johnny crossan wrote:Scatman wrote:Dimples wrote:Original Dub wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11182125/Man-City-costliest-squad-world-Man-United-Chelsea-completing-three.html
City are number1 spenders on squad with add-ons?
Let us manipulate the figures by:
1. ignoring player sales.
2. boost the spend by including unsubstantiated add-ons.
3. no start date, no end date means we can exclude players who have left, for ex, Pogba, Lukaku, Di Maria (£240M)
4. ignore signing on fees, agent fees, etc... therefore, we exclude Ronaldo.
5. don't give a breakdown of the figures, just make sure City come top of te pile.
Garbage article at many levels.
My understanding of the article and the report it is based on, is that they have calculated the cost to each club of purchasing the players who are in their current squad.
Why would they include the cost of players who aren't in the squad (for example Lukaku or Di Maria) when working out the cost of the current squad?
Why would they include receipts for the sales of players who aren't in the current squad when working out the cost of the current squad?
the trouble with the CIES Football Observatory is that it is essentially a propaganda outlet for the cartel clubs funded by UEFA of course.
My understanding of the article is the same as yours.
My problem with the article is that it spins a false narrative about City being the biggest spenders in the PL.
IMO this is deliberate i.e. lets keep spinning the narrative that City blow money, ruin football, destroy the traditional transfer infrastructure, etc...
Technically the article is probably correct (current squad value) but it does not reflect the actual spend by each club.
For ex, MU spent £90M on Pogba who left on a free. That £90M is not included in the current MU squad value.
City spend £100M for Grealish and this is included in the current MC squad value.
City player sales this summer brought in £140M - not included.
MU player sales brought in £10M - not included.
Therefore, if you want to give an accurate account of a club's spending, using the above figures: MC
+£40M and MU
-£80M
If you take the criteria used by the article then MC have the most expensive squad with £100M and MU have the cheapest with £0M.
So you can have a headline like:
MC have the most expensive squad (which is misleading) and MC splash more cash than MU and Chelsea (which is misleading)
ORMC balance the books (which is accurate) and MU and Chelsea inflate the transfer market through irresponsible debt funded spending (accurate)
