17 mil in January transfer window

[blueblue]

By my rough calculations, that's a £47M net spend by RM in his time here.

Just to put that net spend into context, in that same period, amongst those we're supposed to show a clean pair of heels to:

Newcastle net spend £44M
West Ham net spend £80M
West Brom net spend £49M
Norwich net spend £31M
Sunderland net spend £38M
Crystal Palace net spend £65M
Leicester City net spend £49M
Bournemouth net spend £43M

Forget about the financial elite. Even some of these clubs are eclipsing us now in terms of spending power and that'll be the same until the club sorts itself out off the field.

Whereas the figures may be correct Dave what they do not take into account the players already in the squad before the spending begins.
We already had a very solid base of good players and others were trying to catch up. David Moyes was good in the market and did pick up good players cheaply.

 

[Yankfootball1]

I'm actually hoping he helps Wednesday up (via play offs probs) by playing a blinder and they have to buy him due to fan pressure.

A long shot I feel but still.

That was exactly my thought plays well they get promoted they sign him on a perm.

 

[Tubey]

It's only used as the 'correct analysis' when it suits.

If you point out that Spurs have had a negative net spend over the last 5 years, the Bale and Modric cash is thrown back as the reason that they 'don't count'.

It's the correct analysis if you use it consistently. Everton had a ridiculous net spend under Moyes, and have had much more under Martinez, but the proof of whether that net spend is accurate is if we sell leading assets to cover the spend this summer and beyond.

For example, you can berate Martinez for having more money to spend and vastly underperforming with the squad he has, if he doesn't have to sell to maintain that spend and draw even on the net spend.

As of right now, Martinez should be doing better than he is, as he has not had to sell a single valuable asset in order to spend money, so he is failing.

 

[bluestevon]

In terms of gross spend it's pretty much bang on the money as a statement. Moyes was spending more on incomings than all clubs outside United, City, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Spurs, Newcastle. These days you can add a hell of a lot more to that list who have either surpassed us or are spending as much.

Utter rubbish mate

Gross spend is a terrible way to judge how much a manager has been backed though mate - net is what matters, Martinez has to sell Stones, Lukaku and Barkley this summer for 150m and the board give him 75m to spend and we struggle the following year you will be saying how he wasn't backed - seriously doubt you will be saying Martinez had the most money any Everton manager ever had to spend and failed'

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

The shift has been so great in the past few seasons that you may as well compare Martinez's spending to Harry Catterick's.

Moyes/Martinez tenures are two distinct periods in the evolution of the English top flight, financially speaking.

Total spends have increased yes.....

But.......was there ever a window during Moyes tenure when Everton came even remotely close to being top of the net spend league? As we were the window when we bought Lukaku.......

 

[BlueToff]

It's the correct analysis if you use it consistently. Everton had a ridiculous net spend under Moyes, and have had much more under Martinez, but the proof of whether that net spend is accurate is if we sell leading assets to cover the spend this summer and beyond.

For example, you can berate Martinez for having more money to spend and vastly underperforming with the squad he has, if he doesn't have to sell to maintain that spend and draw even on the net spend.

As of right now, Martinez should be doing better than he is, as he has not had to sell a single valuable asset in order to spend money, so he is failing.

Fellaini?

 

[Tubey]

Fellaini?

He covered that and more with the Lukaku and McCarthy signings, and that was his first window and he didn't like the player and was happy to sell.

Since then, not a single valuable outgoing to cover the net spend cost of a valuable incoming.

 

[Yankfootball1]

Total spends have increased yes.....

But.......was there ever a window during Moyes tenure when Everton came even remotely close to being top of the net spend league? As we were the window when we bought Lukaku.......

But lukaku was funded more or less by the sale of Fellaini. During that winter period Martinez said that he was saving that money for the summer. I believe the sale of anichebe, fellaini, and jelavic covered the bulk of not all of McCarthy and Lukaku our two big signings correct. I don't think you can judge spending by a single window. If there was a big negative net spend prior to the window with a positive net spend as an example

 

[bluestevon]

It's the correct analysis if you use it consistently. Everton had a ridiculous net spend under Moyes, and have had much more under Martinez, but the proof of whether that net spend is accurate is if we sell leading assets to cover the spend this summer and beyond.

For example, you can berate Martinez for having more money to spend and vastly underperforming with the squad he has, if he doesn't have to sell to maintain that spend and draw even on the net spend.

As of right now, Martinez should be doing better than he is, as he has not had to sell a single valuable asset in order to spend money, so he is failing.

Also you can say their is a big difference in a manager choosing to sell to buy and a manager who has to sell to buy, Moyes had nothing

He's right to an extent in that there was less competition in terms of 'the best of the rest', though I would have included Villa as well as Spurs.

Six years ago, teams like West Ham, Stoke, Palace etc couldn't have dreamt of having a realistic chance of top six.

Check Stokes spending 'net' over the past ten years mate, and Sunderlands too for an interesting look

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

But lukaku was funded more or less by the sale of Fellaini. During that winter period Martinez said that he was saving that money for the summer. I believe the sale of anichebe, fellaini, and jelavic covered the bulk of not all of McCarthy and Lukaku our two big signings correct. I don't think you can judge spending by a single window. If there was a big negative net spend prior to the window with a positive net spend as an example

Even taking that into account he still had a positive net spend of £20m in his first 2 seasons.

But that wasn't the question I asked...

As even when we'd sold in prior years (with similar circumstances i.e. a large negative net spend in 1 window), did we ever get anywhere near topping the net spend league in any window in the last 15 years?

 

[davek]

Whereas the figures may be correct Dave what they do not take into account the players already in the squad before the spending begins.
We already had a very solid base of good players and others were trying to catch up. David Moyes was good in the market and did pick up good players cheaply.

He did. As is Martinez.

Besic, Robles, Barry, Galloway, Deulofeu for £4M (and way under) is daylight robbery in this era of massive spends.

 

[BlueToff]

He covered that and more with the Lukaku and McCarthy signings, and that was his first window and he didn't like the player and was happy to sell.

Since then, not a single valuable outgoing to cover the net spend cost of a valuable incoming.

I don't think it was a case of not liking Fellaini mate. He was just happy to sell if the price was right, and we got good money for what was a valuable asset...

I hate the entire argument about net/gross spend.

IMO, it shouldn't matter how much you spend really, it's the value you get. e.g. we got Del for £4mil, whereas Liverpool paid £28mil for Firmino...

Both Moyes and Martinez have shown that they get value for the money with signings.

 

[BlueToff]

Also you can say their is a big difference in a manager choosing to sell to buy and a manager who has to sell to buy, Moyes had nothing

Check Stokes spending 'net' over the past ten years mate, and Sunderlands too for an interesting look

But Martinez has done it right. Fellaini at the time wanted out, and we got the price we wanted (if not more) for him.

This window, we've sold Naismith who wanted game time and was taking up a lot of wages, and have used that to put towards a position we really needed to strengthen. That's what being a manager is all about.

Not collecting players for £20mil and having them rot on the bench?

Moyes didn't have anything, no, and you won't see me slating him for that. He often did wonders in the transfer market. But you can't argue that it is a completely different era now.

Stoke are spending big money, so what? Sunderland have spent loads I imagine because they buy players who may be okay but they have to take a gamble on them and hardly ever sell them on for any profit as they don't perform. I imagine Bent was the last player the made any money on.

 

[COYBL25]

But Martinez has done it right. Fellaini at the time wanted out, and we got the price we wanted (if not more) for him.

This window, we've sold Naismith who wanted game time and was taking up a lot of wages, and have used that to put towards a position we really needed to strengthen. That's what being a manager is all about.

Not collecting players for £20mil and having them rot on the bench?

Moyes didn't have anything, no, and you won't see me slating him for that. He often did wonders in the transfer market. But you can't argue that it is a completely different era now.

Stoke are spending big money, so what? Sunderland have spent loads I imagine because they buy players who may be okay but they have to take a gamble on them and hardly ever sell them on for any profit as they don't perform. I imagine Bent was the last player the made any money on.

Spot on, for all the so called super stars ( mercenaries ) that Stoke have signed, there's only the big Austrian lad they've got up front - Arnatovic, who is looking good and I believe he is messing them round over a new contract .

 

[Tubey]

I don't think it was a case of not liking Fellaini mate. He was just happy to sell if the price was right, and we got good money for what was a valuable asset...

I hate the entire argument about net/gross spend.

IMO, it shouldn't matter how much you spend really, it's the value you get. e.g. we got Del for £4mil, whereas Liverpool paid £28mil for Firmino...

Both Moyes and Martinez have shown that they get value for the money with signings.

Net spend is more important than spending smartly, because the more net spend you have, the more you have to spend smartly with.

Martinez is good in the transfer market. The point is that the little gambles like Besic and Deulofeu etc. would be a lot harder to make if he didn't have that money spare in terms of net spend, because he'd have to use every penny on "core" signings.