Last seasons spending vs table position

[sufcboy95]

Thought this looked interesting, in terms of how much teams had spent compared to where they ended up. The Preston one really surprised me

 

[Houso]

Very interesting.

Although, depressing how much the majority spent!

I'd say we're currently on around 1.5million. Depending on still being after Leonard and Holmes at least, probably looking at approaching 3million.

 

[Tyler Durden]

Aston Villas return is shocking.

 

[Mario1889]

You get the odd exception to the rule but in general if you spend more, you finish higher.

In fairness to Newcastle on that table, I'm pretty sure they didn't spend much more than they recouped on player sales.

 

[ucandomagic]

Thought this looked interesting, in terms of how much teams had spent compared to where they ended up. The Preston one really surprised me

Is this spending all season or just in the summer window?

Is it net or gross?

 

[Ricky]

Burton did bloody well to get McFadzean and Irvine for 304k!

 

[grafikhaus]

Aston Villas return is shocking.

It gave them a mid-table finish and a solid platform to build on this coming season. Blackburn proved 'you get what you pay for' And how come the pigs are only showing £9.3m? I thought serial-bottler Rhodes was meant to be £10m (or have they carried it over to 2017-18 to avoid FFP?)

 

[sufcboy95]

It gave them a mid-table finish and a solid platform to build on this coming season. Blackburn proved 'you get what you pay for' And how come the pigs are only showing £9.3m? I thought serial-bottler Rhodes was meant to be £10m (or have they carried it over to 2017-18 to avoid FFP?)

They've only just payed for Rhodes. Think it was last week or something

 

[Sheffsteel]

The spending table only tells half the story.

Some clubs bring in free transfers.
Their cost will show as ZERO in that table
but of course when a player is available on a free,
then the players agent calculates a notional transfer valuation and simply adds it on to the salary.
Hence why some players in the Championship are on extortionate salaries of £20 to £40K a week.

 

[Sheffsteel]

It gave them a mid-table finish and a solid platform to build on this coming season. Blackburn proved 'you get what you pay for' And how come the pigs are only showing £9.3m? I thought serial-bottler Rhodes was meant to be £10m (or have they carried it over to 2017-18 to avoid FFP?)

It was only a loan deal last season.
The £10 million Rhodes signing only became official last month.

 

[Davalon]

For starters that table doesn't show the full picture in terms of total costs but nonetheless it still confirms that the more you spend the more likely you'll finish higher, and vice versa.

It's a fact of life. We haven't got the finance to match plenty of those so let's just get on with it.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

Aston Villas return is shocking.

It is but it didn't surprise me. I went to watch them with a mate towards the end of the their last Premier League season. It was against Southampton at home shortly after their relegation and some of their players were appallingly bad.

The big spend was largely to turn the entire squad over and it probably took them a year to complete the process and bed everyone in. I expect them to win the division next season.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

Very interesting.

Although, depressing how much the majority spent!

I'd say we're currently on around 1.5million. Depending on still being after Leonard and Holmes at least, probably looking at approaching 3million.

The amount we spend doesn't concern me. We have some good players already. We don't need to spend a fortune, just need small touches.

 

[JohnDenver]

This is a pretty crude measure, but I suppose there are a few on here who demand big money signings in order to believe we're actually trying.

 

[Boxer Blade]

The amount we spend doesn't concern me. We have some good players already. We don't need to spend a fortune, just need small touches.

Hope you're right pat, I really do, I suppose it comes down to ambition, stay in the league? 100% agree withyou, and if thats the boards feeling then fair enough but I really want to see some serious ambition in the coming years or CW may decide to seek a club to match his ambition, over all the years of supporting the blades the next 2/3 are for me the biggest for 45 years or so, the management team, the amount of season tickets sold, the feel good factor and sensible expectations, the owners will realise this is a once in a lifetime chance to really make it happen, I for one believe in the next 2/3 years they will.

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

One nice observation there... Spend less than £2m in the Championship and you will be relegated.

 

[BushBlade]

The wage bill usually has a closer correlation to league position than gross transfer spend. If you've got a team that's already nearly good enough to challenge for promotion, you could spend £10m wisely and push on. If you're relegation fodder, £10m is unlikely to get you in the top six.

We have to add slowly because we're not likely to be able to spend £15m on one player. And we'll probably have to sell players to keep funding the progress.

 

[Tuns25]

The table is only a snapshot of one season of spending isn't it? Some of those teams already had hugely expensive players in their squads and massive wage bills from the previous season or seasons and vice versa.

 

[Blades Glory Owls Down]

Its not about how much you spend, but how you spend it.
Having a bug budget doesnt guarantee success. Admittedly it cant hurt to be able to splash out on a big money addition but look at some of the big money flops over the years. You only have to look at that shower over the City. £10 Million for a striker that is scared to take a penalty.
We signed Fleck for nothing and he turned out OK didnt he?

Also if you look at a lot of the comments by Blades towards the end of last season. Many suggested that we only needed a few decent additions to make us competitive in the Championship.
Personally I think this is the case and the Gaffer is addressing this nicely IMHO.

 

[Aston max]

You get the odd exception to the rule but in general if you spend more, you finish higher.

In fairness to Newcastle on that table, I'm pretty sure they didn't spend much more than they recouped on player sales.

that would be a question I was thinking about nett spend as well I would pretty much think Newcastle would be in the black

 

[SwissBlade]

It gave them a mid-table finish and a solid platform to build on this coming season. Blackburn proved 'you get what you pay for' And how come the pigs are only showing £9.3m? I thought serial-bottler Rhodes was meant to be £10m (or have they carried it over to 2017-18 to avoid FFP?)

It was a loan as they didn't get it through on time in jan, hence paying 10m now

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

Hope you're right pat, I really do, I suppose it comes down to ambition, stay in the league? 100% agree withyou, and if thats the boards feeling then fair enough but I really want to see some serious ambition in the coming years or CW may decide to seek a club to match his ambition, over all the years of supporting the blades the next 2/3 are for me the biggest for 45 years or so, the management team, the amount of season tickets sold, the feel good factor and sensible expectations, the owners will realise this is a once in a lifetime chance to really make it happen, I for one believe in the next 2/3 years they will.

It's a case of doing it in a patient and structured way for me. Wilder's comments reflect exactly the way I feel about it. We cant allow ourselves to get carried away all of a sudden now we are back in the Championship. We should be happy to be back there and be looking forward to steady progress. There's no rush to get to the Premier League. For all the rewards it brings it's own long term problems.

Yes we should be ambitious and keep striving to move up the pyramid but we have to live within our means or we will end up being a Portsmouth or a Coventry. I think that to really kick on we will need further investment and possibly a new owner eventually. I believe that our current owners are doing their best for us within a sensible structure but that ultimately football finance will move beyond even what they are able to provide....or at least that's the impression I get.

We have a solid base from which to work currently and I think some of the signings we have already made are very shrewd ones. We simply have to stay in the division this year and I wouldn't want to see us spending tens of millions to do it. I genuinely believe we don't need to either. We should temper our short terms expectations and remember the mire we were in only 12-18 months ago.

UTB

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

John Fleck on a free. That has to be one of the best pieces of business we've done in years.

 

[RammyBlade]

One nice observation there... Spend less than £2m in the Championship and you will be relegated.

Or spend less than £3- £3.5m and you will be in a relegation battle ?

 

[fuerstenberger]

I hope we don't finish 3th, wherever that is.

 

[diplomat]

I'd like to see a wage bill league table. That will have some eye watering numbers on it. I read somewhere that Blackburn had the 9th highest wage bill which I found remarkable.

 

[8lade]

... but nonetheless it still confirms that the more you spend the more likely you'll finish higher, and vice versa.

...

On the contrary looking at those figures in isolation (Ie no other spending-agents fees, wages, etc considered; no valuing the current squad ) then it proves that it's not what you spend but who your manager is and that leaves me feeling content!

 

[loyalblade95]

how did blackburn manage to spend nothing, does this not include loan fees