Premier League Top 6 Cost of Squads

Discussion in 'Players Lounge' started by basskadet, Jan 14, 2012.

  1. basskadet VIP Member Moderator

    basskadet
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    11,358
    Location:
    Hackney
    Ratings:
    +7,141 / 38 / -0
    Off the back of 'Arry's comments earlier, I decided to do a little digging and figure out how much each team has shelled out for their currently registered Premier League squad. The figures exclude players out on loan, but they include some players who may not have featured yet, so long as they are able to feature:

    TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR:

    BRAD FRIEDELFree
    HEURELHO GOMES£9m
    CARLO CUDICINIFree
    BENOIT ASSOU-EKOTTO£3.5m
    MICHAEL DAWSON£4m
    WILLIAM GALLASFree
    LEDLEY KINGFree
    YOUNES KABOUL£5m
    SEBASTIEN BASSONG£8m
    VEDRAN CORLUKA£8.5m
    KYLE WALKER£3m
    AARON LENNON£1m
    JAKE LIVERMOREFree
    TOM HUDDLESTONE£2.5m
    LUKA MODRIC£16.6m
    NIKO KRANJCAR£2m
    GARETH BALE£6m
    STEVEN PIENAAR£3m
    DANNY ROSE£1m
    RAFAEL VAN DER VAART£8m
    SANDRO£6m
    ROMAN PAVLYUCHENKO£13.8m
    JERMAIN DEFOE£15m
    EMMANUEL ADEBAYORLoan
    GIOVANI DOS SANTOS£4.7m
    BEN ALNWICK£900k
    SCOTT PARKER£5m
    TOTAL:£126.5m



    ARSENAL:



    MANUEL ALMUNIA£2.5m
    LUKASZ FABIANSKI£2M
    WOJCIECH SZCZENYFree
    VITO MANNONE£350k
    BACARY SAGNA£6M
    PER MERTESACKER£10m
    THOMAS VERMAELEN£10m
    LAURENT KOSCIELNY£10m
    ANDRE SANTOS£6.2m
    SEBASTIEN SQUILLACI£4m
    JOHAN DJOUROUFree
    CARL JENKINSONFree
    KIERAN GIBBSFree
    ABOU DIABY£2m
    THOMAS ROSICKY£8.8m
    MIKEL ARTETA£10m
    AARON RAMSEY£5M
    ALEX SONG£1M
    JACK WILSHEREFree
    ANDREI ARSHAVIN£15m
    EMMANUEL FRIMPONGFree
    YOSSI BENAYOUNLoan
    FRANCIS COQUELINFree
    JU-YOUNG PARK£3m
    ROBIN VAN PERSIE£2.75m
    THIERRY HENRYLoan
    THEO WALCOTT£9.1m
    ALEX OXLADE-CHAMBERLAIN£12m
    GERVINHO£10.6m
    MAROUANE CHAMAKHFree
    TOTAL:£134.8m

    LIVERPOOL

    BRAD JONES£2.3m
    PEPE REINA£6m
    DONIFree
    GLEN JOHNSON£17.5m
    JOSE ENRIQUE£6.3m
    DANIEL AGGER£5.8m
    FABIO AURELIOFree
    MARTIN SKRTEL£6.5m
    JAMIE CARRAGHERFree
    STEVEN GERRARDFree
    MAXI RODRIGUEZFree
    STUART DOWNING£20m
    JAY SPEARINGFree
    LUCAS LEIVA£6m
    CRAIG BELLAMYFree
    MARTIN KELLYFree
    JONJO SHELVEY£1.7m
    CHARLIE ADAM£7m
    DIRK KUYT£9m
    LUIS SUAREZ£23m
    ANDY CARROLL£35m
    JOHN FLANAGANFree
    JORDAN HENDERSON£16m
    SEBASTIEN COATES£7m
    DANNY WILSON£2m
    TOTAL:£171.1m


    MANCHESTER UNITED:


    LINDEGAARD£3.5m
    KUSZCZAK£2.15m
    DE GEA£18.9m
    EVRA£5.5m
    JONES£17m
    FERDINAND£27.55m
    EVANSFree
    SMALLING£10m
    RAFAEL£2.5m
    FABIO£2.6m
    VIDIC£7m
    ANDERSON£15m
    GIGGSFree
    PARK£4m
    CARRICK£18.6m
    NANI£13.5m
    YOUNG£17m
    WELBECKFree
    HERNANDEZ£6m
    ROONEY£27m
    BERBATOV£30.75m
    OWENFree
    MARCHEDAFree
    SCHOLESFree
    CLEVERLYFree
    FLETCHERFree
    VALENCIA£16m
    DIOUF£2m
    TOTAL:£246.55m


    CHELSEA:


    PETR CECH£7m
    ROSS TURNBULLFree
    HENRIQUE HILARIOFree
    ALEX£5.7m
    BRANISLAV IVANOVIC£9m
    DAVID LUIZ£26m
    JOHN TERRYFree
    ASHLEY COLE£5m
    PAULO FERREIRA£13.2m
    JOSE BOSINGWA£16.2m
    MICHAEL ESSIEN£24.4m
    ORIOL ROMEU£4.35m
    RAMIRES£18.3m
    FRANK LAMPARD£11m
    JOHN OBI-MIKEL£16m
    RAUL MEIRELES£12m
    JOSH McEACHRANFree
    RYAN BERTRANDFree
    FLORENT MALOUDA£13.5m
    JUAN MATA£23.5m
    DIDIER DROGBA£24m
    FERNANDO TORRES£50m
    ROMELU LUKAKU£20m
    SALOMON KALOU£8m
    DANIEL STURRIDGE£4m
    NICOLAS ANELKA£15m
    TOTAL:£326.15


    MANCHESTER CITY:

    COSTEL PANTILIMON£6m
    JOE HART£1.5m
    GUNNAR NIELSENFree
    STUART TAYLORTribunal
    VINCENT KOMPANY£6.7m
    ALEKSANDER KOLAROV£17m
    GAEL CLICHY£7m
    JOLEON LESCOTT£22m
    STEFAN SAVIC£9m
    NEDUM ONUHAFree
    MICAH RICHARDSFree
    KOLO TOURE£16m
    PABLO ZABALETA£6.5m
    GARETH BARRY£12m
    OWEN HARGREAVESFree
    ADAM JOHNSON£7m
    NIGEL DE JONG£16m
    JAMES MILNER£26m
    SAMIR NASRI£22m
    DAVID SILVA£25m
    YAYA TOURE£24m
    MARIO BALOTELLI£24.5m
    EDIN DZEKO£27m
    SERGIO AGUERO£38m
    CARLOS TEVEZ£25.5m
    WAYNE BRIDGE£12m
    TOTAL:£350.1





    Now, I'm not sure whether that exercise throws up any real surprises, but it is still quite interesting. Despite all the praise Wenger receives for assembling a squad of players for a minimal amount, our current squad cost less even than Arsenal's. We spent exactly half of what United spent on their current squad and we have the same points tally after 20 games played, we've virtually spent a 3rd of City and are just 3 points behind them.

    Liverpool are 3rd in the list, but a large majority of their expense was accumulated in the last 2 windows and they are 6th in the League right now but Chelsea are the real embarrassment. Over £300m spent on a squad that are 8 points off a team that spent just £125m. Oh dear


    . . . and that doesn't even take into account player wages, which we would come out with the least spent by quite some margin.

    Pretty impressive really and both Harry & Levy ought to take huge plaudits for such an achievement. We have, essentially, destroyed the commonly held belief that in order to challenge at the top end of the table, you have to spend well in excess of £150m.
    • Like Like x 19
  2. PhildoVT Active Member

    PhildoVT
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    429
    Location:
    Washington DC
    Ratings:
    +192 / 1 / -0
    To be fair, I think you need to include Bentley in our squad cost, given that he's only on loan because he wasn't good enough for us. Still pretty impressive though
  3. FightingCock Well-Known Member

    FightingCock
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,314
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Ratings:
    +365 / 0 / -0
    As much as I hate to admit it Spurs and Arsenal are very alike.

    The only difference is they're shite.
  4. StPaulSpur Well-Known Member

    StPaulSpur
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,691
    Location:
    Lincoln, NE, USA
    Ratings:
    +1,690 / 0 / -0
    I did some digging on this for a Run of Play piece I wrote. Transfer money spent since 2008 (this is only money spent, this is not factoring in money made back through sales) :

    2008 (stats off each team’s 2008/2009 wiki page, each transfer cost listed is than sourced to at least one site)
    Arsenal: 32
    Chelsea: 24
    Liverpool: 38
    Man City: 122
    Man Utd: 30
    Spurs: 102


    2009 (stats from wiki)
    Arsenal: 10
    Chelsea: 25
    Liverpool: 41
    Man City: 118
    Utd: Three undisclosed fees for Valencia, Obertan and Mame Biram Diouf
    Spurs: 28 million


    2010 (stats from wiki)
    Arsenal: 12
    Chelsea: 100
    Liverpool: 82
    Man City: 143
    Man Utd: Five undisclosed transfer fees for Vermijil, Smalling, Hernandez, Bebe and Lindegaard
    Spurs: 18.5


    2011 (stats from Football : English Premier League transfers in 2011/2012 season)
    Arsenal: 60.7
    Chelsea: 78.7
    Liverpool: 69.1
    Manchester City: 82
    Manchester Utd: 57.7
    Spurs: 5.6


    Cumulative spending for each club since 2008:
    Arsenal: 114.7
    Chelsea: 227.7
    Liverpool: 230.1
    Manchester City: 465 (!)
    Manchester United: 87.7 (equally !)
    Spurs: 154.1


    The big things that jump out to me when I look at this is that a) Damion Commoli is a huge wildcard on the spending question. If you take away his spending from Spurs and Liverpool, the top 6 break down into a predictable grouping as far as spending goes: The oilball clubs are the top two, United and Liverpool are next, Arsenal and Spurs are bottom. But when you add in his spending, Liverpool jumps up to Chelsea levels and we end up 4th. Another point: SAF, somehow, still doesn't get enough credit for what a phenomenal manager he is. He's wrung trophies out of a team assembled very cheaply as far as transfer costs go. Yes, their wages are higher, but the fees they pay for players are incredibly low. If we're talking about "winning the right way" then the real model of that in England isn't Spurs or Arsenal, but United. They've won trophies with good academy players, a lot of players purchased cheaply while still young or not-as-well-known, and occasionally have splashed out big dollars in recent years. (SAF's success with this year's squad is really mind-boggling. Their central midfield and central defense are non-existent at this point and they're still 2nd in the Prem.)

    But yes, if you take away DC's spending in 2008, Spurs look very, very frugal. Esp. compared to the oilball clubs and Liverpool.

    * Yes, I don't include the undisclosed fees in compiling United's spending. But even with those added on, they're still probably under 130 million, which puts them lower than us in terms of 2008-2011 spending.
  5. THFCWill i love mister ed and can not lie lol

    THFCWill
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,473
    Location:
    Chorley, Lancs
    Ratings:
    +974 / 0 / -0
    It's funny how the pedo has spent the most money on the defense and it's still shit LOL.
  6. The Cryptkeeper Well-Known Member

    The Cryptkeeper
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,397
    Location:
    On my way to the Lane.
    Ratings:
    +2,020 / 0 / -0
    22M for Lescott....wow.:y13:
  7. jonspurs New Member

    jonspurs
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,202
    Location:
    South West, United Kingdom
    Ratings:
    +936 / 0 / -0
    26 milion on Luiz!?

    ****ing hell LOL
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Musashi Well-Known Member

    Musashi
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,836
    Location:
    Singapore
    Ratings:
    +997 / 0 / -0
    Luiz was considered one of the best CB prospects in Europe during his time at Benfica, and he certainly look to be the part when he first started out at Chelsea. I think he has the tools to be very good, like Kaboul when he just joined us. He needs time to learn and mature. If not, I think he can be converted into a holding mid. He'll still be better than Mikel for sure.

    I also agree we should factor in Bentley in our costs.
  9. mattyvw Well-Known Member

    mattyvw
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,673
    Location:
    nottinghamshire
    Ratings:
    +535 / 1 / -0
    David moyes is a footballing god for that piece of business.
    • Like Like x 2
  10. ToDareIsToDo14 New Member

    ToDareIsToDo14
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    327
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +95 / 0 / -0
    Personally I don't think we've shattered this belief. The thing is we've taken time to assemble this squad, by taking a risk on young players, such as Bale, Lennon, Dawson, Walker, Kaboul etc. and our success has come over time. In order to go from a mid-table club to challenging for the league title in a short period of time you have to spend big. Where were City finishing in the seasons we finished 5th under Jol? We had already started to build a base for where we are now, while they still had the likes of Trevor Sinclair playing for them. Don't think any of their current players were playing for City back then, apart from maybe Hart and Richards in the youth teams.

    I think it's great what we have achieved on a smaller budget, but it's taken time and patience.
    • Like Like x 2
  11. The Cryptkeeper Well-Known Member

    The Cryptkeeper
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,397
    Location:
    On my way to the Lane.
    Ratings:
    +2,020 / 0 / -0
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    100% agree with this.

    This squad has been built over a number of years with fiscal forethought and long term success in mind.

    We are now beginning to reap the rewards.

    COYS.
  12. boo Staff Member

    boo
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    10,175
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Ratings:
    +5,947 / 15 / -0
    yeah, all this recent talk of spurs expenditure is kind of hiding the facts behind the bucks:-

    Total: 2006 to 2011 (not including January 2011 transfers) £in / £out / £net (-/+)

    [1] Manchester City: £471.284.000 / £94.402.000 / -£376.882.000
    [2] Tottenham: £317.460.000 / £153.252.000 / -£164.208.000
    [3] Liverpool: £246.686.000 / £174.894.000
    /71.792.000
    [4] Chelsea: £222.332.000 / £140.417.000
    /81.915.000
    [5] Manchester United: £204.515.000 / £174.275.000
    /30.240.000
    [6] Arsenal: £100.034.000 / £135.276.000
    /35.242.000

    info taken from this post
    boo,
  13. 'Nixspur Well-Known Member

    'Nixspur
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,021
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Ratings:
    +1,215 / 0 / -0
    But again, that flatters Chelsea, as they had some absurd spending in the earliest of the Abramovich years, 03-06, plus it doesn't cover their window last winter which was abnormally large as well.

    It's all a rich tapestry.
  14. skiathospurs Well-Known Member

    skiathospurs
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,720
    Location:
    skiathos greece
    Ratings:
    +4,316 / 26 / -1
    You also have to reckon on the resale/current value of squads.Obviously $ity players have no resale value cos they just loan em out :y2:.No doubt we have some prestige players with high value tags (modders,bale inparticular),arse RVP&song aside not so much,relatively we look fine with spend-sale with current value of our squad.Citeh i would suggest have negative equatiy.
  15. basskadet VIP Member Moderator

    basskadet
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    11,358
    Location:
    Hackney
    Ratings:
    +7,141 / 38 / -0

    That completely misses the point of this exercise as Bentley cannot and has not featured for us this season. I could've included Joe Cole for Liverpool, Yossi Benayoun for Chelsea, Emmanuel Adebayor for City and so on, but I didn't as none of them have contributed to the season that their parent club is having & some of them are actually contributing to other teams (including ourselves in Manny's case) in the same competition!!

    I know that, technically, Bentley has only been on loan to West Ham and now that he's back at Spurs (albeit injured) he could still play for us, he has not been REGISTERED as a Premier League player for Spurs this season and has never been part of our 25 man squad nor is he under 21 anymore.

    Every other player on all the lists is part of these teams' registered 25-man Premier League squad or is under 21 and has featured at some point in the League.



    That may be (although many of those Spurs fees you quoted are WAY off!!) but this exercise was really for the 2011/12 team that have us competing for the title against squads that have been assembled for far more money.

    Using expenditure between 2006-2011 is just irrelevant in this case as it conveniently misses out the money spent in this last summer window, where we spent f-all and everyone else spent hundreds of millions!! considering we are talking about the season directly after that window, it kind of warrants inclusion!

    Besides, Harry was only even at the club since October 2008, so most of that spending took place under a different regime. It doesn't look great for Comolli to be honest. Most of the high expenditure at Spurs, where we paid way over the odds for average players, occurred during the Comolli years and we were never really much better than average, certainly not enough to justify the money spent over that period. Now he's at Liverpool and most of the money they've spent has come since his arrival! Not only that, but they've now similarly overspent on average players and look no better than a 6th place team!!

    Also, it's easy to say this has been spent here and that has been spent there but when evaluating a squad and it's current successes, the only relevant information in this particular argument is how much that specific squad cost. How much we paid for Peter Crouch, for example, does not matter as he has not been part of the team that has us pushing for the title against other squads who cost much more.

    More important still is the overall cost, which would include each players' wages over the course of their contract. That is where Spurs truly come out on top as we know we spend significantly less on wages than our rivals and we always have done.

    Last edited: Jan 16, 2012
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Don Diaz Well-Known Member

    Don Diaz
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    5,769
    Location:
    england
    Ratings:
    +3,705 / 19 / -0
    I wonder what the analysis would show if you compared spending with finishing position in the league in the same season. Surely that would highlight 'buying success' rather than coaching it...I haven't done the stats but presume it would reveal why Chelski won so much a couple of years back and why Man Shitty should have won the league before now? If they got a decent coach they would be unstoppable.
  17. BurnCK New Member

    BurnCK
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2011
    Messages:
    86
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0
    Of course City have had to spend the most in the past few seasons. We were a team looking to avoid relegation so of course heavy investment was required. If we already had the core of a team then it would have been alot less, but we required a whole new team....subs included. Would if have happened otherwise ? Probably not in my lifetime.

    It is very unlikely that you can 'build' a team over years these days, as soon enough the 'big' teams will come sniffing around all your best players and then you're back to square one.
    This happened to Spurs with Carrick and Berbatov, and almost happened with Modric, just like City lost SWP to Chelsea, Everton lost Rooney to Utd, etc, etc.

    Spurs have done well in the past couple of seasons, but part of the success can also be down to the demise of teams like Liverpool and Arsenal, which have opened the door to the otherwise closed top 4. Citys 'oil money' has weakened Aston Villa who were considered your rivals for the top 4 just a couple of years ago. Arsenal have been considerably weakened by City as alot of Arsenal players have come to City and then not been replaced. I'm pretty sure that the likes of Kolo and Clichy would walk straight back into an Arsenal side who are currently defensively slack...then there's also Ade and Nasri.

    City have also pretty much given you a free 20mil striker in Adebayor. You'd most likely still have Crouch otherwise.

    English football was becoming so predictable with the same 2 or 3 teams challenging every season and then Liverpool in 4th (haha), so I don't really care about all this squad cost, history, 'right way' and such. The Prem is much more exciting than it was 3-4yrs ago.

    I'm not trying to take anything away from Spurs as you're up near the top on merit, but I just think it's alot more complicated than some of you make out.
  18. Gomesnum1fan Active Member

    Gomesnum1fan
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2009
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Ireland
    Ratings:
    +55 / 0 / -0
    Or if they hadnt of gotten rid of the best ha
  19. Mattads1882 Donator

    Mattads1882
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,769
    Location:
    Dublin , Ireland
    Ratings:
    +689 / 7 / -0
    Surely Ashely Cole's price should be up to around 15 mil since Gallas went the other way as part of the deal ?
  20. JoshShin New Member

    JoshShin
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    32
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Scott Parker - What a signing, what a steal.

Share This Page