FifeArab Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Some crazy games for motd tonight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky88 Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 OGS - Scandanavian Steve Clarke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtie23 Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Good result that for Palace 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killie_lad Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 If Newcastle never played another game of football would anyone care? Rondon and atsu up front, what even is the point? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanburn Dave Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Newcastle toothless up front. When they get onto their defensive 5-5-0 formation they are difficult to break down but when they have to change shape to get back into games they look vulnerable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 8 minutes ago, killie_lad said: If Newcastle never played another game of football would anyone care? Rondon and atsu up front, what even is the point? Benitez has had no money to spend this season and has been patching together a side with loan players. The summer window saw CAshley make a "profit" of over £20 million. It's not surprising that Benitez says that they will need a miracle to stay up. Luckily for him, Huddersfield, Fulham, Southampton and Burnley are in an even worse state. Fulham have wasted a lot of money on duds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killie_lad Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Benitez has had no money to spend this season and has been patching together a side with loan players. The summer window saw CAshley make a "profit" of over £20 million. It's not surprising that Benitez says that they will need a miracle to stay up. Luckily for him, Huddersfield, Fulham, Southampton and Burnley are in an even worse state. Fulham have wasted a lot of money on duds.Aye I wouldn't blame benitez at all, signing rondon on loan from a dreadful West Brom must be the most desperate 'GIVE ME MONEY' signing ever 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Has Rafa not spent in the region of £140m since joining Newcastle? Think he gets a bit of a free ride because Newcastle fans perceive themselves as a big club and hate Ashley. Certainly should be outperforming the likes of Palace, Brighton, etc and not saying it'd be a miracle if they survived. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killie_lad Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 80 odd million gets smaller teams sigurdsen and richarlison nowadays, 140m isn't a lot, especially when the team was utter shite when he took over and players were being sold as well 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distant Doonhamer Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Shelvey is an absolute piece of work Dreadful challenge on Pogba tonight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8MileBU Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 If Newcastle never played another game of football would anyone care? Rondon and atsu up front, what even is the point? Not anytime soon. Under Fat Cashley’s tenure, they’re just become a completely pointless club. Absolutely horrible team to watch and tonight was no different. Harsh on Rafa Benitez because you can only piss with the cock you’ve got. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Ludo*1 said: Has Rafa not spent in the region of £140m since joining Newcastle? Think he gets a bit of a free ride because Newcastle fans perceive themselves as a big club and hate Ashley. Certainly should be outperforming the likes of Palace, Brighton, etc and not saying it'd be a miracle if they survived. It's the net spend that's the key. Here are last season's figures with Newcastle having the lowest net spend - https://www.sportskeeda.com/football/premier-league-transfer-spending-2018-how-much-each-club-spend-summer. Fulham spent over £100 million! IIRC United received around £70 million prize money from EPL last summer - that's in addition to the annual guaranteed income. A big Premier League club with home crowds of over 50,000 should be able to fund better signings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 7 hours ago, Bishop Briggs said: It's the net spend that's the key. Here are last season's figures with Newcastle having the lowest net spend - https://www.sportskeeda.com/football/premier-league-transfer-spending-2018-how-much-each-club-spend-summer. Fulham spent over £100 million! IIRC United received around £70 million prize money from EPL last summer - that's in addition to the annual guaranteed income. A big Premier League club with home crowds of over 50,000 should be able to fund better signings. Why is "net spend the key"? If Newcastle spend £100m, but recoup £120m, they should have a better team than someone spending £20m but not bringing in anything, despite Newcastle having the lower "net spend". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab B Nesbit Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 Is it Thursday yet !? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 3 hours ago, RandomGuy. said: Why is "net spend the key"? If Newcastle spend £100m, but recoup £120m, they should have a better team than someone spending £20m but not bringing in anything, despite Newcastle having the lower "net spend". Really? Like Tottenham Hotspur who signed nobody last summer? Benitez achieved a fantastic result last season (10th IIRC) with a mediocre squad. His "reward" was to have no money to spend this season. All the signings had to be funded by sales. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScarf Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Alexa, mute 'net spend' from this thread. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, RandomGuy. said: Why is "net spend the key"? If Newcastle spend £100m, but recoup £120m, they should have a better team than someone spending £20m but not bringing in anything, despite Newcastle having the lower "net spend". 50 minutes ago, Bishop Briggs said: Really? Like Tottenham Hotspur who signed nobody last summer? Benitez achieved a fantastic result last season (10th IIRC) with a mediocre squad. His "reward" was to have no money to spend this season. All the signings had to be funded by sales. I'd argue that Spurs being able to pay their players twice as much as Newcastle has made a bigger difference than their transfer dealings. Transfers Fees generally account for about a quarter of what the EPL collectively spends on recruitment and retention of talent. They're not irrelevant but they're not the prime factor Edited January 3, 2019 by topcat(The most tip top) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Briggs Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: I'd argue that Spurs being able to pay their players twice as much as Newcastle has made a bigger difference than their transfer dealings. Transfers Fees generally account for about a quarter of what the EPL collectively spends on recruitment and retention of talent. They're not irrelevant but they're not the prime factor Perhaps but Liverpool, aided by the huge Coutinho fee, have spent a fortune over the last couple of years. They paid big money for Van Dijk, Keita, Allison, Chamberlain and Fabinho. Salah and Robertson were bargains. Shaqiri was cheap due to his release clause. Success does not come cheap as Man City and Chelsea have shown in the past. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab B Nesbit Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Bishop Briggs said: Perhaps but Liverpool, aided by the huge Coutinho fee, have spent a fortune over the last couple of years. They paid big money for Van Dijk, Keita, Allison, Chamberlain and Fabinho. Salah and Robertson were bargains. Shaqiri was cheap due to his release clause. Success does not come cheap as Man City and Chelsea have shown in the past. Just Salah and Robertson bargains ... . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 19 minutes ago, Bishop Briggs said: Perhaps but Liverpool, aided by the huge Coutinho fee, have spent a fortune over the last couple of years. They paid big money for Van Dijk, Keita, Allison, Chamberlain and Fabinho. Salah and Robertson were bargains. Shaqiri was cheap due to his release clause. Success does not come cheap as Man City and Chelsea have shown in the past. I wasn't suggesting that they make no difference (Otherwise nobody would pay them) But even in the extreme examples there you need to look at the big money as an investment being spread over several years if you're going to put them in perspective next to wage bills Van Dijk £247,000/wk over 5.5 years Keita £207,000/wk over 5 years Fabinho. £155,000/wk over 5 years Alisson £181,000/wk over 6 years The transfer fee will be a particularly large part of the "total cost of employment" for these players. Van Dijk is reported as being on a salary of £180,000/wk, Alisson on £70K but these are somewhat exceptional By way of contrast Alexis Sanchez typifies the other extreme. He "only" cost Manchester United 30.6M and signed a four and a half year contract (which works out at £132,000/wk) but he's reportedly on £500,000 a week which means that he's going to work out far more expensive over the term of his deal than anyone Liverpool have bought. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.