-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Circus ManUnitus - Erik's At The Wheel
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
This list shows why it is so difficult for fans to really judge football teams and their performance at any significant level these days. whilst i have little doubt that these numbers are somewhat accurate, i doubt they show the full picture in terms of what the players actually earn. for example, i bet there are other clauses in luke shaw's contract that are worth significant amounts, other than his 50k weekly wage. mourinho was commenting on how chelsea couldnt afford to get shaw due to his wage demands. this would mean that shaw should be on significantly more than his 50k basic wage.
also there were papers suggesting that the chelsea sqaud salary was less than arsenal's earlier on this season. any sane person knows this cannot be the case. and i suspect that ffp rules are leading teams to become more "clever" with their accounting. hence, how some came to the conclusion that arsenal were spending more in wages than chelsea.
these days both transfer fees and wages are becoming more complex. i guess its good for the clubs and players to keep it this way. and tbh, it should be none of our business (how much players cost, or their salaries). but football is about fans' opinions, and its getting harder for fans to form any worthwhile opinions (in this regard).
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
Few people on twitter saying tonight that United have texted ST holders and said if they don't buy a ticket for the Cambridge replay their ST will be blocked from use for the Sunderland game
Surely if true they can't do that !!!
Surely if true they can't do that !!!
Actually Scum's wages have been typically in top 2 bracket for a long time now, it's one of the things they do wrong, and one of things they made look good for years by talking about net spend in transfers.
Their policy was for a long tie to buy players on end of contracts, pay minimum transfer fee and high wages. Even their brick players have high wages.
i dont think their wages have been in the top 2 bracket for a very long time. and i wouldnt be surprised if it has never been in the top 2 since the premier league started. i seem to recall that even during the first part of wenger's reign, liverpool had a higher wage expenditure for many of those seasons. when was the last time they bought someone who was approaching the end of his contract and paid him big wages? sol?
and i actually think paying higher wages relative to transfer fees is probably the correct way to go. large transfer fees doesnt necessarily get you the top players. paying big wages on the other hand does. if you pay big wages 1) you can hold onto the big names that are already at your club 2) you can get big name players at the end of their contracts or approaching the end. you can pay large transfer fees all you like, a big name player wont move unless there is a large salary to match the transfer fee. i think this is the mistake liverpool made a few years back when they brought in the likes of downing, henderson and carroll. they paid top fees, but they didnt actually secure any top players because their wages budget didnt allow them too. hence, they just ended up with a bunch of guys who may be potentially good in the future.
having said all this, ill reiterate my original thought. i think any wage comparison (at this basic level) is almost pointless now. player contracts are becoming ever more complicated and i suspect for many players, their basic weekly wage does not represent the full picture in regards to what they actually earn.
SteveAWOL
Andy Thompson
FWIW, according to Deloitte the Goons had the 2nd highest wagebill in the league back when they used to challenge for the title.
glorygloryeze
Ian Walker
No, no , noooooooo, he is not an Arsenal fan. He just believes that if Wenger buys a player it is ALWAYS the right decision and cannot be questioned.
They had the second highest wage bill for 2 years during the 2000’s. You’re excluding the numbers from the 1990’s. I’ve copied the following graphs from what seems to be a Liverpool fan site, who have also got their figures from deloitte.
Links: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2010/11/exclusive-liverpool-vs-arsenal-wage.html
http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2010/11/exclusive-liverpool-vs-man-united-wage_07.html
Clearly shows that Liverpool outspent arsenal in wages for the majority of wenger’s reign pre abramovic and mansour. Yet their results on the pitch were less impressive. Furthermore, they also totally destroyed wenger’s net spend figure in the transfer market too.
http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2012/08/lfc-vs-arsenal-21-year-grossnet.html
His decisions can be questioned. But when fans like us start to question a man who has been so succesful at his job, that he has not been sacked from a top european team for almost 2 decades, i dont think its hard to see who is probably more in the wrong.
jts1882
Dean Richards
I remember reading about Arsenal's wages being second highest for the first seven years of Wenger's reign (aggregate, not every year). The numbers in the Political Economy of Football put Liverpool higher and are slightly higher than those tables above (presumably as they include social secrurity and pension costs, while the tables above exclude them).
Arsenal also got into trouble with the HMRC about payments into overseas trusts of foreign players. They had to pay a fine, iirc, but the payments would have been made. How these payments appeared on the books might affect the wage numbers.
Arsenal also got into trouble with the HMRC about payments into overseas trusts of foreign players. They had to pay a fine, iirc, but the payments would have been made. How these payments appeared on the books might affect the wage numbers.
This is an example of what i meant when i said that even comparing clubs on wages is somewhat futile now. I think the secret footballer goes into detail on this matter too. how clubs used to pay unrealistic amounts in image rights to offshore accounts etc. i think for us fans its frustrating because we dont know who to pin the blame on when things go bad.
we (spurs fans) are divided over blaming levy(/ownership) or the managers (or the dof) over results or player purchases. but the honest truth is, no fan really knows whos responsible for what at our club. and if we're being honest with ourselves, its really quite funny that we choose to pin a lot of "blame" on one of those guys, when we have absolutely no idea whos really responsible for what.
Mate, the problem with talking about Wenger is (and what people like yourself often don't see)
- Wenger Mk1 (first 7-9 years) was extremely successful, transformed a 1-0 style club into something much better, and won trophies doing it. With caveats of the only real competition at the time was United, PL was very unsophisticated tactically, he inherited a solid defensive team (something that has faded the longer he is in charge), he also had Dein "helping" in more ways than one
- Wenger Mk2 (last 8 or so years) has taken a side that was a real challenger/winner of titles/silverware and transformed them into the 4th place trophy champions (something that obviously the owners are very happy with). It's clear that he no longer has a plan, he goes multiple seasons with same issues (Keeper, DM come to mind), the injuries issue is a joke, and they now make appeasement buys (Ozil) in positions they don't need.
People complain about Levy's lack of ambition, lets be clear, the reason Wenger is still employed is because the owners know he will manage 4th place (income), he won't push for the 100-150M in investment really needed to make them competitive, and his reputation (from Mk1 days) stops it from really being an issue with fans/media, because people can't/don't separate the first part of his time with the side they have become (how many years of season over by February do you need, after having been title contenders/winners to see it?)
jts1882
Dean Richards
I agree with a lot of what you say there, but there are additional factors.
When he came he had some advantages. He had good contacts in France when other people weren't looking as hard. Based on his success, everyone now is looking and he has lost this advantage. He brought a more professional approach (advanced training centre, dietary regimes, etc.) and more sophisticated tactics with him from the continent. Now most top clubs have adopted similar approaches.
At the same time he was losing the advantages that he benefited from early on, we had the rise of the billionaire sugar-daddies. First Chelsea, then City knocked Arsenal out of the top two. So while I agree with your two phases, they are largely due to different sets of circumstances, not changes to Wenger. He didn't become happy with fourth, he just has to contend with three clubs with far greater resources rather than one. Beating one is possible, beating all three very difficult.
There is certainly a stubbornness about Wenger and some things he is unwilling to change. But is refusing to demand £150m for players and then asking for another £150m because it isn't working really a weakness? Wenger is operating at Arsenal the way Levy expects his managers to operate at Spurs, within the means of the club. When Wenger leaves it will be interesting. Will they have a temporary decline like United, with a spacegoat like Moyes, or will the owners finally decide to open the cheque book and get a van Gaal?
When he came he had some advantages. He had good contacts in France when other people weren't looking as hard. Based on his success, everyone now is looking and he has lost this advantage. He brought a more professional approach (advanced training centre, dietary regimes, etc.) and more sophisticated tactics with him from the continent. Now most top clubs have adopted similar approaches.
At the same time he was losing the advantages that he benefited from early on, we had the rise of the billionaire sugar-daddies. First Chelsea, then City knocked Arsenal out of the top two. So while I agree with your two phases, they are largely due to different sets of circumstances, not changes to Wenger. He didn't become happy with fourth, he just has to contend with three clubs with far greater resources rather than one. Beating one is possible, beating all three very difficult.
There is certainly a stubbornness about Wenger and some things he is unwilling to change. But is refusing to demand £150m for players and then asking for another £150m because it isn't working really a weakness? Wenger is operating at Arsenal the way Levy expects his managers to operate at Spurs, within the means of the club. When Wenger leaves it will be interesting. Will they have a temporary decline like United, with a spacegoat like Moyes, or will the owners finally decide to open the cheque book and get a van Gaal?