Wenger: Chelsea overpaid for Torres.: Page 3 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

Wenger: Chelsea overpaid for Torres.

Rohit

Caligula wrote:
Ancelotti will not be held accountable for the price at which Torres was bought. I don't know why people get that idea. He will just be held accountable for results given the players at his disposal.

I agree with what you say about market value.

As for the above, Chelsea is ofcourse a special case but in general managers should be accountable for the cost of failure. Rafa Benitez spent carelessly but no one spoke about his excesses but only about his failure to win trophies. His failure to win trophies also came at a high cost which in any normal business may be ill-affordable which is why i like the direction UEFA intends to take with its financial fair play practice. It may not be the best system at the outset but it may well evolve into a very effective one.

A manager's failures are only seen for what they are, failure to win trophies but they should also be seen in the context of the cost to the club. Look at what David O'Leary did to Leeds, even Chelsea were close to going down. They were all a result of excesses which then were nothing but 'market value' as defined by Tony, being spent on players in the hope that they would help the club win trophies.

I don't always agree with Wenger and don't often agree with his thrifty ways but a manager should be fiscally prudent.

Claudius

Rohit, it's hard. The average tenure of a manager is around 18 months. Personally, if I was a manager, my initial focus would be to get off to a good start. That would mean spending all the money I can get my hands on to build the best possible squad for myself. If there's money left over after that and the owner gives it to me, I'll spend it.

Wenger has a unique relationship with the board. Really only he and Ferguson have the combination of stability and resources. He can think more than 12 months out at a time, so he doesn't need to spend everything he has now.

Rohit

I know it is hard, especially when the boss is as unforgiving as Abrahimovic and i feel sorry for managers who aren't given enough time to progress the club. It is also not an ideal environment but it is also unfair that a club like Chelsea can keep defining 'market value' just because their owner is a very rich man and not because Chelsea is a very rich club. The club's operating losses run into hundreds of millions isn't it.

I never had an issue with Manchester United spending money, because the money was theirs. They also never distorted the market like Chelsea has done giving impressions of a 'market value' that actually doesn't exist.

Rohit

Real Madrid despite spending all those millions have not progressed beyond the quarter finals in 6 years now. How can spending such ridiculous sums be justified then. I know fans want instant gratification, especially fans of Barcelona and Madrid but this is just a joke in my honest opinion. How do they balance their books? Is everything written as bad debt? I am sure they borrow to fund these purchases, i have never seen financial statements of Barca and/ or Madrid so i have no idea. I know about the individual TV deals but still such exorbitant sums never made sense to me.

Man City may have spent over £ 400 million on players by the time they win a trophy or qualify for the Champions League and in doing so would have grossly overspent on individual players and set the 'market value' because they want the player at that price. Is it worthwhile then, the £ 400 million spent? Clubs should never be allowed to run like this.

Claudius

Real Madrid have no balance sheet. The City and donors will step in as necessary to finance the splurge.

The truth is though, the rich owner throwing money around has always been there. He's just much richer now. Think about the kind of money that Jack Walker was throwing at Shearer or when Berlusconi was hoarding stars like Papin on his bench. It's always been there.

I really would like to see a more German model, but the only issue would be to design the system in a way that ensures that a team like Blackpool has a chance to move up. It's hard to get your head around.

Rohit

I hear you but what you say does mean that these splurges have been a preserve of rich owners and it only strengthens my belief and not everyone may agree, that how can then the money being spent by these cash rich owners (not clubs) be taken to be market value. For me they don't define market value, they only bring distortions in it.

It will be interesting how effective these financial fair play rules will be combined with the home grown rule.

Burnwinter

Tony Montana wrote:
But in response to you there is still only one Torres. If I buy a sony LCD TV from Currys for £1000 when most places would sell it for £900 then I am overpaying. But a Sony TV is mass produced.

If I buy a doughnut from an independent bakery for 3 quid then I am also overpaying. Sure, that particular doughnut is only made at that particular bakery but it is till a standard doughnut with the same ingredients give or take a herb or whatever. Most other places don't charge over a pound regardless of whether they're Krispy Kremes or from some random shop. £1.00 ish or less is market value. One ring doughnut is NOT worth 3.00 quid.

But you can only buy one Torres. Sure there are other strikers who are similar products but they have too many variables to be seen as the same product. Compare him to Suarez who Liverpool bought as a replacement. Torres is more marketable generally and he is proven in the Premier League. That has to be at least part of the reason Chelsea went for Torres and not Suarez. But those reasons are massive making the "products" too dissimilar.

Let's think about this differently. Did Chelsea overpay for Shevchenko?

Claudius

No. It's the price Abramovich wanted to pay for that particular player.

As Tony said, players are not commodities, but the buyers are also not identical. They have a great diversity of drivers.

Did Real overpay for Cristiano Ronaldo?

Irishgunnerz

There's also the negative/risky elements though - his poor form and recent injury record

Klaus

Caligula wrote:
No. It's the price Abramovich wanted to pay for that particular player.

Brilliant. So the commonly used and objectively defined verb "overpay", in other words, has no connotative meaning for you. Should'e just said so at the beginning and saved us the thread.

Captain

I'm fairly sure, being the astute businessman that he is, it isn't the price Abramovich wanted to pay at all.

Irishgunnerz

😃 Bad day Klaus?

Claudius

Klaus wrote:
Caligula wrote:
No. It's the price Abramovich wanted to pay for that particular player.

Brilliant. So the commonly used and objectively defined verb "overpay", in other words, has no connotative meaning for you. Should'e just said so at the beginning and saved us the thread.

I like how you conveniently ignore the 2nd line of my post when you make your sarcastic remark. What did I expect anyway?

y va marquer

Burnwinter wrote:
Let's think about this differently. Did Chelsea overpay for Shevchenko?

They did.

Four weeks or so into his time there and it looks as if they've overpaid for Torres too 😉

He has a lot of match winning, title swinging performances to produce in order to live up to his price tag.
Fully fit and motivated he might do so.

Burnwinter

Klaus wrote:
Caligula wrote:
No. It's the price Abramovich wanted to pay for that particular player.

Brilliant. So the commonly used and objectively defined verb "overpay", in other words, has no connotative meaning for you. Should'e just said so at the beginning and saved us the thread.

I'm with you Klaus. I prefer working with the English language as if the words I'm speaking have their usual meaning.

Caligula wrote:
No. It's the price Abramovich wanted to pay for that particular player.

As Tony said, players are not commodities, but the buyers are also not identical. They have a great diversity of drivers.

Did Real overpay for Cristiano Ronaldo?

Ronaldo is miles better than Torres - in my opinion. Chelsea overpaid for Torres - in my opinion.

As for the suggestion that if the buyer has personal reasons, their spending cannot be wrong - it's great that you're able to hold your judgement in such enviable reserve 😃

« Previous Page