re: Why does Klopp get a pass regarding how he handles domestic cups?

quote:

---

Right.

I know City have spent the GDP of a small country, but let’s not act like Liverpool are living off of academy grads and small fee transfers.

---

I just don’t understand why anyone ever uses this as an “insult” in all facets of life.

quote:

---

Same reason people dislike Golden State Warriors a couple of seasons ago. People like a more organically built team, when you go out and *net* spend £500m+, you’re essentially buying your success.

---

Yea but Liverpool isn’t an organically built team or sisters of the poor

If you want that look at teams that rely on their academy big time or buy young players in their teens and develop them. Like a Dortmund or Ajax

quote:

---

Yea but Liverpool isn’t an organically built team or sisters of the poor

---

No one is in the PL (among the top teams)
frick even Leicester isnt.

quote:

---

Yea but Liverpool isn’t an organically built team or sisters of the poor

---

No but they’ve done good business on the transfer market to fund the purchase of world class players and they’ve scouted well.

Like I said, just look at the net spend for each PL club. Think Liverpool is 11th or something, even teams like Brighton have spent more.

I’m not for or against spending, just answering why people criticize City for it. I’m kind of in the same boat as IBG, if you have money then spend it.

quote:

---

No one is in the PL (among the top teams)
frick even Leicester isnt.

---

In the top six Chelsea and United play a ton of local academy grads

quote:

---

In the top six Chelsea and United play a ton of local academy grads

---

But they also spend a ton of money.
It's not cool to act like you don't spend money.

quote:

---

Yes. It’s just easier to look at the last 5 years bc it coincides with middle eastern investment in City and City’s resulting success.

---

City spent way more and above the clubs means 10 years ago. The last 5 years Liverpool is starting to close that gap but of course selling Cou helped offset a ton of that.

City the last 5 years has been forced to spend some what reasonable by their standards

Comparing MC spending and Liverpool’s is disingenuous.

City has 6 defenders that were at least a £30 mil transfer fee

Walker Otamendi cancelo Laporte stones and mendy
Their fees alone equal £303.5 mil

Yeah van Dijk was £75 mil. But the next most expensive player is lovren at £20.

Their top six defenders add up to £106.5 and two didn’t have a fee at all.

Liverpool don’t have the depth of true international players that City have.

And that’s just defenders. City routinely sit 3-4 players on a weekend that were each £30-45 mil players that would and should be on other teams playing each week except for that fact that city can pay the fee and wages and then stash em.

So yeah Liverpool have expensive players but they play every week. Their backup is a guy on a free or a youngster. City is bringing in a legit international off the bench most of the time.

By the way Liverpool’s top 11 cost £324. That includes two of the most costly players in the world (£142 or 44% of the total)

City’s top 11 cost £494.2. 10 of the 11 were £32 and above.

So while their bench is WAY more valuable than Liverpool’s. Their starters are also.

I agree that Klopp should prolly be on the field. I don’t think anyone really thinks it’s a big dea to play a young team against Shrewsbury at home.

Great rebuttal

As long as it’s within the means of the club who gives a shite

Obviously the issue with City was it wasn’t with in their means