17 mil in January transfer window

[Eggs]

....Merseyside Millionaires.

 

[davek]

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'

But that's not what's being said, is it? Moyes didn't sell players and then receive 50% of that cash back to spend; he received all that cash and some on top. £150M gross spend between 2002/03 and 2012/13 and a net spend of £19M.

There's no argument from me that he was being bankrolled, but that doesn't detract from any argument that he had at his disposal the kind of sums to allow him to smash the club's transfer record time after time with big money purchases for the day of £9M followed by £10m, followed by £11M followed by £15M....the kind of consistent big money signings the likes of which all others outside of the financial elite could only dream about.

So yeah, my point concerning Everton/Moyes back then in relation to what we face now is substantiated.

 

[BlueToff]

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.

Well yes of course it is important, but it doesn't bother me that our net spend isn't ridiculously high either. I just want to see the players we do buy give us value for money, and if we do sell anyone that it be squad players (like we have shifted this window) rather than key players.

And, if key players do go, as we do with the squad fodder actually, I'm confident we'll get very good money.

 

[Yankfootball1]

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.

Agreed for the most part. There is always going to be mistakes. Hopefully nothing massive. Martinez mistakes to date have been small. McGeady, Alcarez, possibly Kone. Where only Kone had a material outlay.

Moyes had some misses, Beattie, Bily

 

[davek]

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.......

Actually, yes. In 2005/06 Moyes had a net spend of over £25M. Liverpool spent the same net that season, and they were only surpassed by Chelsea.

...and, btw, £25M+ net translated to today's inflated market would be like spending about £55M net.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Actually, yes. In 2005/06 Moyes had a net spend of over £25M. Liverpool spent the same net that season, and they were only surpassed by Chelsea.

...and, btw, £25M+ net translated to today's inflated market would be like spending about £55M net.

Actually no.

He bought Neville, VDM, Valente and Kroldrup in the summer window, who totaled about £12.5m

 

[davek]

Actually no.

He bought Neville, VDM, Valente and Kroldrup in the summer window, who totaled about £12.5m

Oh right, well that totally destroys the point then doesn't it...the season total net spend wasn't that big in comparison with all other clubs if you break it up into summer and winter windows.

*shakes head*

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Oh right, well that totally destroys the point then doesn't it...the season total net spend wasn't that big in comparison with all other clubs if you break it up into summer and winter windows.

*shakes head*

You tried answering my question with an answer that was using different parameters.

Simple really

 

[davek]

You tried answering my question with an answer that was using different parameters.

Simple really

The simple part is this: Moyes spent £25M net in one season (an utter fortune a decade ago...and still decent by todays standards).

A massive outlay.

Moyes smashed the transfer record on multiple occasions and spent cash which the also rans in the PL could only dream about.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

The simple part is this: Moyes spent £25M net in one season (an utter fortune a decade ago...and still decent by todays standards).

A massive outlay.

Moyes smashed the transfer record on multiple occasions and spent cash which the also rans in the PL could only dream about.

£11m net......I thought it was only net that mattered?

The rest of the cash he raised himself (barring Rooney) buying cheap and selling high.

I'd call that great management personally.

The sad thing is you're trying to use exactly the same argument i.e. net spend, to make out Martinez hasn't had a decent chunk of cash, and yet using the converse i.e. gross, to try and have yet another poke at Moyes.

Flip, flopping all over the place here mate....chuffed you took the bait though

 

[davek]

£11m net......I thought it was only net that mattered?

The rest of the cash he raised himself (barring Rooney) buying cheap and selling high.

I'd call that great management personally.

The sad thing is you're trying to use exactly the same argument i.e. net spend, to make out Martinez hasn't had a decent chunk of cash, and yet using the converse i.e. gross, to try and have yet another poke at Moyes.

Flip, flopping all over the place here mate....chuffed you took the bait though

Flip flopping? My underlying point is that both Martinez and Moyes haven't been at the races in terms of spending and that there;s no point in comparing one more favourably with the other in terms of making what they do have to spend count.

Would that your points were so consistent. Have a go, you might like it.

 

[bluestevon]

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.

Begovic i would have thought they made a decent profit on

But anyway i'm just saying really, to Dave especially so more than anyone, that trying to use the 'its a different era now' thing to explain why Martinez supposedly has it tougher is pretty much bull, and also it's a disservice to Moyes (who i was never a fan of btw), both managers have done so far exceptionally well in the quality of players they have bought for the prices they paid, the difference for me anyway is in getting them to play as a whole at a level of their individual ability (could argue that Moyes got them playing above their collective talents), for that right at this moment and for the best part of two seasons Martinez has been distinctly not doing

 

[bluestevon]

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.

Look at spurs, net spend pretty much zero after Bale and the influx of players, most busts - sold them on and reinvested again and now have a very good collective team, net spend pretty much nil, lot of failed buys in their as well but they cut the losses quickly on most, able to do so as they had a core around bale that was 'decent' so never dropped too far away from the top 6 whilst trying to improve the team.


As for Martinez - in three seasons - he has failed to address the Keeper, left wing and a back up striker (up till now anyway when he looks to have finally tried to sort that - my guess is though he will be played ad hoc on the left), if the team would have been in worse shape when he took over then we would still right now have a lot more holes in the squad/first team i'm certain of that, in many ways Martinezwas afforded the time to get things right with players he brought in by the fact we had a very solid group of players already in situ

 

[bluestevon]

But that's not what's being said, is it? Moyes didn't sell players and then receive 50% of that cash back to spend; he received all that cash and some on top. £150M gross spend between 2002/03 and 2012/13 and a net spend of £19M.

There's no argument from me that he was being bankrolled, but that doesn't detract from any argument that he had at his disposal the kind of sums to allow him to smash the club's transfer record time after time with big money purchases for the day of £9M followed by £10m, followed by £11M followed by £15M....the kind of consistent big money signings the likes of which all others outside of the financial elite could only dream about.

So yeah, my point concerning Everton/Moyes back then in relation to what we face now is substantiated.

Moyes had on average of 1.9m per year for ten years mate, as for smashing the club transfer record time after time, most teams have done the same mate over that time period, the prices have been steadily rising with each increase in tv revenue

All fair points about Moyes 2-3 times buying a player for money the likes of stoke etc wouldn't have paid, but never did answer my point about WHO outside the top 6 have spent 28m on one player like Martinez has been allowed to mate? answer is no one - so really whats been shown is that the playing field for Moyes and Martinez is the same as is the fact both managers are allowed the luxury of occasionally buying a player for a fee that othr clubs around us wont do

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Look at spurs, net spend pretty much zero after Bale and the influx of players, most busts - sold them on and reinvested again and now have a very good collective team, net spend pretty much nil, lot of failed buys in their as well but they cut the losses quickly on most, able to do so as they had a core around bale that was 'decent' so never dropped too far away from the top 6 whilst trying to improve the team.


As for Martinez - in three seasons - he has failed to address the Keeper, left wing and a back up striker (up till now anyway when he looks to have finally tried to sort that - my guess is though he will be played ad hoc on the left), if the team would have been in worse shape when he took over then we would still right now have a lot more wholes in the squad/first team i'm certain of that

Spurs have a negative net spend of over £50m in the last 5 years.

So if you solely used the net argument they appear to have spent less than nothing....only they've spent £250m in that period, making them the 6th highest gross spenders......

Despite my toying with Dave, you can't look at either stat in isolation, as they're meaningless without the full picture.