The Weekend’s Other Games 01/01/21

[miller0863]

One thing it proves is our players had done well and pretty much all increased their value, whereas Man Utd’s players were underperforming so valued at less.
Those figures were not what was paid, it was what they were valued at to sell.

[RedNoodle]

How do you know our wages are accurate, or indeed anybody's ?

How do you or anyone know that we aren't a computer simulation running from a computer sitting on someone's table?

You don't. However you do the best with what information/evidence is available to you. With that being the case you would assume that the figures we release are accurate. Doing otherwise is illegal, and it would have serious ramifications not only for our players, but for our owners who are serious business people. That wouldn't go down well with their investors.

Contrast that with Man City's owners who we all know are shady as ****, and are using Man City as a vanity piece and a sportswashing vehicle.

On top of that I've already mentioned that we have the FOURTEENTH highest net spend over the last FIVE years in the PL. Don't you think that based on that evidence alone, if FSG were going to misrepresent how much our wage bill was they would provide/manufacture a much lower one, rather than one which is near or at the top as Fagin mentioned and will mean a huge tax bill? Logic says that would definitely be the case.

[Kev0909]

One thing it proves is our players had done well and pretty much all increased their value, whereas Man Utd’s players were underperforming so valued at less.
Those figures were not what was paid, it was what they were valued at to sell.

Exactly doesn't mean we've spent anywhere near as others, not that it matters (unless we can't even get a needed CB in)

but you know, fuck it there's more important things going on

[skyebo]

How do you or anyone know that we aren't a computer simulation running from a computer sitting on someone's table?

You don't. However you do the best with what information/evidence is available to you. With that being the case you would assume that the figures we release are accurate. Doing otherwise is illegal, and it would have serious ramifications not only for our players, but for our owners who are serious business people. That wouldn't go down well with their investors.

Contrast that with Man City's owners who we all know are shady as ****, and are using Man City as a vanity piece and a sportswashing vehicle.

On top of that I've already mentioned that we have the FOURTEENTH highest net spend over the last FIVE years in the PL. Don't you think that based on that evidence alone, if FSG were going to misrepresent how much our wage bill was they would provide/manufacture a much lower one, rather than one which is near or at the top as Fagin mentioned and will mean a huge tax bill? Logic says that would definitely be the case.

All businessmen or women know how to cook the books. Football chairmen of any club are no different. And no-one would be worried about what City were up to if they were a mid table club. Like their fans wouldn't worry about us if we weren't a threat on the field.

[Balinkay]

I'm gonna have to go with Noods on this one sky.

Whereas our owner's goal is to essentially make money off the club, the Arabs' goal with City is to sportswash their image. Money doesn't matter to them. It stands to reason that if anyone's cooking their books, it's not FSG.

[RedNoodle]

All businessmen or women know how to cook the books. Football chairmen of any club are no different.

What about my last point. Would FSG provide a high or low wage bill if they were 'cooking the books', especially given their reluctance to open up their chequebook? I think we both know the answer to that question.

[skyebo]

What about my last point. Would FSG provide a high or low wage bill if they were 'cooking the books', especially given their reluctance to open up their chequebook? I think we both know the answer to that question.

You and a few others think they are reluctant to spend money, others don't agree with that. All 3 managers have had sizeable funds to spend, if that money was spent on the wrong players, that's down to the managers not the owners. When was the last time Klopp went in for a player that he couldn't get ?. Forget about players sold on, because all clubs sell players too.

[Kev0909]

You and a few others think they are reluctant to spend money, others don't agree with that. All 3 managers have had sizeable funds to spend, if that money was spent on the wrong players, that's down to the managers not the owners. When was the last time Klopp went in for a player that he couldn't get ?. Forget about players sold on, because all clubs sell players too.

if they aren't reluctant to spend money

Why is fabinho playing at CB?

Why do we know the record of injury's of matip/gomez we know what could happen.... yet don't bring anyone in and risk this, it's our fault we're in this position, we've risked having a smaller squad, yet we have a bunch of dossers that aren't good enough or injured all the time sitting around getting paid- YET WE CAN'T BUY A CB

ok makes no sense to me, any other owners would spend to make sure they'd stay on top, and not even risk it, doesn't even have to be a expensive signing someone that can just do a fucking job and a bit of experience at least

If we have to ship some of the players that don't get a game even off the bench after we're out of the fa cup v villa and get a CB in that way if we're that broke jeeze

Let's just forget about the title and getting anywhere in the champions league then no problem

[skyebo]

if they aren't reluctant to spend money

Why is fabinho playing at CB?

Why do we know the record of injury's of matip/gomez we know what could happen.... yet don't bring anyone in and risk this, it's our fault we're in this position, we've risked having a smaller squad, yet we have a bunch of dossers that aren't good enough or injured all the time sitting around getting paid- YET WE CAN'T BUY A CB

ok makes no sense to me, any other owners would spend to make sure they'd stay on top, and not even risk it, doesn't even have to be a expensive signing someone that can just do a fucking job and a bit of experience at least

If we have to ship some of the players that don't get a game even off the bench after we're out of the fa cup v villa and get a CB in that way if we're that broke jeeze

At the start of the season we had enough cover at centre back, that's without shifting Fabinho. We will see what happens this month, no doubt the owners will get blamed if no-one is brought in, when it could be down to Klopp wanting to promote a youngster instead. The owners make mistakes, but Klopp does too.

[RedNoodle]

You and a few others think they are reluctant to spend money, others don't agree with that. All 3 managers have had sizeable funds to spend, if that money was spent on the wrong players, that's down to the managers not the owners. When was the last time Klopp went in for a player that he couldn't get ?. Forget about players sold on, because all clubs sell players too.

The difference is that I and others have provided (as much as they can be) figures/information that backs up what we say e.g. being the fifth richest club in the world, yet only have the fourteenth highest net spend in the PL (not even the world). That on it's own suggests that we are correct.

Spending money is not the only/main factor when assessing how good a set of owners are when it comes to backing their manager. We could spend £300m, but that's not going to reflect quite as well on FSG if we have to sell VVD, Salah and Mane to raise those funds. It would be like a kids parents telling him he can have a Playstation 5 for his birthday, but he's going to have to sell his bike, mobile phone, and his dog in order to get it.

Is he going to be as thankful? I think not.