(PLEASE NOTE THAT I DO NOT OWN OR CLAIM ANY OF THE DATA MENTIONED IN THIS ARTICLE/BLOG, THE TRANSFER NUMBERS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FROM SITES LIKE TRANSFERMARKET AND OTHER NEWS SOURCES IN FULL ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR TERMS OF USE)
INTRODUCTION
Premier League is the biggest, most toughest and the richest league in the world, Premier League clubs spend more money in comparison to clubs from other leagues, but do they perform better and do the clubs which spend more in transfermarket rank higher in the premier league table than those who spend less, we will be comapring that today using 'NET SPEND' of Premier League clubs, which is
TOTAL MONEY EARNED - TOTAL MONEY SPENT
First things First this is for this season only, also one more thing is that its not always about spending more but making the right investment over a period of time, that's what makes good projects and good football clubs, also the Financial Fair Play rules right are very well in place and are quite strict which makes it even more important to make investments wisely. Investing in younger players is obviously preffered for long term projects, if you want to know which league has the best youngsters - read one of my previous blogs here
Now lets get to the point-
5 TEAMS HAD A POSITIVE NET SPEND THIS SEASON
This means there are 5 teams in the entire league who apent less than what they earned in the market, that is they made a profit
These 5 teams are-
ASTON VILLA
NEWCASTLE UNITED
LIVERPOOL
EVERTON
CRYSTAL PALACE
If you notice 4 out of these 5 have either qualified for European football or have won a trophy.
Aston Villa in the last few years have been doing very well with their new project under Unai Emery, they were able to generate good amount of money from the sale of Jhon Duran and signed quality players in January and Summer window.
Newcastle qualified for champions league nect season, they let go of 16 players with some of them being sold for transfer fee which helped them make around 89 million euros, they bought players worth 68 million. They had a good season winning a trophy and finishing 4th.
Liverpool who hired Arne Slot, already had a pretty balanced squad and did not make major changes and had positive net spend of 5 million euros.
Crystal Palace, who won their first ever major trophy in their history also had a positive net spend of around 8.80 million. They finished 12th in Premier League which is not too far off from their 10th position finish in the previous season. They soild one of their star players Michael Olise for more than 50 million which generated some major funds.
Everton like previous season finished in the bottom half(15th last season and 13th this season), howver they made good profit in the market, about 33 million which second highest(first being Villa).
One more thing is that the net spend of Liverpool and Crystal Palace was around 5 million and 8 million respectively which is not that high(especially in comparison to the other three teams).
WHAT TEAMS HAD THE WORST NET SPEND
So Brighton spent the most in the market, around 281 million, where as player sales amounted to around 50 million, placing them last in terms of net spend, which is around -231 million.
In terms of league performance, Brighton finished 8th just one place away from European qualification, Brighton in the past few years have really been scouting some insane talent and came close to qualifying for Europe this time around, last season they 11th.
Both Manchester United and Tottenham hotspur had arguably the wort seasons in their history finishing 15th and 17th in the league table respectively.
Both of them spent heavy in the market, Man United spent around 240 million and had a net spend of -143 million whereas Spurs spent around 170 million and had a net spent of around -120 million.
However Spurs did win the Europa League.
Still both teams will be extremely unhappy with their league performances as both teams made major signings, for example Spurs signed Dominic Solanke, Bergvall, Tel(loan) etc.
And Man United signed Ugarte ,De Ligt ,Mazroui etc.
These two clubs signify why planning is so important.
In my view, Man United gave Erik Ten Hag these many signings and then they sacked him and brought in a manager who has a completely diffrent style of play and did not give that new manager the signings he needed.
NET SPEND AND EXPENDITURE OF RELEGATION TEAMS
All 3 teams who got promoted got relegated:Southhampton, Leicester city and Ipswich Town.
You really have to go big and spend a lot of money to stay in the Premier League, so you really cannot expect a positive net spend but you can only expect high expenditure.
Ipswich Town had a net spend -150million, they spent around 153to 154 million of incomings and earned just 3-4 million on player sales. Only Brighton have a worse net spend than Ipswich.
Leicester city's net spend was -43 million, unlike Ipswich they did sell players and earned around 50 million from that while spent around 90 to 95 million on signings.
Southampton made signings of over 100 million and had a negative Net spend of around 80 million.
From my perspective, the difference between PL and Championship is massive and its only going to get tougher of promoted teams to stay up even if they spend massive money, which happened to all 3 of these clubs.
HOW DID OTHER BIG 6 TEAMS FAIR IN TERMS OF NET SPEND
We have already talked about the three teams from the big six, lets talk about the rest of them.
Manchester City who by their standards did not have that great of a season and they went trophyless however they did go big in the January transfer window. Their total expense for the season was around 240 million while incomes (player sales) were around 140 million, thus their resulting net was -102 million.
This puts them 16th in terms of net spend. They did finish third and reached the FA Cup final though the expectations that people have for Pep Guardiola are very high.
Chelsea signed loads of players at the start of the season and Enzo Maresca did deliver Champions League football and a Conference League trophy.
But they also sold a lot of players, total amount of player sales was around 235 million and player purchases was around 270-275 million thus there net spend came out to be around -40 million.
In my honest opinion this model that Chelsea owners adopted kind of worked for them, they can aim for a top 3 finish next season if they reinforce certain positions.
Then is Mikel Arteta's Arsenal who had a respectable -25 million net spend as the sold around 85 million worth of players and bought in new players for combined transfer fees in the reigon of 105 million.
At the start of the season I expected Arsenal to be favourites for the title simply because they seemed to have a balanced squad and also for the reason that Arteta has been working with this team for quite a few years but the absence of a key striker and lack of steel in attack cost them the season.
At last I like to think that it is important for clubs to sometimes think beyond the season and get players who could contribute in long term, that way they will not have to sign players repeatedly also it is important to give the manager the signings that fit his playing style and system.
Comments
Post a Comment