davidmatzdorf
Front Page Gadfly
- Jun 7, 2004
- 18,106
- 45,030
There is a specific reason why 'net spending' is a misleading barometer of how hard a club is working at improving its squad: it does not account for the ability of a club to add value to its players. That applies both to promising players signed before they become stars (Berbatov, Modric, Bale) and are sold for £30m-£86m and to players brought through the development system and then sold for £5m-£8m (Livermore, O'Hara, Caulker).
If you were to look at the net spending of Southampton, you would find it very low. That's because of the money they make on sales.They still managed tio put together an impressive squad, without spending a lot of money, because they have a top-notch academy. The same is true, to a lesser extent and at a level typical of somewhat larger club, of us.
We do not have a low net spending on players because we do not buy expensive players. It is low because we add value to the players whom we subsequently sell, both the ones we want to sell and the ones whom we are forced to sell.
It's not a sign of lack of ambition, it's a sign of good management.
If you were to look at the net spending of Southampton, you would find it very low. That's because of the money they make on sales.They still managed tio put together an impressive squad, without spending a lot of money, because they have a top-notch academy. The same is true, to a lesser extent and at a level typical of somewhat larger club, of us.
We do not have a low net spending on players because we do not buy expensive players. It is low because we add value to the players whom we subsequently sell, both the ones we want to sell and the ones whom we are forced to sell.
It's not a sign of lack of ambition, it's a sign of good management.
