villalad21 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 20 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: https://www.brightonandhoveindependent.co.uk/sport/football/brighton-and-hove-albion/brightons-ps202m-five-year-transfer-net-spend-compared-spurs-wolves-more-3128834 Brighton's -£202m five-year transfer net spend compared to Spurs, Wolves & more In theory, yes, in financial reality/stability of the last few years, no. More PL money etc. Obviously that changes as we progress back to normalcy. We've spent more than that in just 2 summers 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 6 minutes ago, villalad21 said: We've spent more than that in just 2 summers You're missing the point, perhaps on purpose. It's not just about the spend, I highlighted that because, it's not as if they've spent nothing. If pure spend is the only criteria, Wilder at Sheffield dwarfed everybody in just 1 season last year. They have had the advantage of: - Premier League Status for the past 4/5 years - Been able to attract better caliber of player due to above, in terms of fees and wages + PL status ( Regardless of fees or wages, they could even get a higher calibre of FREE player during this period ) - Relatively stable squad and build during that time. - This is our second season back in the PL, we started from scratch, and had to begin building a totally new squad last season. So in essence they have had a big headstart on in, regardless of perceived club " stature ". Similarly to FFP, doesn't matter how big the club is, if they can't spend their money. Our Spend to progress ratio, now more accurately reflects the stature of the clubs ( Look at the PL Table ), and end of THIS season is now where we are probably on level terms. Now obviously we know the differences, but as with most things, there are multiple variables to be considered here. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 30 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: You're missing the point, perhaps on purpose. It's not just about the spend, I highlighted that because, it's not as if they've spent nothing. If pure spend is the only criteria, Wilder at Sheffield dwarfed everybody in just 1 season last year. They have had the advantage of: - Premier League Status for the past 4/5 years - Been able to attract better caliber of player due to above, in terms of fees and wages + PL status ( Regardless of fees or wages, they could even get a higher calibre of FREE player during this period ) - Relatively stable squad and build during that time. - This is our second season back in the PL, we started from scratch, and had to begin building a totally new squad last season. So in essence they have had a big headstart on in, regardless of perceived club " stature ". Similarly to FFP, doesn't matter how big the club is, if they can't spend their money. Our Spend to progress ratio, now more accurately reflects the stature of the clubs ( Look at the PL Table ), and end of THIS season is now where we are probably on level terms. Now obviously we know the differences, but as with most things, there are multiple variables to be considered here. Aston Villa will always have a much bigger pull than Brighton in terms of being attractive for players. Not similar clubs. Like comparing Everton and Liverpool. I just had a look at the Premier League table ranked by squad cost 1. Man City - £810,870,000 2. Man Utd - £628,130,000 3. Chelsea - £577,100,00 0 4. Arsenal - £454,800,000 5. Liverpool - £454,250,000 6. Everton - £388,050,000 7. Spurs - £385,300,000 8. Leicester - £317,450,000 9. Wolves - £241,980,000 10. Aston Villa £229,350,000 11. West Ham £218,500,000 12. Newcastle £198,100,000 13. Southampton £170,550,000 14. Brighton £159,100,000 15. Crystal Palace £149,860,000 16. Sheffield United £120,700,000 17. Leeds £120,300,000 18. West Brom £97,700,000 19. Fulham £94,350,000 20. Burnley £82,600,000 It's quite interesting that it's similar to the actual table. West Ham and Leicester over performing while Arsenal quite clearly under performing. I take into consideration the points you are bringing up but it still confirms money is still by far the biggest factor in succeeding. It is a sad way of looking at it but it's reality. Chelsea and City are only where they are because of financial doping and i predict if our owners keep spend at their current rate we will continue to climb up the table. Edited March 9, 2021 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 9 minutes ago, villalad21 said: Aston Villa will always have a much bigger pull than Brighton in terms of being attractive for players. Not similar clubs. Like comparing Everton and Liverpool. I just had a look at the Premier League table ranked by squad cost 1. Man City - £810,870,000 2. Man Utd - £628,130,000 3. Chelsea - £577,100,00 0 4. Arsenal - £454,800,000 5. Liverpool - £454,250,000 6. Everton - £388,050,000 7. Spurs - £385,300,000 8. Leicester - £317,450,000 9. Wolves - £241,980,000 10. Aston Villa £229,350,000 11. West Ham £218,500,000 12. Newcastle £198,100,000 13. Southampton £170,550,000 14. Brighton £159,100,000 15. Crystal Palace £149,860,000 16. Sheffield United £120,700,000 17. Leeds £120,300,000 18. West Brom £97,700,000 19. Fulham £94,350,000 20. Burnley £82,600,000 It's quite interesting that it's similar to the actual table. West Ham and Leicester over performing while Arsenal quite clearly under performing. I take into consideration the points you are bringing up but it still confirms money is still by far the biggest factor in succeeding. It is a sad way of looking at it but it's reality. Chelsea and City are only where they are because of financial doping and i predict if our owners keep spend at their current rate we will continue to climb up the table. So based on your financial observation, it means Dean is slightly over achieving thus far. Lol Also, are you trying to tell me that we were a bigger pull for players, than Brighton, even whilst we were in the Championship? Even putting aside the fact that we obviously couldn't pay the same wages or transfer fees? Come on get real, you are skewing the argument. You've also conveniently ignored the factuals I placed in my last post. Again though, if you are using this table as a guide, it indicates that each manager is accurately doing the job they are supposed to be doing, and nothing spectacular. Which actually weakens your argument. We can't just throw stats and figures around without the background variables which affect all of these. They can be skewed to paint whichever narrative we want. Edited March 9, 2021 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjvilla Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 9 minutes ago, villalad21 said: Aston Villa will always have a much bigger pull than Brighton in terms of being attractive for players. Not similar clubs. Like comparing Everton and Liverpool. I just had a look at the Premier League table ranked by squad cost 1. Man City - £810,870,000 2. Man Utd - £628,130,000 3. Chelsea - £577,100,00 0 4. Arsenal - £454,800,000 5. Liverpool - £454,250,000 6. Everton - £388,050,000 7. Spurs - £385,300,000 8. Leicester - £317,450,000 9. Wolves - £241,980,000 10. Aston Villa £229,350,000 11. West Ham £218,500,000 12. Newcastle £198,100,000 13. Southampton £170,550,000 14. Brighton £159,100,000 15. Crystal Palace £149,860,000 16. Sheffield United £120,700,000 17. Leeds £120,300,000 18. West Brom £97,700,000 19. Fulham £94,350,000 20. Burnley £82,600,000 It's quite interesting that it's similar to the actual table. West Ham and Leicester over performing while Arsenal quite clearly under performing. I take into consideration the points you are bringing up but it still confirms money is still by far the biggest factor in succeeding. It is a sad way of looking at it but it's reality. Chelsea and City are only where they are because of financial doping and i predict if our owners keep spend at their current rate we will continue to climb up the table. So, Smith overachieving and Potter underachieving then. Well, well, well. Also, I presume this table doesn't include players out on loan at clubs? I think if it doesn't, then we would slip down a couple more places. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 3 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: So based on your financial observation, it means Dean is slightly over achieving this far. Lol Also, are you trying to tell me that we were a bigger pull for players, than Brighton, even whilst we were in the Championship? Even putting aside the fact that we obviously couldn't pay the same wages or transfer fees? Come on get real, you are skewing the argument. You've also conveniently ignored the factuals I placed in my last post. Again though, if you are using this table as a guide, it indicates that each manager is accurately doing the job they are supposed to be doing.l, and nothing spectacular. Which actually weakens your argument. We can't just throw stats and figures around without the background variables which affect all of these. No it doesn't 'weaken' my argument Our owners are by far the biggest factor in why we are where we are. Not Dean Smith. We are about where we are expected to be. The most important people for this club are our owners. There are many managers who could do the same job or better with this heavy financial backing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 9 minutes ago, Mjvilla said: So, Smith overachieving and Potter underachieving then. Well, well, well. Also, I presume this table doesn't include players out on loan at clubs? I think if it doesn't, then we would slip down a couple more places. I think most clubs would be slightly overachieving if they had a player of Grealish quality. We've seen the cold harsh reality with us without him. 4 points in 4 games. That's relegation form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 11 minutes ago, villalad21 said: No it doesn't 'weaken' my argument Our owners are by far the biggest factor in why we are where we are. Not Dean Smith. We are about where we are expected to be. The most important people for this club are our owners. There are many managers who could do the same job or better with this heavy financial backing. Mate to me, it seems like you would be better off saying, you would take " beautiful football " over results. Who is to tell that if we had Potter, we wouldn't play " beautiful " football but still be in the same position, or worse? Don't Norwich, Swansea and Brentford play " beautiful " football as well? In one sense, I get the points you are trying to make, but you are contradicting yourself massively. I don't think management is as easy or straightforward as some think. I might have to start aligning with some who say you just don't like Deano. Which I am hesitant to do, as you do have some valid points at times, and constructive criticism should always be welcomed. Some of his decisions also frustrate me but in the grand scheme of things he is doing a good job. We need to give him at least another season, at least, before we start scrutinising like this. Yes you are correct, the owners are the most important part of the club/progress, but to write Deano off as a non entity in our progress, is farcical. Edited March 9, 2021 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 Transfer spend and annual players salary are two completely different things. Wilder spunked over 20 million on Brewster last summer, Rodríguez joined Everton on a free but is probably earning 3 times his weekly wage. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 15 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: Mate to me, it seems like you would be better off saying, you would take " beautiful football " over results. Who is to tell that if we had Potter, we wouldn't play " beautiful " football but still be in the same position, or worse? Don't Norwich, Swansea and Brentford play " beautiful " football as well? In one sense, I get the points you are trying to make, but you are contradicting yourself massively. I don't think management is as easy or straightforward as some think. I might have to start aligning with some who say you just don't like Deano. Which I am hesitant to do, as you do have some valid points at times, and constructive criticism should always be welcomed. Some of his decisions also frustrate me but in the grand scheme of things he is doing a good job. We need to give him at least another season, at least, before we start scrutinising like this. Yes you are correct, the owners are the most important part of the club/progress, but to write Deano off as a non entity in our progress, is farcical. I'm not taking away credit from Smith. He's done a perfectly fine job so far. Just think the job he has done is somewhat overrated. I still don't think finishing 5th in the Championship and getting promoted through the play offs were that over the board amazing. Not with the group of players he had at his disposal. People talking about the 10 game winning run. Only reason he had to go on that run in the first place is because he had only won 2 in 12 in the previous games cutting us adrift. Which were embarrassingly poor. I still say this to this day. How we got into the top 6 was not the important part, as long as we got there. Couldn't care less about a 10 game winning run, as long as we finished in the top 6 or even better the top 2. That's all i care about. As far as this season goes we have recruited some really good players who have taken us to another level. But as previously mentioned. Without Grealish we are showing relegation form and that does not look good on Smith. The 'one man' team has been labeled against us and it's worrying that there is actual truth to the claim. Paul Merson have recently gone out and said we'd be battling relegation without him. I'm not sure i would go that far but from recent evidence although it's not the greatest of sample size we are showing relegation form without him. Edited March 9, 2021 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 17 minutes ago, villalad21 said: I'm not taking away credit from Smith. He's done a perfectly fine job so far. Just think the job he has done is somewhat overrated. I still don't think finishing 5th in the Championship and getting promoted through the play offs were that over the board amazing. Not with the group of players he had at his disposal. People talking about the 10 game winning run. Only reason he had to go on that run in the first place is because he had only won 2 in 12 in the previous games cutting us adrift. Which were embarrassingly poor. I still say this to this day. How we got into the top 6 was not the important part, as long as we got there. Couldn't care less about a 10 game winning run, as long as we finished in the top 6 or even better the top 2. That's all i care about. As far as this season goes we have recruited some really good players who have taken us to another level. But as previously mentioned. Without Grealish we are showing relegation form and that does not look good on Smith. The 'one man' team has been labeled against us and it's worrying that there is actual truth to the claim. Paul Merson have recently gone out and said we'd be battling relegation without him. I'm not sure i would go that far but from recent evidence although it's not the greatest of sample size we are showing relegation form without him. Smith inherited a bloated unbalanced squad from potato head. It took until January to sort it out by bringing in Mings and Hause. Grealish then got injured. It was miraculous he got us to the play offs after the home defeat by Albion I had given up and was looking to our 4th season in the EFL with no jack and no parachute payments. Look at us now. I wouldn't trust Merson to open a can of beans with the tin lid open so I wouldn't take much weight on his comments. Edited March 9, 2021 by The Fun Factory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 21 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said: Smith inherited a bloated unbalanced squad from potato head. It took until January to sort it out by bringing in Mings and Hause. Grealish then got injured. It was miraculous he got us to the play offs after the home defeat by Albion I had given up and was looking to our 4th season in the EFL with no jack and no parachute payments. Look at us now. I wouldn't trust Merson to open a can of beans with the tin lid open so I wouldn't take much weight on his comments. There is some substance to the " without Jack " arguments. However, couldn't you say this for almost ANY football team? Without their best/standout player, they are not as good, shocker! Unless they have a squad the likes of Man City, Man U etc have. Leicester without Vardy Tottenham without Kane etc Of course, at our stage of development, it will hit us harder. My only critique would be that at times the squad hasn't been used effectively to offset this, but it's all work in progress. Once the quality increases, so will the effect of us being without him. It's why I say, I sometimes get the points some people are trying to make. However for those points to be concrete, the context needs to line up. Edited March 9, 2021 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 Smith has been Villa's best coach (and I used that word rather than manager) since Little. End of. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 3 hours ago, villalad21 said: Not even remotely the same job. Aston Villa is a much bigger club. More resources. Better facilities and training ground. You really can't compare the clubs or the job. Good to see Leeds fans acknowledging this fact also. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingman Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 Be interesting to compare current squad estimated valuations on that list compared to the initial costs. Think we would be in the top 4 as most of recent signings over last few seasons have at least doubled in valuation if Not trebled/quadrupled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 6 hours ago, villalad21 said: Not even remotely the same job. Aston Villa is a much bigger club. More resources. Better facilities and training ground. You really can't compare the clubs or the job. Bodymoor been spruced up recently but Brighton centre looks decent to me: https://www.buckinghamgroup.co.uk/sectors/location/east-sussex/brighton-ha-fc-training-academy/ They've also been spending 20m + on players like we've been doing last 18 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 17 minutes ago, VillaChris said: Bodymoor been spruced up recently but Brighton centre looks decent to me: https://www.buckinghamgroup.co.uk/sectors/location/east-sussex/brighton-ha-fc-training-academy/ They've also been spending 20m + on players like we've been doing last 18 months. Main point is we've outspent them in only 2 summers to what they've spent the past 5 years. You mention they can spend 20M on players. Sure, but we are still outspending them in terms of net spend and by a pretty significant amount as well. 19/20 season we spent £159M on players they spent £74M This season we spent £98M on players they spent £28M If we spend at the current rate we will have spent more than double of the amount of them in the next 3 seasons. Again. It's a very different job. Smaller club. Different expectations. Smaller budget. I find it hard to compare Villa and Brighton. Compare us with Newcastle. Compare us with Everton. Compare us with West Ham. Not the likes of Brighton and Bournemouth. Really is like comparing a bicycle to a motor cycle. Completely different things. Not just in terms of money but a bit of everything. Ceiling is just much higher at Villa. Edited March 9, 2021 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fun Factory Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 1 hour ago, villalad21 said: I find it hard to compare Villa and Brighton. Brighton has the rolling south downs and Villa has er some canals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted March 9, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9, 2021 6 hours ago, villalad21 said: I'm not taking away credit from Smith. He's done a perfectly fine job so far. Just think the job he has done is somewhat overrated. I still don't think finishing 5th in the Championship and getting promoted through the play offs were that over the board amazing. Not with the group of players he had at his disposal. People talking about the 10 game winning run. Only reason he had to go on that run in the first place is because he had only won 2 in 12 in the previous games cutting us adrift. Which were embarrassingly poor. I still say this to this day. How we got into the top 6 was not the important part, as long as we got there. Couldn't care less about a 10 game winning run, as long as we finished in the top 6 or even better the top 2. That's all i care about. As far as this season goes we have recruited some really good players who have taken us to another level. But as previously mentioned. Without Grealish we are showing relegation form and that does not look good on Smith. The 'one man' team has been labeled against us and it's worrying that there is actual truth to the claim. Paul Merson have recently gone out and said we'd be battling relegation without him. I'm not sure i would go that far but from recent evidence although it's not the greatest of sample size we are showing relegation form without him. gotta bite here. that 10 game winning run will never be beaten in the championship. putting in a run of results like that was a ridiculous achievement. to say you couldn't care less is, for me, the ultimate troll from you, and that's saying something. jack captaining the club, mings coming in. it was important for us in so, so many ways and to play it down is shocking. would you be saying the same if bielsa had put a run like that together last season? no, you wouldn't and you know you wouldn't. yes, 2 wins in 12. but we only lost 4 in 14 in that same run. why do you spin it to the negative every single **** time?? the 4 points without jack have been against 2 good sides...one of which you can't stop bleating on about how good their manager is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, tomav84 said: gotta bite here. that 10 game winning run will never be beaten in the championship. putting in a run of results like that was a ridiculous achievement. to say you couldn't care less is, for me, the ultimate troll from you, and that's saying something. jack captaining the club, mings coming in. it was important for us in so, so many ways and to play it down is shocking. would you be saying the same if bielsa had put a run like that together last season? no, you wouldn't and you know you wouldn't. yes, 2 wins in 12. but we only lost 4 in 14 in that same run. why do you spin it to the negative every single **** time?? the 4 points without jack have been against 2 good sides...one of which you can't stop bleating on about how good their manager is. I care about promotion. How we get there does not matter as long as we get there. That being said i'd prefer automatic promotion. No one will argue with it that it was an impressive run but the reason we had to go on a run like that in the first place is because we only won 2 in 12 in the games before. Which again was appalling. At the end of the day you don't get extra rewards for winning 10 in a row, it's just a stat. And hopefully we will never beat it considering that means us being relegated. It's like which season would you rather take? Arsenal's invincible season or Man Utd treble season? Sure Arsenal's season looks good on paper. Never defeated right? But you don't get multiple titles for being undefeated. I'd take Man Utd's season any day of the week. And i would also swap our season with Norwich as winning the league is a much bigger achievement. Edited March 9, 2021 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts