Don Pacifico On your net spend point, whilst I'm not completely discounting it, I think most here would be of the opinion that both United and Chelsea (and to a lesser extent Spurs) have invested pretty poorly. This can be taken as an endorsement of our recruitment I don't think it completely proves the point that we've maximised our spend as others have just been more profligate.

I just don’t see evidence of anyone who has actually been consistently great at buying. Even City who hsve generally bought well under Pep have brought in the following forwards beyond Haaland: Savinho, Doku, Grealish, Alvarez in last 3 1/2 years for a total of £190m. This season, Alvarez is gone and the other 3 have combined for 4 premier league goals.

I dont want to even look at Spurs. I believe every pound spent by Ange could’ve been better used in a bonfire.

So are there places we could’ve done better per dollar? Yeah. Probably every player we bought not named Trossard. But overall, collective has been bought extremely well.

    • Edited

    It's also completely possible for a DoF or owner to say "OK Mik, have your 7th left back, but only if you sanction one from this list of forwards, because it's my job to look after the squad as a whole with a view on the medium term".

      Claudius I just don't think the fact others have spunked money away completely absolves our guys of responsibility. I'd need to do some more sourcing but across Europe, I feel fairly confident there are a number of good deals happening that we could be matching on a more regular basis.

      The other part of this equation we haven't referenced is our selling, which I think we're pretty much all agreed has been poor.

      Coombs it should be possible in theory. In reality we don't have a DoF, our last one had most likely little to no say in who get signed, the next one will be appointed by the manager and the owner is a billionaire yank cunt who's probably surprised that our football players don't wear helmets.

      Write a Reply...