- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 8/27/14 at 2:05 pm to wm72
quote:
First, it's driven up a bit by the absurd prices they pay back and forth for English players that often wouldn't sell for 1/2 the amount, if that much, on the open market.
That's the part I don't understand.
How does Luke Shaw cost more than Mehdi Benatia? Adam Lallana more than Reus or Balotelli?
Posted on 8/27/14 at 2:11 pm to TFTC
quote:
And to think that midfield only accounted for 10.5 of that... I was surprised to see them so high..
Yeah, the irony is that many of players really adding onto aren't their main contributors.
I think only Buffon had an extremely high fee. I guess they do also have a lot that add up like Chiellini, Asamoah, Lichtsteiner, Tevez, Ogbonna, Bonucci, Morata, Pepe, Isla. . .
Another part of it though is probably that Juve was a main offender in causing the 1/2 ownership rule to be scrapped. They likely have a noteworthy percentage of those fees from buying 1/2 ownership of tons of promising young Serie A players.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 2:12 pm to beastieboys
English teams need a certain number of English players on their roster so if you have a pulse, you're starting out at £10 million
Posted on 8/27/14 at 2:19 pm to beastieboys
quote:
How does Luke Shaw cost more than Mehdi Benatia?
I would also say this is as much to do about age as it is nationality
Posted on 8/27/14 at 2:25 pm to beastieboys
quote:
That's the part I don't understand.
How does Luke Shaw cost more than Mehdi Benatia? Adam Lallana more than Reus or Balotelli?
That does highlight what a terror English teams could be if they didn't have to buy English players.
It's due to protectionism on the part of the governing body to assure that a premium is placed on developing young English players.
Serie A, La Liga and Bundesliga all have similar rules but they, in my opinion, have more quality players to choose from to fill the quotas than England.
For example, an Italian player is worth a bit more Serie A but not enough so that people really notice all that much.
The difference seems so absurd in England because the league's top teams have so much money to spend and the talent they're forced to spend much of it on isn't as deep.
Posted on 8/27/14 at 3:07 pm to wm72
quote:
Generally it's not when comparing team quality but they are kind of forced into overpaying for most of their transfers.
First, it's driven up a bit by the absurd prices they pay back and forth for English players that often wouldn't sell for 1/2 the amount, if that much, on the open market.
Furthermore, they kind of have to pay much higher transfers and salaries to attract many good players from all over Europe and South America. A significant amount of these players would prefer to play in other top leagues if the money difference wasn't so vast.
You're forgetting the Sky subsidy all the EPL clubs get.
Posted on 8/28/14 at 1:08 am to engvol
To try and say that United has spent more than Chelsea, or that Chelsea didn't buy titles is crazy. I'm not going to lie and say that buying players like Rio wasn't a step in that direction, but it was no where near what Chelsea started.
Up date (or looks like it)
# Net Spend last 5 Years Purchased Gross Sold Nett Per Season
1 Manchester City £439,450,000 £129,900,000 £309,550,000 £61,910,000
2 Manchester United £342,500,000 £49,600,000 £292,900,000 £58,580,000
3 Chelsea £473,759,000 £188,400,000 £285,359,000 £57,071,800
4 Liverpool £351,950,000 £212,150,000 £139,800,000 £27,960,000
Written 31 Jan 2014
I'm not sure where they got the numbers from, but before this season, which is a crucial rebuilding year for Utd., there is just no way Chelsea has spent less.
Up date (or looks like it)
# Net Spend last 5 Years Purchased Gross Sold Nett Per Season
1 Manchester City £439,450,000 £129,900,000 £309,550,000 £61,910,000
2 Manchester United £342,500,000 £49,600,000 £292,900,000 £58,580,000
3 Chelsea £473,759,000 £188,400,000 £285,359,000 £57,071,800
4 Liverpool £351,950,000 £212,150,000 £139,800,000 £27,960,000
Written 31 Jan 2014
I'm not sure where they got the numbers from, but before this season, which is a crucial rebuilding year for Utd., there is just no way Chelsea has spent less.
Posted on 8/28/14 at 6:25 am to beastieboys
quote:
How does Luke Shaw cost more than Mehdi Benatia?
Because he's like 9 years younger.
quote:
Adam Lallana more than Balotelli?
Because Balotellis is an unreliable moron whose just as likely to shove a booger up his managers anus during a game as he is to score a goal.
Posted on 8/28/14 at 8:52 am to RandySavage
quote:
How does Luke Shaw cost more than Mehdi Benatia?
Because he's like 9 years younger.
Luke Shaw wouldn't cost 1/2 of that fee if he were anything other than English and likely not 1/4 of it if he were transferring from club to club in any other league.
He seems pretty good but it's not like he's the undisputed greatest fullback prospect to ever walk the earth to anyone but the English and their myriad followers, which is kind of the point.
This post was edited on 8/28/14 at 9:07 am
Posted on 8/28/14 at 9:05 am to FunkasaurusReb
City are merely just making up for lost time with their spending. 
I would be interested in seeing the net spending since start of EPL.
I would be interested in seeing the net spending since start of EPL.Posted on 8/28/14 at 9:16 am to wm72
quote:
He seems pretty good but it's not like he's the undisputed greatest fullback prospect to ever walk the earth to anyone but the English and their myriad followers, which is kind of the point.
I agree but it's not like Benatia is the greatest CB ever and he's 9 years older.
Posted on 8/28/14 at 9:58 am to RandySavage
quote:
I agree but it's not like Benatia is the greatest CB ever and he's 9 years older.
I agree with that as well.
The examples Balotelli - Lallana, Benatia - Shaw certainly aren't like for like comparisons.
However, his point that English players like Shaw sold for extremely exaggerated prices just due to being English seems correct.
Better to compare Shaw to other fullbacks, like say, De Ciglio, Carvajal, Rodriguez etc. . . And none of those, arguably all more accomplished, would sell for anywhere near Shaw's price.
Posted on 8/28/14 at 10:59 am to wm72
quote:
his point that English players like Shaw sold for extremely exaggerated prices just due to being English seems correct.
I don't think anybody argues that. I was just pointing out why x player sold for more than y in his comparisons.
I'm curious, is there a "national" price spike in other countries as well? Do Italians clubs pay more for Italians, Spanish more for Spanish etc...?
Posted on 8/28/14 at 11:15 am to RandySavage
quote:
I'm curious, is there a "national" price spike in other countries as well? Do Italians clubs pay more for Italians, Spanish more for Spanish etc...?
Yes, there certainly is in Italy however it's more like +15% than +100-200% like it seems to be in England.
I actually mentioned it earlier in this thread. In Italy, Spain and Germany I think that there's a bit more useful players to go around in terms of just filling the "homegrown" and "national" quota than traditionally in England.
It's over simplifying but Man City tries to substitute Sinclair for Silva whereas Juventus substitutes Marchisio for Vidal.
However, there is the same discourse/pressure from the governing bodies to force clubs to develop and play Italian players for the sake of the NT and therefore an Italian star is worth a bit more than a foreign one and not just for marketing.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News