Have state funded oil clubs ruined football?

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

City & PSG, clubs funded by the UAE & Qatar respectively, with a bottomless pit of cash the like of which we’ve never seen in the history of football. Have they ruined football for you?

If im being honest, right now I’d say no, although this is the first summer where I’ve started to worry for the future of the game. City spending a potential 250m on 2 players, fielding a squad worth nearly 1 billion pounds in transfer fees. PSG filling their team with superstars & amassing the highest wage bill in the history if sport. If these two keep this up for the next decade I think the game could be gone.

Theres reports this morning PSG are willing to offer Pogba 600k a week with a 30m signing on fee. And you just know if they do get him next summer he won’t be their only signing. When will this madness end?

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

The financial disparities have been ruining football and the oil clubs are just the most blatant example of it.

The good thing is that if the PL is dominated by City, it would make all major leagues dominated by 1-2 clubs and hopefully mark the beginning of the end of this garbage.

 

[Sleigh]

You can only field 11 players.

It just makes it that more bitter sweet when you beat them.

I still can’t see PSG winning the champions league, even with Messi. They don’t have enough steal and determination.

I’d argue and state that Manchester City have wasted money on Grealish as he’s not a great improvement on what they have. Kane doesn’t fit the system.

What these clubs have done, like Chelsea, Madrid and Barca before them, has wasted money.

 

[B20]

Have they ruined football? No. It's not presently in ruins. Have they been detrimental to european football in many ways and will they continue to be so? Yes and yes.

Mind you, teams like barca would find ways of ruining themselves for other reasons down the line anyway, as there is no substitute for incompetence.

 

[gajender]

No they haven't and they won't in the future either, before them Chelsea were suppose to be major culprit with their billions but they are more less Run as business now similar thing would happen to City and Psg as well they will try to become self sustaining with occasional spending spree just like any other major Club in not so distant future.

 

[Andy_Cole]

If these clubs did not exist would the likes of Barca, inter Milan, Madrid be in financial ruin? Not to mention the likes of Arsenal and Newcastle plummeting down and down.

They have made it more difficult to compete. But the EPL does have a lot of money. So on a large it is handling the financial pressures the oil clubs have brought.

 

[RoyH1]

Ruined is perhaps a bit excessive. They are adulterating football as a competition, no doubt about it, but football will still be here regardless of what they do. People will still come to stadiums to see their local competitions. Perhaps some will tune out of the Champions League considering it will become even harder to win.

My hope is that once they get their desired outcomes (the Emir with the CL trophy and the resulting PR for their country from it) , they'll tire of it and move on, leaving their clubs in autopilot.

The nightmare scenario is other countries thinking that this is a good idea and then we suddenly have a sovereign wealth fund arms race.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Not really, well for me anyway.

 

[GazTheLegend]

City & PSG, clubs funded by the UAE & Qatar respectively, with a bottomless pit of cash the like of which we’ve never seen in the history of football. Have they ruined football for you?

Honestly? Look at the semi finals of the CL last year. Did anyone give a flying feck which one of those soulless orgs won?

They've not ruined football for me, at least not yet, and certain rules (squad sizes and homegrown player rules) mean that there is only so much they can do. But they've been an absolutely insidious influence everywhere - on the sporting bodies, on transfer fees and wages, on fans, and even on journalists who they pay off for positive coverage.

 

[Bubz27]

You can only field 11 players.

This is a bad argument and the fact that city have won 4 league cups in a row, whilst maintaining a serious league threat and a growing European threat show how important a squad full of £40-50m players are.

 

[Wumminator]

Yes. Massively.

 

[LoneStar]

You can only field 11 players.

It just makes it that more bitter sweet when you beat them.

I still can’t see PSG winning the champions league, even with Messi. They don’t have enough steal and determination.

I’d argue and state that Manchester City have wasted money on Grealish as he’s not a great improvement on what they have. Kane doesn’t fit the system.

What these clubs have done, like Chelsea, Madrid and Barca before them, has wasted money.

Spending millions each year, with no impact on finances will lead to trophies eventually (it's obviously happening with City already).

Madrid and Barca are dicey examples, but still, they are limited by their finances. Barca tried to spend like crazy and look where they are now. But City will never face that, they can still afford to spend 100s of millions.

 

[pratyush_utd]

Yes. I don't have an issue with private funding. But people who run countries should not be allowed. It's unfair competition.

Imagine if tomorrow Government starts selling commercial products like TV and then make it dirt cheap because it can and take out the competition. How is that scenario different to what we are seeing in football?

Football is still great but competition is slowly becoming unfair. I am okay with private funding of a club like Chelsea but City/PSG are step too far in my opinion

 

[duffer]

Nah, football's still great.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

You can only field 11 players.
It just makes it that more bitter sweet when you beat them.

Think you mean "sweet" there.

I’d argue and state that Manchester City have wasted money on Grealish as he’s not a great improvement on what they have. Kane doesn’t fit the system.

Graelish could probably be an improvement on what other clubs have, but he isn't there because City were the ones who could pay this much money for him. That's the issue, really.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

I don’t think gajender understands the bottomless pit that is City & PSG. Why would they ever give two shits about being “self sufficient”?

 

[LoneStar]

This is a bad argument and the fact that city have won 4 league cups in a row, whilst maintaining a serious league threat and a growing European threat show how important a squad full of £40-50m players are.

Look at how the absence of VVD affected Pool. It's not about the starting 11, it's about the depth of the squad if you go deep in all competitions. City have such a strong bench that a long term injury to one of their key players doesn't make too much of a difference.

 

[jackal&hyde]

If it continues like this, with the other "big" clubs having to go in to major debt to compete in fees and wages, then we will get there. We are already at the point where the 2 state backed clubs and the one oligarch backed one are the first 3 favorites for the CL. You can still find exceptional players or get lucky with the academy, but sooner or later you will lose them due to the wages discrepancy.

 

[RoyH1]

Spending millions each year, with no impact on finances will lead to trophies eventually (it's obviously happening with City already).

Madrid and Barca are dicey examples, but still, they are limited by their finances. Barca tried to spend like crazy and look where they are now. But City will never face that, they can still afford to spend 100s of millions.

Even Madrid has to have lean years where they don't buy players. They haven't purchased a single player since the Mendy/Hazard spending spree in 2019 and sold several players in that time frame.

City and PSG are the only clubs that don't have to balance the books. There's no price to pay.

 

[Carl]

City blowing us out of the water with what they can spend on fees and wages is only like us blowing clubs out of the water previously.

You can say that we earned that money legitimately etc etc but the end result is still the same, which is massive financial disparity.

You could actually argue the money into City and Chelsea is positive. If anything its only lead to a more competitive league, whereas had it not happened there would probably be only 1 or 2 teams with a realistic chance of winning the league.

 

[Zehner]

What ruined football is the system. The core of the whole problem is that you can just buy success. You don't even have an outside chance of winning something without huge financial backing.

If there was only so much you could do with money, simply outspending the opposition wouldn't be enough.

 

[pass.pass.pass]

No they haven't and they won't in the future either, before them Chelsea were suppose to be major culprit with their billions but they are more less Run as business now similar thing would happen to City and Psg as well they will try to become self sustaining with occasional spending spree just like any other major Club in not so distant future.

Chelsea are owned by 1 single billionaire. City and PSG are owned by nation states. Big difference. Unlike Abramovich, the states have no interest in making their clubs self sustaining in the long run. As long as they can get around the weak rules, they will.

 

[Hastar]

Stated owned teams aren't a problem. The problem is governing bodies inability to apply FFP.
Make the rules stringent on spending, and punish the guilty. These teams will then stop spending astronomical amounts.

On a side note, these teams have definitely distorted the transfer market.

 

[Lay]

The financial muscle in the EPL in general is not good for European football.

 

[jackal&hyde]

City blowing us out of the water with what they can spend on fees and wages is only like us blowing clubs out of the water previously.

You can say that we earned that money legitimately etc etc but the end result is still the same, which is massive financial disparity.

You could actually argue the money into City and Chelsea is positive. If anything its only lead to a more competitive league, whereas had it not happened there would probably be only 1 or 2 teams with a realistic chance of winning the league.

Biggest spenders in PL history by season:

Spoiler: spending

1992/93

The biggest spenders: Blackburn
The spend: £8.46m
The signings: Alan Shearer, Duncan Shearer, Kevin Gallacher, Frank Talia, Patrik Andersson, Stuart Ripley, Graeme Le Saux, Nicky Marker, Simon Ireland, Wayne Burnett, Henning Berg, Lee Makel, Tim Sherwood
The biggest signing: Alan Shearer (£3.4m, Southampton)
The finish: 4th

1993/94
The biggest spenders: Blackburn
The spend: £8.5m
The signings: Tim Flowers, David Batty, Ian Pearce, Paul Warhurst, Paul Harford, Andy Morrison
The biggest signing: David Batty (£2.75m, Leeds)
The finish: 2nd

1994/95
The biggest spenders: Everton
The spend: £10.9m
The signings: Earl Barrett, Duncan Ferguson, David Burrows, Daniel Amokachi, Vinny Samways
The biggest signing: Duncan Ferguson (£4m, Rangers)
The finish: 15th

1995/96
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £24.5m
The signings: Shaka Hislop, Les Ferdinand, David Batty, David Ginola, Warren Barton, Darren Huckerby, Faustino Asprilla
The biggest signing: Faustino Asprilla (£6.7m, Parma)
The finish: 2nd

1996/97
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £17.5m
The signings: Alan Shearer, Des Hamilton
The biggest signing: Alan Shearer (£15m, Blackburn)
The finish: 2nd

1997/98
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £24.65m
The signings: Paddy Kelly, Shay Given, Temuri Ketsbaia, Jon Dahl Tomasson, Stuart Pearce, Alessandro Pistone, Brian Pinas, John Barnes, Ian Rush, Carlos Gonzalez, Ralf Keidel, Paul Dalglish, David Terrier, Andreas Andersson, Andy Griffin, Gary Speed, James Coppinger, Paul Robinson, Stephen Glass, Nikos Dabizas
The biggest signing: Gary Speed (£5.5m, Everton)
The finish: 13th


1998/99
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £29.35m
The signings: Jaap Stam, Russell Best, Jesper Blomqvist, John O’Shea, Dwight Yorke, Bojan Djordjic
The biggest signing: Dwight Yorke (£12.6m, Aston Villa)
The finish: 1st


1999/2000
The biggest spenders: Liverpool
The spend: £35.9m
The signings: Sami Hyypiä, Titi Camara, Sander Westerveld, Stéphane Henchoz, Dietmar Hamann, Vladimír Šmicer, Emile Heskey, Erik Meijer, Jon Newby
The biggest signing: Emile Heskey (£11m, Leicester)
The finish: 4th


2000/01
The biggest spenders: Leeds
The spend: £48.7m
The signings: Olivier Dacourt, Mark Viduka, Dominic Matteo, Jacob Burns, Rio Ferdinand, Robbie Keane
The biggest signing: Rio Ferdinand (£18m, West Ham)
The finish: 4th


2001/02
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £58.6m
The signings: Roy Carroll, Ruud van Nistelrooy, Juan Sebastián Verón, Laurent Blanc, Diego Forlán, Luke Steele
The biggest signing: Juan Sebastián Verón (£29.1m, Lazio)
The finish: 3rd


2002/03
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £30.6m
The signings: Rio Ferdinand, Ricardo
The biggest signing: Rio Ferdinand (£29.1m)
The finish: 1st

2003/04
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £121.5m
The signings: Jürgen Macho, Marco Ambrosio, Glen Johnson, Geremi, Wayne Bridge, Damien Duff, Joe Cole, Juan Sebastián Verón, Adrian Mutu, Alexey Smertin, Hernán Crespo, Neil Sullivan, Claude Makélélé, Scott Parker
The biggest signing: Damien Duff (£17m, Blackburn)
The finish: 2nd


2004/05
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £94.45m
The signings: Paulo Ferreira, Petr Čech, Arjen Robben, Mateja Kežman, Didier Drogba, Tiago, Ricardo Carvalho, Nuno Morais, Jiří Jarošík
The biggest signing: Didier Drogba (£24m, Marseille)
The finish: 1st


2005/06
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £54.4m
The signings: Asier del Horno, Lassana Diarra, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Michael Essien, Maniche
The biggest signing: Michael Essien (£24.4m, Lyon)
The finish: 1st


2006/07
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £56.5m
The signings: Michael Ballack, Salomon Kalou, Andriy Shevchenko, John Obi Mikel, Khalid Boulahrouz, Ashley Cole
The biggest signing: Andriy Shevchenko (£30.8m)
The finish: 2nd


2007/08
The biggest spenders: Liverpool
The spend: £69.3m
The signings: Andriy Voronin, Yossi Benayoun, Fernando Torres, Ryan Babel, Lucas, Charles Itandje, Krisztián Németh, Nikolay Mihaylov, Emiliano Insúa, Ryan Crowther, Sebastián Leto, Damien Plessis, Martin Škrtel, Javier Mascherano
The biggest signing: Fernando Torres (£20m, Atletico Madrid)
The finish: 4th


2008/09
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £119.35m
The signings: Jô, Tal Ben Haim, Vincent Kompany, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Pablo Zabaleta, Gláuber, Robinho, Wayne Bridge, Craig Bellamy, Nigel de Jong, Shay Given
The biggest signing: Robinho (£32.5m, Real Madrid)
The finish: 10th


2009/110 The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £125.5m
The signings: Gareth Barry, Roque Santa Cruz, Stuart Taylor, Carlos Tevez, Emmanuel Adebayor, Kolo Touré, Sylvinho, Joleon Lescott, Patrick Vieira, Adam Johnson
The biggest signing: Carlos Tevez (£25.5m, MSI)
The finish: 5th


2010/11
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £152m
The signings: Jérôme Boateng, Yaya Touré, David Silva, Aleksandar Kolarov, Mario Balotelli, James Milner, Edin Džeko
The biggest signing: Edin Džeko (£27m, Wolfsburg)
The finish: 3rd


2011/12
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £79.2m
The signings: Thibaut Courtois, Oriol Romeu, Romelu Lukaku, Juan Mata, Ulises Davila, Raul Meireles, Sam Hutchinson, Kenneth Omeruo, Gary Cahill, Lucas Piazon, Patrick Bamford, Kevin de Bruyne
The biggest signing: Juan Mata (£23.5m, Valencia)
The finish: 6th


2012/13
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £86.1m
The signings: Lamisha Musonda, Charly Musonda, Tika Musonda, Andreas Christensen, Marko Marin, Eden Hazard, Thorgan Hazard, Oscar, César Azpilicueta, Victor Moses, Wallace, Demba Ba
The biggest signing: Eden Hazard (£32m, Lille)
The finish: 3rd


2013/14
The biggest spenders: Tottenham
The spend: £109m
The signings: Paulinho, Nacer Chadli, Roberto Soldado, Étienne Capoue, Vlad Chiricheș, Christian Eriksen, Érik Lamela
The biggest signing: Érik Lamela (£30m, Roma)
The finish: 6th


2014/15
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £147.2m
The signings: Ander Herrera, Luke Shaw, Vanja Milinković-Savić, Marcos Rojo, Ángel di María, Daley Blind, Timothy Fosu-Mensah, Víctor Valdés, Sadiq El Fitouri
The biggest signing: Ángel di María (£59.7m, Real Madrid)
The finish: 4th


2015/16
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £149.6m
The signings: Kevin de Bruyne, Raheem Sterling, Nicolás Otamendi, Patrick Roberts, Fabian Delph, Enes Ünal, Anthony Caceres, Florian Lejeune, Rubén Sobrino, Luke Brattan
The biggest signing: Kevin de Bruyne (£55m, Wolfsburg)
The finish: 4th


2016/17
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £171.5m
The signings: Ilkay Gündoğan, Nolito, Oleksandr Zinchenko, Leroy Sané, Marlos Moreno, John Stones, Claudio Bravo, Gabriel Jesus
The biggest signing: John Stones (£47.5m, Everton)
The finish: 3rd


2017/18
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £278.7m
The signings: Bernardo Silva, Ederson, Kyle Walker, Douglas Luiz, Danilo, Benjamin Mendy, Olarenwaju Kayode, Aymeric Laporte, Jack Harrison
The biggest signing: Aymeric Laporte (£57m, Athletic Bilbao)
The finish: 1st


2018/19
The biggest spenders: Liverpool, kind of
The spend: £165.45m
The signings: Naby Keita, Fabinho, Xherdan Shaqiri, Alisson
The biggest signing: Alisson (£56m, Roma)
The finish: 2nd


2019/20
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £192.6m
The signings: Harry Maguire, Aaron Wan-Bissaka, Bruno Fernandes, Daniel James
The biggest signing: Harry Maguire (£80m, Leicester City)
The finish: 3rd


2020/21
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £222.5m
The signings: Hakim Ziyech, Timo Werner, Ben Chilwell, Thiago Silva, Kai Havertz, Edouard Mendy
The biggest signing: Kai Havertz (£72m, Bayer Leverkusen)
The finish: Likely 3rd or 4th

We were outspend by many clubs many times. 29 seasons we spent the most in 5 seasons. This notion that we were doing what Chelsea and City are doing since their ownership change is nonsense. Occasionally we would spend big on one player. Fact of the matter is we were an exceptionally well run club on and off the pitch from manager, academy, comercial, transfer targets and scouting and that is what gave us our edge. An example for how a club should be run imo. To compare that with being state owned is ludicrous.

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

This is a bad argument and the fact that city have won 4 league cups in a row, whilst maintaining a serious league threat and a growing European threat show how important a squad full of £40-50m players are.

Exactly. Liverpool lost van Dijk for a season & collapsed. I suspect something similar would happen to us if Bruno went down for a long time. City have won 2 league titles with de Bruyne missing the majority of the seasons.

 

[adexkola]

Yawn.

Do you not ever get tired of fans of big clubs complaining about how the new comers ruined football which was this pristine paradise prior?

Anyways carry on.

 

[jackal&hyde]

Stated owned teams aren't a problem. The problem is governing bodies inability to apply FFP.
Make the rules stringent on spending, and punish the guilty. These teams will then stop spending astronomical amounts.

On a side note, these teams have definitely distorted the transfer market.

They do do it to everyone, even Chelsea, Madrid and Barca; it's just the 2 that get away with it because the influence of a super rich country is much to powerful to combat for a sport organization like UEFA. Fixing this would probably require EU and UK intervention but they have their own interests. It's too late basically.

 

[RedRover]

In the context of the PL, I believe not. Pre Chelsea, United had already become a business more than a football club and whether through their own shrewdness or otherwise, the financial gap between them and other clubs would have increased year on year. The PL wouldn't have been anywhere near as competitive as it is now and as a product, it's be much less appealing.

It's worth remembering, Real Madrid were spending mega money well before Chelsea, City and PSG, and Barca have ruined themselves trying to keep up.

Generally though, it depends what you consider "ruining football" to mean. People have been saying the spending is unsustainable for years - well before "oil " clubs, and it's never happened.

 

[R'hllor]

Not at all, if you think football is in ruins, that shit started before them.

 

[GazTheLegend]

Stated owned teams aren't a problem.

So you would be fine if, say, the Chinese government bought Manchester United?

 

[RedSinha]

Ignoring the very material problems they impose which I'm sure people will talk about here, I just feel like they've ruined football for themselves. There's nothing romantic about a billion dollar team with all the best players winning all the time. There's always room for the underdog, and it's so weird to think that even United with all our riches can be considered an underdog in the face of oil funded clubs.

Defeating them brings the ultimate joy, just look at Leicester and Liverpool in the last few years, even if Liverpool are bigger than City as a football club. Clubs like City and PSG have taken on a supervillain identity for all the other clubs.

 

[LoneStar]

City blowing us out of the water with what they can spend on fees and wages is only like us blowing clubs out of the water previously.

You can say that we earned that money legitimately etc etc but the end result is still the same, which is massive financial disparity.

You could actually argue the money into City and Chelsea is positive. If anything its only lead to a more competitive league, whereas had it not happened there would probably be only 1 or 2 teams with a realistic chance of winning the league.

The difference is that we still had restrictions with our finances since we had to sustain ourselves.

City can spend 250M this summer and 250M again next summer with no problem. No big club can compete with that.

 

[Kingantti1874]

The death of real competition began in 1990 with sky and the premiership. The oil clubs are a consequence of that

 

[Bertie Wooster]

I've no problem with some teams / nations having more money, coming from a city / country with a bigger population and better facilities than others, having a bigger ground, etc. That sort of advantage has always been part of the game and other sports.

My biggest problem is with the City Group type set up - similar to Watford / Udinese /Granada - with owners owning many other clubs around the world and being able to do deals with each other and loan quality players to their smaller clubs, pay big transfer fees to help them, etc. I think that's a huge conflict of interest, especially in the FFP era.

When we had our era of dominance we were just one club. Bigger than others, and with a better manager, but still one club. City forming an 'empire' with fingers in many pies for me 'changes football' for the worse far more than the usual situation of 'bigger clubs with more money can attract the better players and managers' - but with just a change in the teams involved.

 

[nuanced]

Biggest spenders in PL history by season:

Spoiler: spending

1992/93

The biggest spenders: Blackburn
The spend: £8.46m
The signings: Alan Shearer, Duncan Shearer, Kevin Gallacher, Frank Talia, Patrik Andersson, Stuart Ripley, Graeme Le Saux, Nicky Marker, Simon Ireland, Wayne Burnett, Henning Berg, Lee Makel, Tim Sherwood
The biggest signing: Alan Shearer (£3.4m, Southampton)
The finish: 4th

1993/94
The biggest spenders: Blackburn
The spend: £8.5m
The signings: Tim Flowers, David Batty, Ian Pearce, Paul Warhurst, Paul Harford, Andy Morrison
The biggest signing: David Batty (£2.75m, Leeds)
The finish: 2nd

1994/95
The biggest spenders: Everton
The spend: £10.9m
The signings: Earl Barrett, Duncan Ferguson, David Burrows, Daniel Amokachi, Vinny Samways
The biggest signing: Duncan Ferguson (£4m, Rangers)
The finish: 15th

1995/96
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £24.5m
The signings: Shaka Hislop, Les Ferdinand, David Batty, David Ginola, Warren Barton, Darren Huckerby, Faustino Asprilla
The biggest signing: Faustino Asprilla (£6.7m, Parma)
The finish: 2nd

1996/97
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £17.5m
The signings: Alan Shearer, Des Hamilton
The biggest signing: Alan Shearer (£15m, Blackburn)
The finish: 2nd

1997/98
The biggest spenders: Newcastle
The spend: £24.65m
The signings: Paddy Kelly, Shay Given, Temuri Ketsbaia, Jon Dahl Tomasson, Stuart Pearce, Alessandro Pistone, Brian Pinas, John Barnes, Ian Rush, Carlos Gonzalez, Ralf Keidel, Paul Dalglish, David Terrier, Andreas Andersson, Andy Griffin, Gary Speed, James Coppinger, Paul Robinson, Stephen Glass, Nikos Dabizas
The biggest signing: Gary Speed (£5.5m, Everton)
The finish: 13th


1998/99
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £29.35m
The signings: Jaap Stam, Russell Best, Jesper Blomqvist, John O’Shea, Dwight Yorke, Bojan Djordjic
The biggest signing: Dwight Yorke (£12.6m, Aston Villa)
The finish: 1st


1999/2000
The biggest spenders: Liverpool
The spend: £35.9m
The signings: Sami Hyypiä, Titi Camara, Sander Westerveld, Stéphane Henchoz, Dietmar Hamann, Vladimír Šmicer, Emile Heskey, Erik Meijer, Jon Newby
The biggest signing: Emile Heskey (£11m, Leicester)
The finish: 4th


2000/01
The biggest spenders: Leeds
The spend: £48.7m
The signings: Olivier Dacourt, Mark Viduka, Dominic Matteo, Jacob Burns, Rio Ferdinand, Robbie Keane
The biggest signing: Rio Ferdinand (£18m, West Ham)
The finish: 4th


2001/02
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £58.6m
The signings: Roy Carroll, Ruud van Nistelrooy, Juan Sebastián Verón, Laurent Blanc, Diego Forlán, Luke Steele
The biggest signing: Juan Sebastián Verón (£29.1m, Lazio)
The finish: 3rd


2002/03
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £30.6m
The signings: Rio Ferdinand, Ricardo
The biggest signing: Rio Ferdinand (£29.1m)
The finish: 1st

2003/04
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £121.5m
The signings: Jürgen Macho, Marco Ambrosio, Glen Johnson, Geremi, Wayne Bridge, Damien Duff, Joe Cole, Juan Sebastián Verón, Adrian Mutu, Alexey Smertin, Hernán Crespo, Neil Sullivan, Claude Makélélé, Scott Parker
The biggest signing: Damien Duff (£17m, Blackburn)
The finish: 2nd


2004/05
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £94.45m
The signings: Paulo Ferreira, Petr Čech, Arjen Robben, Mateja Kežman, Didier Drogba, Tiago, Ricardo Carvalho, Nuno Morais, Jiří Jarošík
The biggest signing: Didier Drogba (£24m, Marseille)
The finish: 1st


2005/06
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £54.4m
The signings: Asier del Horno, Lassana Diarra, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Michael Essien, Maniche
The biggest signing: Michael Essien (£24.4m, Lyon)
The finish: 1st


2006/07
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £56.5m
The signings: Michael Ballack, Salomon Kalou, Andriy Shevchenko, John Obi Mikel, Khalid Boulahrouz, Ashley Cole
The biggest signing: Andriy Shevchenko (£30.8m)
The finish: 2nd


2007/08
The biggest spenders: Liverpool
The spend: £69.3m
The signings: Andriy Voronin, Yossi Benayoun, Fernando Torres, Ryan Babel, Lucas, Charles Itandje, Krisztián Németh, Nikolay Mihaylov, Emiliano Insúa, Ryan Crowther, Sebastián Leto, Damien Plessis, Martin Škrtel, Javier Mascherano
The biggest signing: Fernando Torres (£20m, Atletico Madrid)
The finish: 4th


2008/09
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £119.35m
The signings: Jô, Tal Ben Haim, Vincent Kompany, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Pablo Zabaleta, Gláuber, Robinho, Wayne Bridge, Craig Bellamy, Nigel de Jong, Shay Given
The biggest signing: Robinho (£32.5m, Real Madrid)
The finish: 10th


2009/110 The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £125.5m
The signings: Gareth Barry, Roque Santa Cruz, Stuart Taylor, Carlos Tevez, Emmanuel Adebayor, Kolo Touré, Sylvinho, Joleon Lescott, Patrick Vieira, Adam Johnson
The biggest signing: Carlos Tevez (£25.5m, MSI)
The finish: 5th


2010/11
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £152m
The signings: Jérôme Boateng, Yaya Touré, David Silva, Aleksandar Kolarov, Mario Balotelli, James Milner, Edin Džeko
The biggest signing: Edin Džeko (£27m, Wolfsburg)
The finish: 3rd


2011/12
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £79.2m
The signings: Thibaut Courtois, Oriol Romeu, Romelu Lukaku, Juan Mata, Ulises Davila, Raul Meireles, Sam Hutchinson, Kenneth Omeruo, Gary Cahill, Lucas Piazon, Patrick Bamford, Kevin de Bruyne
The biggest signing: Juan Mata (£23.5m, Valencia)
The finish: 6th


2012/13
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £86.1m
The signings: Lamisha Musonda, Charly Musonda, Tika Musonda, Andreas Christensen, Marko Marin, Eden Hazard, Thorgan Hazard, Oscar, César Azpilicueta, Victor Moses, Wallace, Demba Ba
The biggest signing: Eden Hazard (£32m, Lille)
The finish: 3rd


2013/14
The biggest spenders: Tottenham
The spend: £109m
The signings: Paulinho, Nacer Chadli, Roberto Soldado, Étienne Capoue, Vlad Chiricheș, Christian Eriksen, Érik Lamela
The biggest signing: Érik Lamela (£30m, Roma)
The finish: 6th


2014/15
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £147.2m
The signings: Ander Herrera, Luke Shaw, Vanja Milinković-Savić, Marcos Rojo, Ángel di María, Daley Blind, Timothy Fosu-Mensah, Víctor Valdés, Sadiq El Fitouri
The biggest signing: Ángel di María (£59.7m, Real Madrid)
The finish: 4th


2015/16
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £149.6m
The signings: Kevin de Bruyne, Raheem Sterling, Nicolás Otamendi, Patrick Roberts, Fabian Delph, Enes Ünal, Anthony Caceres, Florian Lejeune, Rubén Sobrino, Luke Brattan
The biggest signing: Kevin de Bruyne (£55m, Wolfsburg)
The finish: 4th


2016/17
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £171.5m
The signings: Ilkay Gündoğan, Nolito, Oleksandr Zinchenko, Leroy Sané, Marlos Moreno, John Stones, Claudio Bravo, Gabriel Jesus
The biggest signing: John Stones (£47.5m, Everton)
The finish: 3rd


2017/18
The biggest spenders: Manchester City
The spend: £278.7m
The signings: Bernardo Silva, Ederson, Kyle Walker, Douglas Luiz, Danilo, Benjamin Mendy, Olarenwaju Kayode, Aymeric Laporte, Jack Harrison
The biggest signing: Aymeric Laporte (£57m, Athletic Bilbao)
The finish: 1st


2018/19
The biggest spenders: Liverpool, kind of
The spend: £165.45m
The signings: Naby Keita, Fabinho, Xherdan Shaqiri, Alisson
The biggest signing: Alisson (£56m, Roma)
The finish: 2nd


2019/20
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: £192.6m
The signings: Harry Maguire, Aaron Wan-Bissaka, Bruno Fernandes, Daniel James
The biggest signing: Harry Maguire (£80m, Leicester City)
The finish: 3rd


2020/21
The biggest spenders: Chelsea
The spend: £222.5m
The signings: Hakim Ziyech, Timo Werner, Ben Chilwell, Thiago Silva, Kai Havertz, Edouard Mendy
The biggest signing: Kai Havertz (£72m, Bayer Leverkusen)
The finish: Likely 3rd or 4th

We were outspend by many clubs many times. 29 seasons we spent the most in 5 seasons. This notion that we were doing what Chelsea and City are doing since their ownership change is nonsense. Occasionally we would spend big on one player. Fact of the matter is we were an exceptionally well run club on and off the pitch from manager, academy, comercial, transfer targets and scouting and that is what gave us our edge. An example for how a club should be run imo. To compare that with being state owned is ludicrous.

Do you happen to have the data for top three spenders before the Roman period (no doubt Chelsea and City have been dominant spending wise since then)? Would love to see the same data aggregated over a few years (3 or 5) to get a better idea of who consistent spent in the top x% percentile.

 

[nuanced]

Can this discussion be done in this thread - Oil club spending. It has lots of in-depth back and forth on this topic, and has already covered most of the issues brought up on this page.

 

[dalriada]

You can include with the oil states the likes of Abramovich, whose money came from the sell-off of state assets for peanuts.

I wouldn't go as far as to say ruined, but their ability to spend without having to worry too much about balancing the books in the short term has contributed to a cycle of ever increasing transfer and player costs. If you look at Man City as an example and where they were a few years ago, it's difficult not to say they've bought titles, so the oil-state owners have contributed to a sort of arms race. As supporters, we end up paying for some of that, although it would be wrong to ascribe it all to big-money owners. If you asked a club like Burnley if the money's ruining the game, they will say, yes, definitely, but equally we don't want to be watching nothing more than Burnley-style football because there's not enough money in the game.

You have to look at the ethics as well. Many people who are not big-club supporters think the wages and transfer prices are obscene, and with oil states the club owners are effectively stealing the wealth of the countries they rule, usually without any mandate from their populations, to fund their football interests. For all the legitimate criticism of the Glazers, I wouldn't want Utd to fall into the hands of, say, the Saudis.

 

[ivaldo]

City blowing us out of the water with what they can spend on fees and wages is only like us blowing clubs out of the water previously.

You can say that we earned that money legitimately etc etc but the end result is still the same, which is massive financial disparity.

You could actually argue the money into City and Chelsea is positive. If anything its only lead to a more competitive league, whereas had it not happened there would probably be only 1 or 2 teams with a realistic chance of winning the league.

It's not the same though. We still had a budget. We were restricted by who we could buy and when. We wouldn't have been nearly as dominant if we didnt have the Class of 92' come through our youth system. But if we were City, we could've just bought the class of 92', and if it didn't work, we could buy another 6. We had a budget, and that budget was effected by how successful we had been. That simply doesn't apply to City.

 

[JPRouve]

No. Football hasn't really changed.