Jump to content

Rino8

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Zatman said:

They are not the only top team with this. Another English team with a high profile manager has been rumoured to have players on drugs at a previous club and he himself failed numerous tests as a player 

I used to say Jammy liverpool - perhaps I should say Juicy Liverpool ! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

yep, they somehow like to think of themselves as plucky liverpool up against the spending might of man city...whilst having the at the time record signings for GK and defender in their team

in the cup final they had £380m out on the pitch and £150m on the bench - but they sold harry wilson to fulham for £12m, taiwo awoniyi to union berling for £5m and shaqiri to lyon for £5m so really that team was only worth £508m, its nonsense 

week in week out if you look at the cost of the 11 they put out on the pitch they are right up there with the rest of them

 

21 minutes ago, Zatman said:

The net spend is the worst argument in transfers and think its mainly a Liverpool thing from Rafa

Just because the club is getting money back doesn't mean you have not spent money. If we sell Trez and Davis and get 17 million it doesn't mean anything on the Coutinho deal. It doesn’t count the wages

 

That's sort of how it all works, though.  You get money in to be able to spend money.

 

Villa have spent more money this season than Liverpool - but our net spend is less, because we received £100m for Grealish.  To say this income means nothing is, frankly, utterly **** ridiculous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but Man City's 4 most expensive transfers ever cost £290m. Not that much different. Especially when you consider before this season it was less than £250m

Their top 4 fees received, though, will be absolutely miles short of Liverpool's.  Probably to the tune of £150m - just on the top 4 players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bobzy said:

 

 

That's sort of how it all works, though.  You get money in to be able to spend money.

 

Villa have spent more money this season than Liverpool - but our net spend is less, because we received £100m for Grealish.  To say this income means nothing is, frankly, utterly **** ridiculous.

Its not though is it

Our net spend over the last 10 years is higher than Liverpools but when we play them the cost of their 11 on the pitch is £150m+ more than ours 

All it tells you is they are better at selling players 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Its not though is it

Our net spend over the last 10 years is higher than Liverpools but when we play them the cost of their 11 on the pitch is £150m+ more than ours 

All it tells you is they are better at selling players 

What's not what? :D

This whole conversation started with me saying:

2 hours ago, bobzy said:

Nah, not at all.  Proper old traditional club, run well who spend wisely.

You may dislike their success and their fans etc etc, but they're pretty much exactly how I'd want Villa to be.

And hippo responding:

2 hours ago, hippo said:

Andy Carroll conveniently forgotten.  £50m write off.  

 

Aren't we just sort of proving that they are well run?  That they receive a lot of transfer income and, therefore, spend a lot on players?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bobzy said:

What's not what? :D

This whole conversation started with me saying:

And hippo responding:

 

Aren't we just sort of proving that they are well run?  That they receive a lot of transfer income and, therefore, spend a lot on players?

they weren't well run before FSG stepped in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I’ll get destroyed for this but I’m happy for villa to lose if it prevents the quad. The amount of plastic fans I know would make it unbearable. Guess how many City fans I know?

In fairness its not like we will be throwing the game. I cant even remember the last time we beat City in the league. 

2013 probably 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

16 minutes ago, Zatman said:

In fairness its not like we will be throwing the game. I cant even remember the last time we beat City in the league. 

2013 probably 

That’s true. But Just picturing the cringe worthy headlines about Gerrard doing it for Liverpool if somehow we won. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I’ll get destroyed for this but I’m happy for villa to lose if it prevents the quad. The amount of plastic fans I know would make it unbearable. Guess how many City fans I know?

We'll get thrashed regardless mate! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

 

That’s true. But Just picturing the cringe worthy headlines about Gerrard doing it for Liverpool if somehow we won. 

They hate Mings. Imagine a 30 yard Mings strike would hurt the ego 😂😂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, villa4europe said:

They'll try it again this summer, Joe Gomez £25m, a quick Google says they're trying to offload Ox for £35m, neco Williams £10m

Just got to hope we're nowhere **** near them

Buying Ings worked out well for Southampton, and they even turned a profit on him.

There's not a hard and fast rule. Just because Bournemouth's signings didn't work out (initially; Solanke has been huge for them this season) doesn't mean none of them can. Question is just if it's the right player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, hippo said:

they weren't well run before FSG stepped in.

Back when Purslow was in charge?

Speaking of Purslow, I only recently understood how big a fan of Liverpool he is. Grew up on the Wirral in a family who've been Liverpool fans since forever, and is a long-time season ticket holder. I listened to a podcast from 2018 where Purslow described himself as a "fanatical and passionate Liverpool fan" and also said that he "never in a million years" would have accepted the job as managing director for them if he hadn't been such a big fan.

No wonder he's fond of Gerrard.

Edited by VillaParkAvenue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

Back when Purslow was in charge?

Speaking of Purslow, I only recently understood how big a fan of Liverpool he is. Grew up on the Wirral in a family who've been Liverpool fans since forever, and is a long-time season ticket holder. I listened to a podcast from 2018 where Purslow described himself as a "fanatic and passionate Liverpool fan" and also said that he "never in a million years" would have accepted the job as managing director for them if he hadn't been such a big fan.

No wonder he's fond of Gerrard.

Doesn't bode well does it ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â