Is it really that surprising that Liverpool finished behind Spurs and Man City?
Posted In:
Spurs get fourth
.
By Red and White Blogger
They've done it. Spurs have officially managed to dislodge one of the 'big four' from the their cosy spec at the top of the Premier League tree.
But was it really that inconceivable that Tottenham and Manchester City would finish ahead of Liverpool?
Harry Redknapp will recieve all the plaudits for guiding his Spurs side into Europe's premier competition (pending a play-off), but if you put the numbers together it becomes slightly less of an achievement.
Instead, it's an eventuality of what was always bound to happen considering the financial muscle that both Manchester City and Tottenham can now exert.
Let's take a look at the facts...
- The Manchester City starting XI that took to the field against Spurs (replacing Fulop with Given) cost £147m.
- The City subs bench cost a total of £26.5m
- The Tottenham Hotspur starting XI that took to the field against Man City cost £84m.
- The Spurs subs bench cost a total of £57m
Now let's take a look at the valuation of the current Liverpool team...
- A first XI including Reina,Johnson,Carragher,Agger,Insua,Mascherano,Lucas,Gerrard,Kuyt,Benayoun and Torres costs a total of £79m
- A subs bench consisting of Cavalieri, Degen, Kyriakgos, Maxi, Babel, Riera and Ngog costs a total of £26m
Now considering that Fernando Torres has been absent for long spells this season (taking the value of the first XI to £60.5m by replacing with Ngog), it probably isn't too much of a surprise that the likes of City, Spurs et al. have to an extent, caught up, and now overtaken Liverpool.
It says quite something that the cost of the strongest possible Liverpool bench (including idiot Reira) cost less than the purchase of Manchester City's Carlos Tevez. Moreover, it emphasises the competition that Liverpool now face to finish in the top four.
Of course this is merely an observation, but it does demonstrate that people shouldn't be too shocked that Spurs are competing in the higher regions of the Premier League table.
With both Manchester City and Tottenham likely to add to their squads in the summer it's a scary thought for Liverpool supporters that the financial gap between the squads is only likely to increase.
Posts
5 Responses to Is it really that surprising that Liverpool finished behind Spurs and Man City?
Interesting numbers but they only tell half the story.
Comparing the wages of the players and spreading their transfer costs over the length of their contract would give a more realistic comparison. That would give you a pounds per player per year value.
When you do that comparison I am pretty sure the Spurs squad has the lowest total cost
Aqualani and his twenty million must be included, injured or not, money was spent.
I agree that Aquilani's transfer fee should be included and it seems to me that your Liverpool starting XI has only ten players in it.
Admittedly I forgot the Aquilani fee. (probably because he hasn't played too much, and I posted late last night!)
But the point remains the same, Spurs and City are now competing on a similar level to Liverpool.
The post is merely an observation that Spurs and City aren't really Champions League underdogs when they have spent similar or more cash than Liverpool.
Just look at the net spend (which takes into account of players sold) and you'll see an even bigger difference. Tottenham's net spend over the last three years is second only to Manchester City.
Something to say?