The theory that PL players are too expensive is flawed!

[andersj]

Buying players who dont work out is too expensive. Buying superstars past their peak on a ridiculus wage is even worse.

Jurgen Klopp built his first competitive team with a core of players recruited from the PL. Some were expensive. Some were not. Henderson, Milner, Robertson, Winjaldum, Oxlade and Mane where in the range of fair to cheap/bargain. They also added van Dijk who was not.

Arsenal too have recruited heavily from the PL. Most of their signings have been more expensive. Since 2021 they have signed Ramsdale, Raya, Jorginho, Trossard, Zinchenko, Jesus, White, Havertz and Rice. In fact, very few significant signings have been from abroad.

I think Ferguson used a similar approach. And I think there is a good chance Ineos will too. Of course, if we buy a player with few minutes in the PL from a very average side playing a very different type of football (to what we want) the risk increase. Even more so if you let that club take you to the cleaners for that player. You need to be good regardless. But I think the risk should be reduced.

What options are there in the Premier League or even the Championship at the current time?

Attackers
Ivan Toney, Dominic Solanke, Cunha or Muniz?

My prefered choice would be Solanke, but if Bmth demand a Maguire-fee? feck it. Find someone else.

I would also like to give Calvert-Lewin a shout. Average npxg of 0,41 in the PL. Three seasons at 0,48 or better in the PL for a poor Everton-side. Only Cavani or Ronaldo have been at a similar level or better at Man Utd. 27 years of age. One year left of his contract. Everton need to raise funds. Would be a good option if we need a «bargain».

Biggest issue probably availablity. Contract should reflect that. If not, move on.

Midfielders
Olise, Eze, Onana, Douglas Luiz (one year left and Villa are pushing PSR), Joao Gomes, Gallagher

Defenders
Tosin, Kilman, Guehi, Andersen, Brantwaithe, Murillo, Ait-Nouri, Justin, Walker-Peters,

I have not included players I think is «out of our league» (Lucas Paqueta for instance). Maybe that is also the case for Luiz.

I think you could put that bunch above in three categories:

A: Players more than good enough and we should go for if there is funds and need
B: Players good enough for what we need and sensible given reasonable fee and need, but maybe some question marks
C: Not good enough or too soon

A: Solanke, Eze, Olise, D. Luiz
B: DCL (cheap backup), Tosin (cheap backup), Ait-Nouri, KWP, Justin, Toney (big ego, could be toxic?), Cunha, Andersen (too old for big fee?)
C: Branthwaite (too few minutes in a team that play very different football), Muniz

Kilman, Murillo, Onana, Gomes, Gallagher and Guehi? No idea to be honest. Could probably make sense if several players leave and the fee is ok.

I also hope we are more aggressive about «pay-as/if-you-play». It would make it alot easier getting rid of players not good enough. Less risk relating to injuries. Would also be a test of their motivation.

 

[Ali Dia]

The only thing is we’ve let other teams master what used to work for us. It’s going to be way harder to catch-up using the same approach as the teams above us. Plus City are the best team in the league by miles. Their foreign recruits either work out fast or get the bullet. We need a healthy mix of both approaches

Good post

 

[tomaldinho1]

It's not really a theory, it's more that most PL clubs can hold out for more money than teams in other leagues. Clubs can and do financially bully weaker clubs still but it's no longer as easy (Grealish, Rice, Caceido, Enzo, Maguire, VVD) to get them at a good age hence why PL players are more expensive for the most part. There are exceptions of course, Mac Allister's fee seems very good for Pool for example, Palmer price seems good for Chelsea

Of those players you mentioned, the same issue will arise unless they are older/their contract situation is favourable so Douglas Luis is a good shout. I would love to see Cunha here but Wolves would fleece us on the fee.

Tosin seems a no brainer to me on a free.

We don't really know Ineos' plan yet but my hope is we aren't going for these types of player anyway unless (like the two above I want) the contractual situation is good for a buying club. I would like us to be looking for younger players and actually build something whilst bulking out the squad. I am hopeful we'll see a huge amount of exits this summer from the first team and a lot of now faces.

 

[Taribo's Gap]

It's not really a theory, it's more that most PL clubs can hold out for more money than teams in other leagues. Clubs can and do financially bully weaker clubs still but it's no longer as easy (Grealish, Rice, Caceido, Enzo, Maguire, VVD) to get them at a good age hence why PL players are more expensive for the most part. There are exceptions of course, Mac Allister's fee seems very good for Pool for example, Palmer price seems good for Chelsea

Of those players you mentioned, the same issue will arise unless they are older/their contract situation is favourable so Douglas Luis is a good shout. I would love to see Cunha here but Wolves would fleece us on the fee.

Tosin seems a no brainer to me on a free.

We don't really know Ineos' plan yet but my hope is we aren't going for these types of player anyway unless (like the two above I want) the contractual situation is good for a buying club. I would like us to be looking for younger players and actually build something whilst bulking out the squad. I am hopeful we'll see a huge amount of exits this summer from the first team and a lot of now faces.

Even with those exceptions there are caveats. I would not call either of those really financial bullying. Mac Allister was on a "release clause" he negotiated with Brighton because of time served in order to facilitate his move to a bigger club. Caicedo had no such tenure and Brighton, per usual, extracted a high price and stood firm in negotiations. Palmer's move was seen as a high price at the time for someone with so little first team experience and City don't really follow the same pattern of holding out for the highest price when they sell players because they don't need the money.

United have been so profligate that there is also a bit of a United tax that the club will have to shake off. That will take some time and probably passing on a few "overpriced" targets. This kind of thing is much easier to do from a position of strength or with a higher tolerance for down years in order to set a proper tone.

 

[andersj]

It's not really a theory, it's more that most PL clubs can hold out for more money than teams in other leagues. Clubs can and do financially bully weaker clubs still but it's no longer as easy (Grealish, Rice, Caceido, Enzo, Maguire, VVD) to get them at a good age hence why PL players are more expensive for the most part. There are exceptions of course, Mac Allister's fee seems very good for Pool for example, Palmer price seems good for Chelsea

I think there is plenty of examples in my post.

In the stock market whether something is expensive or not is not just based on price, but several other aspects. Like risk. I would rather pay abit more for something on S&P500 than something not listed or listed in fecknowswhere. I agree that a player in the PL usually have a higher price. But I think, in general, the reduced risk makes it worth it. Unless you make a player on a long term contract at a team that dont have to sell your only option (Maguire, AWB).

 

[andersj]

The only thing is we’ve let other teams master what used to work for us. It’s going to be way harder to catch-up using the same approach as the teams above us.

You are probably right. But it is also easier to improve Man Utd than Arsenal, City or Liverpool. Meaning the marginal utility of some of these players are bigger at Man Utd. That is not really a good thing, but it should make it easier for Man Utd to reduce the gap than for them to increase it. If Man Utd sign Olise (and he stay fit) we will probably be a way better team. Arsenal and Liverpool will not.

We have to build step by step from here.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Agreed. My theory is due to the quality of coaching and depth of talent, there is actually less ability difference than ever between 99% of top-level pros - if you get an exceptional talent like Messi, Haaland, Mbappé etc then you have to be all-out to get them. But after that, the difference between a lot of them is purely down to ease of environment, knowing their role, confidence and most importantly, the quality of the coaching by the manager.

There are lots of players in the league at the moment playing in mid-table that would immediately improve United if they have the right coach. There are also a few midfielders for teams above us in the table that would be completely lost in Ten Hag's system.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Even with those exceptions there are caveats. I would not call either of those really financial bullying. Mac Allister was on a "release clause" he negotiated with Brighton because of time served in order to facilitate his move to a bigger club. Caicedo had no such tenure and Brighton, per usual, extracted a high price and stood firm in negotiations. Palmer's move was seen as a high price at the time for someone with so little first team experience and City don't really follow the same pattern of holding out for the highest price when they sell players because they don't need the money.

United have been so profligate that there is also a bit of a United tax that the club will have to shake off. That will take some time and probably passing on a few "overpriced" targets. This kind of thing is much easier to do from a position of strength or with a higher tolerance for down years in order to set a proper tone.

Yeah I guess Mac Allister's is technically a release clause (without being an official one).

I think there is plenty of examples in my post.

In the stock market whether something is expensive or not is not just based on price, but several other aspects. Like risk. I would rather pay abit more for something on S&P500 than something not listed or listed in fecknowswhere. I agree that a player in the PL usually have a higher price. But I think, in general, the reduced risk makes it worth it. Unless you make a player on a long term contract at a team that dont have to sell your only option (Maguire, AWB).

Is it less risky though? Let's just look at United's PL signings post SAF:

Maguire £80m.
Matic £40m
Schneiderlin £32m.
Fellaini £27m.
Mata £40m.
Mount £55m
AWB £50m.
Shaw £30m

We're overpaying for every single one by some margin and have any been successful? Shaw maybe although back then that was a huge fee and he's had 2 or 3 good seasons in his whole career.

There are equally bad ones from non PL teams but I'd say our best transfer is Bruno - by some way - and then the more good/acceptable ones are Herrera, Ibra, Dalot, technically we bought Garnacho for peanuts from Atleti I guess he can go on here, I think Martinez will be but jury remains out.

Edit. If your point is simply we should get better prices and sign better players, then obviously yes I agree.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Buying players who dont work out is too expensive. Buying superstars past their peak on a ridiculus wage is even worse.

Jurgen Klopp built his first competitive team with a core of players recruited from the PL. Some were expensive. Some were not. Henderson, Milner, Robertson, Winjaldum, Oxlade and Mane where in the range of fair to cheap/bargain. They also added van Dijk who was not.

Arsenal too have recruited heavily from the PL. Most of their signings have been more expensive. Since 2021 they have signed Ramsdale, Raya, Jorginho, Trossard, Zinchenko, Jesus, White, Havertz and Rice. In fact, very few significant signings have been from abroad.

I think Ferguson used a similar approach. And I think there is a good chance Ineos will too. Of course, if we buy a player with few minutes in the PL from a very average side playing a very different type of football (to what we want) the risk increase. Even more so if you let that club take you to the cleaners for that player. You need to be good regardless. But I think the risk should be reduced.

What options are there in the Premier League or even the Championship at the current time?

Attackers
Ivan Toney, Dominic Solanke, Cunha or Muniz?

My prefered choice would be Solanke, but if Bmth demand a Maguire-fee? feck it. Find someone else.

I would also like to give Calvert-Lewin a shout. Average npxg of 0,41 in the PL. Three seasons at 0,48 or better in the PL for a poor Everton-side. Only Cavani or Ronaldo have been at a similar level or better at Man Utd. 27 years of age. One year left of his contract. Everton need to raise funds. Would be a good option if we need a «bargain».

Biggest issue probably availablity. Contract should reflect that. If not, move on.

Midfielders
Olise, Eze, Onana, Douglas Luiz (one year left and Villa are pushing PSR), Joao Gomes, Gallagher

Defenders
Tosin, Kilman, Guehi, Andersen, Brantwaithe, Murillo, Ait-Nouri, Justin, Walker-Peters,

I have not included players I think is «out of our league» (Lucas Paqueta for instance). Maybe that is also the case for Luiz.

I think you could put that bunch above in three categories:

A: Players more than good enough and we should go for if there is funds and need
B: Players good enough for what we need and sensible given reasonable fee and need, but maybe some question marks
C: Not good enough or too soon

A: Solanke, Eze, Olise, D. Luiz
B: DCL (cheap backup), Tosin (cheap backup), Ait-Nouri, KWP, Justin, Toney (big ego, could be toxic?), Cunha, Andersen (too old for big fee?)
C: Branthwaite (too few minutes in a team that play very different football), Muniz

Kilman, Murillo, Onana, Gomes, Gallagher and Guehi? No idea to be honest. Could probably make sense if several players leave and the fee is ok.

I also hope we are more aggressive about «pay-as/if-you-play». It would make it alot easier getting rid of players not good enough. Less risk relating to injuries. Would also be a test of their motivation.

Agree with 99% of this.

 

[Alex99]

PL players are expensive though. And seem to be particularly expensive when we want to buy them (as do players from basically anywhere else, for that matter). We can hope things will improve with new people negotiating the deals.

I'm also not sure you've provided much evidence that PL players are cheap, especially as you've basically acknowledged how expensive Arsenal's PL signings have been.

• Henderson moved to Liverpool in 2011, aged 21, and cost them around £20 million. That was a fairly large fee back then.
• Oxlade-Chamberlain cost them £40 million. Given his injury record, I think that was, at best, an okay bit of business.

After that, you're looking at

• Milner on a free, which is exactly the sort of deal we have got over the line. However, you're unlikely to find many players of Milner's age still running like he was for so long. It's far more likely to pan out like the Eriksen signing.
• Wijnaldum cost them £25 million from a freshly relegated Newcastle. However, it's not often teams get relegated with that caliber of player. Maddison cost Spurs £40 million from a relegated Leicester this summer just gone.
• Even Mane cost them £36 million. It obviously worked out very well for them, but at the time it was still a fairly significant outlay. He was the fourth most expensive signing in the league that summer, behind Pogba for us and Sane and Stones for City, and was obviously Liverpool's marquee signing of that summer.

Who are we signing on a free that can offer what Milner offered Liverpool? Who are we signing from Sheffield United/Burnley/Luton that's as good as Wijnaldum? Olise seems the obvious Mane comparison, but we're not getting him for £36 million, nor is he guaranteed to stay fit. The game's moved on since Liverpool signed those players.

 

[Andycoleno9]

I used to think that "PL proven" is just an excuse. But i realised that it is not a myth. Many foreign players (including world class players) said that PL is different to other leagues and you do need time to adapt.
So, i am for slightly overspending for a player from PL but that player really needs to be a game changer.
Overspending for Olise or Toney? Yes.
Overspending for AWB or Maguire? No.

 

[andersj]

The game's moved on since Liverpool signed those players.

Always seems to be the argument. Games moved on. Have it moved on since Arsenal spent what? 80-90 percent of their funds since 2021 on PL players? They where way behind Man Utd in 2021.

 

[Teja]

Agreed. My theory is due to the quality of coaching and depth of talent, there is actually less ability difference than ever between 99% of top-level pros - if you get an exceptional talent like Messi, Haaland, Mbappé etc then you have to be all-out to get them. But after that, the difference between a lot of them is purely down to ease of environment, knowing their role, confidence and most importantly, the quality of the coaching by the manager.

There are lots of players in the league at the moment playing in mid-table that would immediately improve United if they have the right coach. There are also a few midfielders for teams above us in the table that would be completely lost in Ten Hag's system.

The flip side of this argument is that our players aren't all that bad and good coaching, man management and squad building will improve them significantly. No player is perfect (except maybe Messi). You need to pair them with the right teammates given a system you want to play.

For me I think our problem is mostly having the right squad. We tried chopping and changing coaches and that never worked and that should be enough of a clue to say it's not the manager. For example, we never had a DM next to Pogba. We played Rashford + Ronaldo when both aren't high work rate players and had to carry two players who wouldn't run. Now we're running stupid midfields like Mainoo + Eriksen and wondering why we don't have control. We pair Varane with Martinez when neither wants to be that aggressive, stopper type CB. We briefly had a decent attack with Martial, Rashford, Greenwood and Bruno but didn't invest in a midfield base behind them and stuck McTominay at DM.

I think some reasonable squad building this summer will get a lot more out of the players we have. I genuinely believe this is what Rangnick meant by open heart surgery - not that all our players are garbage and we need to throw them away - it's that the team right now is less than the sum of the parts because the players don't complement each other very well.

 

[Alex99]

Always seems to be the argument. Games moved on. Have it moved on since Arsenal spent what? 80-90 percent of their funds since 2021 on PL players? They where way behind Man Utd in 2021.

Yeah, really expensive PL players. Which completely flies in the face of your idea that they aren't that expensive.

 

[André Dominguez]

I used to think that "PL proven" is just an excuse. But i realised that it is not a myth. Many foreign players (including world class players) said that PL is different to other leagues and you do need time to adapt.
So, i am for slightly overspending for a player from PL but that player really needs to be a game changer.
Overspending for Olise or Toney? Yes.
Overspending for AWB or Maguire? No.

There's also the other way arround: Jota was an average player in Portuguese league, Jimenez couldn't even get a place on Benfica's bench during parts of the season, Ruben Neves was 3rd choice at Porto, José Sá was also 3rd choice at Porto and Toti Gomes couldn't even get minutes of gametime at a relegation level club.

I think the Premier League proven is far more complex than just players adapting to the country, I think the player personality has more to do with a successful adapting rather than a physical or technical issue.

 

[andersj]

Yeah, really expensive PL players. Which completely flies in the face of your idea that they aren't that expensive.

You think Raya, Jorginho and Trossard was «really expensive»? Even Jesus cost less than Hojlund, probably closer to Donny.

And my point is that a high price is not the same as expensive. We paid a high price for Rio and Rooney, but considering quality and age they were not expensive.

 

[Alex99]

You think Raya, Jorginho and Trossard was «really expensive»? Even Jesus cost less than Hojlund, probably closer to Donny.

And my point is that a high price is not the same as expensive. We paid a high price for Rio and Rooney, but considering quality and age they were not expensive.

They weren't all really expensive, but £105 million on Rice and £65 million on Havertz are. £50 million for White was hardly a bargain, nor was £45 million for Jesus, £30 million for Raya (having already spent £24 million on Ramsdale) or £30 million for Zinchenko.

My point is not that we can't get a "fair" price for PL players. My point is that we're unlikely to find many bargains. More often than not, first team players are likely going to cost £50 million + and squad players £30 million +. If you want true quality, you're getting close to £70 million.

I'm also not sure us overpaying for Hojlund and van de Beek should be a benchmark for anything. Expensive literally means "high price". What you're talking about is value for money, which we can't know until we've seen these players play for us.

 

[Zen86]

The price of PL players depends on who’s buying. For us, they’re expensive.

 

[andersj]

Expensive literally means "high price".

Maybe its my english, but when you are talking about an investment I disagree. Its like saying a house is expensive but an appartment (or even car) is not. Based on what?

 

[Alex99]

Maybe its my english, but when you are talking about an investment I disagree. Its like saying a house is expensive but an appartment (or even car) is not. Based on what?

We're talking about football players, so this analogy doesn't work. Houses and apartments are similar, but not the same, and cars are a different thing entirely.

Some football players are more expensive than others. Expensive players can still represent value for money, which is what you actually mean.

However, we can't judge that until they've played for us.

 

[andersj]

We're talking about football players, so this analogy doesn't work. Houses and apartments are similar, but not the same, and cars are a different thing entirely.

I still think that whether or not something is expensive have to factor in what you are getting. In other words, value. Regardless of the semantic, my point is this (and I paraphrase);

It’s far better to buy a wonderful player at a fair price than a fair player at a wonderful price.

 

[Alex99]

I still think that whether or not something is expensive have to factor in what you are getting. In other words, value. Regardless of the semantic, my point is this (and I paraphrase);

It’s far better to buy a wonderful player at a fair price than a fair player at a wonderful price.

Well, yeah. That's got almost nothing to do with your post though, which presents the idea that PL players aren't expensive.

 

[andersj]

Well, yeah. That's got almost nothing to do with your post though, which presents the idea that PL players aren't expensive.

The concept of "expensive" inherently involves a subjective judgment about the worth or value of something relative to its price.

If we look at typical dictionary definitions:

• "Expensive" is often defined as "costing a lot of money."
• "Value" can be defined as "the importance, worth, or usefulness of something."

While the dictionary definition of "expensive" directly relates to the monetary cost, it implicitly involves the idea of value because the judgment of what constitutes "a lot of money" varies depending on what the buyer feels the item is worth or the utility it provides. Therefore, something is typically deemed expensive if its cost is high relative to the value perceived by the individual or the market.

 

[Alex99]

The concept of "expensive" inherently involves a subjective judgment about the worth or value of something relative to its price.

If we look at typical dictionary definitions:

• "Expensive" is often defined as "costing a lot of money."
• "Value" can be defined as "the importance, worth, or usefulness of something."

While the dictionary definition of "expensive" directly relates to the monetary cost, it implicitly involves the idea of value because the judgment of what constitutes "a lot of money" varies depending on what the buyer feels the item is worth or the utility it provides. Therefore, something is typically deemed expensive if its cost is high relative to the value perceived by the individual or the market.

You've posted the definitions yourself and still don't get it.

To give you an example, Maguire and van Dijk were similarly expensive purchases for their respective clubs. Maguire has provided far less value for money than van Dijk.

 

[andersj]

You've posted the definitions yourself and still don't get it.

To give you an example, Maguire and van Dijk were similarly expensive purchases for their respective clubs. Maguire has provided far less value for money than van Dijk.

I think most professional investors would argue that ROI are more important than price when determining if something is expensive or not. So in my opinion, Maguire turned out expensive. van Dijk was not.

 

[Alex99]

I think most professional investors would argue that ROI are more important than price when determining if something is expensive or not. So in my opinion, Maguire turned out expensive. van Dijk was not.

And as I said, we can't know what the ROI is until they've played for us.

You're arguing value, not expense. The former is subjective, the latter objective. I'm not going over this again.

 

[andersj]

And as I said, we can't know what the ROI is until they've played for us.

You're arguing value, not expense. The former is subjective, the latter objective. I'm not going over this again.

Again, whether something is expensive or not
implicitly involves the idea of value because the judgment of what constitutes "a lot of money" varies depending on what the buyer feels the item is worth or the utility it provides.

 

[Alex99]

Again, whether something is expensive or not
implicitly involves the idea of value because the judgment of what constitutes "a lot of money" varies depending on what the buyer feels the item is worth or the utility it provides.

You've got it backwards.

Something is expensive if it costs (noticeably) more than other things of the same type (which is why your comparison of houses and cars didn't work). It is an objective description of how much something cost.

The value of something, in this context, will factor in how expensive it was, as well as the return on that investment. It is a subjective evaluation of expense versus return.

An expensive footballer can provide good value for money (e.g. van Dijk) while a cheaper, even inexpensive footballer can provide poor value for money (e.g. our loan for Amrabat).

A good value signing can be expensive (e.g. van Dijk) or inexpensive (e.g. Robertson) and a poor value signing can be expensive (e.g. Antony) or inexpensive (e.g. Amrabat).

For the last time, you've got the word wrong. The fact you've repeated "it's implicit" multiple times should tell you that. Definitions are not implicit about the meaning of a word.

 

[andersj]

It is an objective description of how much something cost.

If you generally are accustomed to using the word in a meaningless, pointless and really, really stupid way, you are probably right.

 

[Alex99]

If you generally are accustomed to using the word in a meaningless, pointless and really, really stupid way, you are probably right.

In the correct way, yes.

 

[NoPace]

Looking at guys that Transfermarkt says has 2 years left from Prem teams outside the top teams:

Guehi, Adingra, Ait-Nouri stand out as guys who have played well and their teams might be willing to sell for not completely insane fees rather than have them run down their contracts, though you'd imagine Brighton could just give Adingra a raise.