How come people rarely suggest the managers who won a League Cup as a replacement?
McLeish? McClaren? Souness? O'Nei404. That’s an error.
The requested URL /places?authuser=0 was not found on this server. That’s all we know.*ll? Little?
Your inability to grasp the significance of the concept of net spend is baffling.
Team A: They are an 8/10 squad. They sell a single player for 50m and buy a replacement for 50m.
Team B: They are an 8/10 squad. They sell nobody and buy a new player for 50m.
Let's assume both new players are worth the 50m. By your logic team A and B are still the same rating as they "spent the same amount of money." It's an indefensible position. Nevertheless, even if we accept that logic, Everton are 17th in net spend over the last 5 years. We're 13th by gross spend. Do Everton finish above or below 13th most years? Even the argument you want to make doesn't really hold up.
I'm trying to prove hes spent money. More than this £2.5m per season figure that gets banged round which is NET. How many times do I have to repeat that NET spend means nothing if your selling players for big money! It means nothing! His average spend over 9 years by stats thrown on her is £14.5m per season. Doesnt look so bad now. I have never once said hes had more than his piers but hes had enough to push on. I'd be all for this great manager shout if he'd won something with lesser funds but he hasnt.
Also, most clubs sell their best players at some point. And have to replace them. Not just us! Examples:
Spurs - Modric, Van Der Vaart
Arsenal - Van Persie, Fabregas, Nasri
Liverpool - Alonso, Macherano, Torres
All sold on whilst still being clubs best players.
You cant seem to grasp that a net spent is f all if your recieving big transfer fees.








