez has a much larger gross and net spend then Sir Alex Ferguson surely this is to be expected as Ferguson has not needed to spend as much money as Benitez he only needed to buy a few players here and there while Benitez tried to rebuild the whole squad. 

    At the end of the day Rafa messed up last season big time and for finishing 7th and loosing the dressing room he clearly had to go but the current squad is more than good enough to be in the top 6 or 7. You make some good points but at the end of the day buying players is a gamble no one has a crystal ball... I genuinely believe that every player Benitez tried to sign he thought would do a job but you don't know how it will work out until you sign and play them. Personally I think the biggest problem is that british players are ridiculously over priced forcing mangers to look to Europe meaning that you take a risk that players wont settle or take too long to get used to the English league particularly where you are taking a risk and signing players for 5-10m.

    Hodgeson's signings so far have not been stellar either. While you don't rate Insua I felt that he was a young player who came through the academy who could get better who we have now swapped for an older player who wont. Secondly we are clearly missing the destructive play of Mascherano (which I believe proves that he did a great job for us although I know you didn't rate him) and rather than trying to get in a striker RH transfered aquilani who is now doing well at Juventus and wasted (IMO) money on Paulson and Meireles. I say this not to have a go at Hodgeson but to highlight the problem that like Benitez Hodgeson was unable to secure a striker despite this being the obvious and vital addition the squad needed to take the pressure off Torres.

    ReplyDelete
  191. I guess the issue of NET SPEND is causing lots of controversy again. THe point, surely, is that no single stat proves anything on its own. So lets maybe start from another position: what DOES net spend in fact tell us? Well, it really only tells us whether a club has made an outlay on new recruits, or whether it is making a return for players sold. Now, in each individual instance, the reasons for that will be different - surely. So while both Man U and West Ham might have a relatively low net spend compared to Man C for example, they may be pursuing very different strategies. Man U have a strong team, with a consistent sguad of highly paid top-class professionals - as would be consistent with one of the top teams in the EPL and Europe. No argument there. So a relatively low net spend might mean either that they are pursuing a strategy of maintaining the status quo with careful sales and additions, OR it may mean that this has been forced on them by the debt they have. I would wager it is a bit of both, as we can all see the ManU team getting older and maybe slipping a bit behind Chelski and ManC, but a top side they remain. ManC of course have a net spend that is high over the last few years, look at where they were and where they are now. Arsenal also have a low net spend, based on a very different model. So I agree, net spend by itself tells us little.
    What is important is to locate these statistics in an argument. So to simply show that Man U and LFC have relatively similar net spends tells us very little in and of itself. And even gross spend tells little in itself, although I would admit that bigger teams may have much larger overall transfer transactions and smaller teams overall much smaller transactions - just as would be expected with bigger or smaller companies in any industry. Ismail's corner-shop down the road from me sells far less than BP every year, but will probably make a higher net profit than BP this year (stupid example, but just to illustrate).
    I think that the statistics that Jamie has presented (and he always does a heck of a lot of very valuable leg-work - thanks Jamie) is definately important in showing that Rafa was actually usually very busy in the transfer market, and that he often bought a lot of dros. There can be no argument that there is a LOT of deadweight in the squad, and at least some of that must come down to Rafa. Whether that was forced on him because of a sell to buy policy is up for debate (as this forum shows). So conceivably, one can imaginbe a situation where a manager may spend £200m gross but still buy crap each time - with a small net spend (or a recoup). I do agree that near the end of his reign a good many LFC fans (including me) tore their hair out over what appeared to be increasingly desparate tactics by Rafa - buying loads of mediocre £5 to £10m players. Was this a sign of losing it, or was it Rafa's desparate attempt at getting through to the owners that he needed a big blank cheque??? I am not convinced either way. But certainly, the debate about Rafa's transfer record needs to go beyond the NET SPEND question.
    What may be more interesting is to devise some kind of algorithm for working out the net benefit gained through each addition - then we could work out how EFFECTIVE different manager's transfer dealings are. Such an algorithm would surely have to take into account the fact that cheaper players are more likely to have less overall positive benefit, whereas more expensive players will have a higher expoential impact. I am not sure how such an algorithm would work, but it would be interesting to see across all EPL managers.

    ReplyDelete
  192. Do you ever write about or even watch the actual games?

    Just wondering.

    ReplyDelete
  193. Civilised debate! Ha the opening gabit of this "discussion" started with you labeling your intended debaters as cretinous! What a joke.

    Net spend, gross spend, arse end. Love him or hate him Benitez was the best manager we had for 20 years. That's why people stand up for him despite his flaws. The number of pro-Rafa fans posting here is tantamount to regard in which he is held by the majority. I'm not sure what your continued argument and agenda is? Is it just the net spend that winds you up or is it that people still hold Rafa in such high esteem. In both cases your cold heart facts and figures will sway no one to reconsider this. Rafa improved the team and turned Liverpool into a European heavy weight for the majority of his reign. He's gone now. Does the fact that people also hold Kenny and Shanks in high esteem warrant an investigation into their net spend? Probably not. Liverpool fans love a winner. Rafa won a big one. That's what counts. That will always trump your net spend gross spend balderdash.

    ReplyDelete
  194. Bit of a pointless comparison really, be honest not going to read it, will have seen it in the press before, no doubt.  But are you taking into account that we were still attempting to build a squad, while Man United are just keeping theirs ticking over?  I'm guessing you haven't, but as I said, I've probably read this before.  And I'll await the dismissive response.

    ReplyDelete
  195. You overlook that the off balance sheet jiggey pokery that was Carlos Tevez will be nowhere in United's Intangibles for players registrations, so the basis of comparison is not necessarily fair. Using a fairly prudent estimate of £20m as Tevez's open market value (i.e. the oft-reported fee for which they could have bought his contract from Joorabchian) then the net spend stats pretty much balance out.

    ReplyDelete
  196. Not sure if this is totally irrelevant, Jamie. There is a difference between a team attempting to build and a team able to just maintain - although I will certainly grant you that Rafa made some terrible purchases in his attempt to build a squad to compete. I think Rafa, being a tactical manager, wanted to build a system around a certain formation, and was maybe a little blinkered in wanting to make purchases to fit this system, with little energy put into building the squad more generally. Your articles have got me thinking about Rafa more critically, but I am not yet convinced that Rafa's strategy wouldn't have worked out if he was given more time.
    THe squad that came second to ManU two seasons back was a good starting 11, and it worked, but even then there were fears that the squad had little depth - as last season proved. But whether Rafa made bad purchases or not, a few good additions in 2008/09 - and keeping Alonso - might have finally vindicated Rafa's system, and laid the basis for building a stronger squad. I think Rafa was building a work in progress but never quite got it right for more than a season. Just when it seemed to come together, he needed to make some investments and strengthen. Why didn't he? It appears that by then the board had lost some faith in him. Anyway, thats just my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  197. my comments are hopefully a little different. I see the facts as what you have presented them.  The point is, no one is disputing the success that united have had. As much as we hate them, ferguson and Wenger are great managers. they have also have over 30 years experience each.  Rafa was still a baby in comparison.  the fact he did what he did on that net spend is still amazing.  Not everyone can win the title.

    Its the only thing you cannot account for to be honest, the quality of the manager.

    Of course the fact the mancs sold their crap to their old players (bruce, keane, robson, mclaren etc) for stupid money helped! :)

    ReplyDelete
  198. Hey Old Timer, this sounds like an interesting comparison, and it may even be good to see this for a range of managers - maybe even work out an algorithm that might suggest what spending by a chasing team will bring the greatest potential for challenging. THe spending by Manc over the recent three seasons would therefore be interesting.

    ReplyDelete