"During Rafael Benitez' six-year tenure as manager of Liverpool, he oversaw the purchase of 59 players and the depature of 72. Approximately £230,000,000 was spent on players under the leadership of Benitez at an average of approximately £3,900,000 per player, whilst approximately £162,000,000 was recouped from players sales. This equates to a net spend of approximately £68,000,000 on transfers, at an average of £11,300,000 per year. " So you add 20 mill on dont include player sales http://liverpoolfc.wikia.com/wiki/Rafael_Benitez/Transfers
Wiki http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/managers-comparisons.html Whichever way you cut it "bad, bad, owners" was not true when it came to Benitez spending.....
Rafa Benitez (04/05 - 09/10) Liverpool £247,730,000 Purchased £143,680,000 Sold £104,050,000 Net £17,341,667 Average But he recouped a lot as well £ 17 mill a season (if you believe your site) isnt enough to mount a challenge on Chelsea, City, Utd and thats before you even start in Europe Different sites say different things on spend and sales so without going through every single one you cant say ones wrong or ones right
Wenger managed to challenge on both fronts til March sometimes April on a smaller net spend, more than Rafa did
Not really. Over the same period Utd had an average net spend of £4 million per year, or the exact same £17 million a year if you don't include Ronaldo. And before you start banging on about how he had to spend massive amounts to 'catch up' to Utd, the season before he arrived you finished 4th and we finished 3rd. I think the truth of the matter comes from your Wiki quote - 59 players in six years. FIFTY NINE! That's the same number of players SAF signed between 1998 and 2013. Even Chelsea with Abramovich's bottomless pit of money and Maureen writing most of the cheques only signed 25 players whilst Rafa was Liverpool manager. And every single one of those players came with agents' fees, signing on fees and all the associated palaver that would not have been recovered when they were sold. Benitez would have had plenty of cash, and you might not have flirted with bankruptcy, if he hadn't ditched 90% of the players he bought within an average of two seasons of buying them.
He did make a load of signings that didn't work out. Like city later, Chelsea signed less players but spent significantly more on those players and the cost of the contract too. Where Rafa for me went wrong was just buying too many cheap players with PO tential more of Torres ilk would have been welcome. We had a complete 2nd tier of players that never made it at all. I mean Veronin? Ngog Pongolwhatever, none of these were future CL PL champions and never would be. Way too many "stock" players, it was almost like panhandling Rafa was not and never has been brilliant in the transfer market but then again, stay in the game long enough and you'll make a bunch of signings that didn't work out just like every other manager. Wenger has done alright. Big sham put together a decent Bolton outfit for buttons, Moyes at Everton not bad at all with the purse strings. Fergie has probably blown more money than Moyes has ever had to spend if you wanted to look at it that way Chelsea can just shrug off wasting well over 100m on players that "didn't work out" Torres and Sheva alone 80m and they didn't bat an eyelid. Crespo, cost them 1 million a match 16m. There are a few more too.
Think you hit the nail right on the head there. Too many signings of cheap players who were supposed to be good but didn't work out in the short term, who were then arguably ditched too hastily. I reckon Rafa would have sold Allen and Henderson from your current side, and probably Carrick if he'd been managing Utd in 2010. And like you say, stay in the game long enough and you'll make a bunch of poor signings. Benitez just made them all in the space of about three or four years, which only compounded the problems you have with owners and debt around then, without really driving the club forwards in a meaningful manner.
Doesn't matter who you get if you go through, all would be very tough. Remember what happened last time you played the chavs? PSG just beat the chavs and really, if they weren't making so many mistakes in attacks they could have trashed Chelsea tonight
Is this the chavs imploding? Really puts the OT match into context. Bayern would have made mincemeat of that PSG side good as they were. How the chavs can carry on without a striker is just incredible. Thats PSG through unless the chavs (like United) pull off a miracle.
Chelsea have to win 2-0. hardly impossible is it. 3-1 is better than losing 2-0 for example. they have an away goal so theres always a chance.
Of course it is possible and there is always a chance. Like it is possible we can sneak a goal at Bayern and defend with 11 men in the penalty box like the chavs did a few years back. But with their lack of strikers I cannot see them scoring 2 without conceding at least a goal.
