5th columnist

[Sir X]

In other words you make up your own shitstem to justify B.S ,because what you are saying is your personal theory that would not fly in the real world,There is a reason teams have budgets and all that is included in it,free transfers and loans come at a cost,they have a price that bears on a teams ability to purchase players outright ,why because of salaries , case in point Gerrad his salary is rumored in 150k per week,thats about 6 million per season.A fortune to mid and relegation teams.Or even Milner thats 6 million pool doesnt have to spend to purchase miller.Value of squad is heavily dependent on all of these factors ,you cant exclude any,but in your ignorance to prove your point,you come up with voodoo economics.


How in the world would you explain that to midtable/relegation clubs,they would crack up laughing.Only on this site can you promote nonsense.

Your spin is feeble,get Peter to help you out,yuh looking ridiculous.I will put it to you bluntly,money spent on players is money spent and it should equal to your league position unless yuh ave a RUCKS coach,another thing,yuh nuh too smart.

[Paul Marin]

Their you go ,how do you deal with loans ,Falco cost man u a rumored 250 k a week , which would probably be the entire payroll for the teams fighting relegation,thats a third or quater of the prem ,you have the balls to tell them that man u having having that money to spend doesnt increase the chances of their league position and of course squad value ?


Claffy...money spent !liver pool have a loanee too ,in fact many do.Your narrow narrative only makes you look like yuhself,stupid.

Eediat...what did I say? There are two things I told you:

1. Overall value = the total value of a squad, independent of how much was spent to amass that squad; e.g. cost of Milner $0 but increased squad value by £12m - IT IS NO DYAM DIFFERENT FOR FALCAO
2. Wage bill = the salaries paid each week to a squad

Milner increased squad value by £12m and added £150k/week to the wage bill, for $0 in "money spent".

I guess you are too thick to understand that I have been referring to "money spent" in the way you have been referring to it all season when you was cussing Rodgers off for spending £100m in transfer fees. I also said that until the transfer season done, you can't know the final number. How hard is that for your concrete brain to understand?????? You are too much of a dyam two-face-flip-floppin-turncoat-donkey-wid-no-dyam-sense-at-all...no ****** sense whatsoever.

Thank god u run go a Citeh. Tan ova deh an leave we out. Brains! LOL! What you think of this post? http://www.reggaeboyzsc.com/forum1/showthread.php?p=378365&highlight=City+Liverpool#p ost378365

[Sir X]

Their you go ,how do you deal with loans ,Falco cost man u a rumored 250 k a week , which would probably be the entire payroll for the teams fighting relegation,thats a third or quater of the prem ,you have the balls to tell them that man u having having that money to spend doesnt increase the chances of their league position and of course squad value ?


Claffy...money spent !liver pool have a loanee too ,in fact many do.Your narrow narrative only makes you look like yuhself,stupid.

[Paul Marin]

Really , explain free transfers , Milner to liverpool and pirrilo,pogba to juventus ,money spent be it purchase or free transfer where wages are demanded , are supposed to do one thing to a team , add to its value ,hence the value to sell before value is declined.Dont speak for me , speak for paul .

Paul stated as much about value to team , apparently he sees the correlation ,how and when do you seperate the two,how can you ? they are supposed to do one thing ,add value,be it free transfer in or purchase, money is being spent i.e salaries and purchase price.

Dont be silly in your haste to defend claffy. and yes i am offended by the term disingenious, you are either aloof or ignorant to how value is added to a team, all coming from your nepotistic bias to pauls foolishness.

Disgrace, the extent of your thickness is outdone only by your poor grammar and inability to craft any semblance of a written argument. Let me put it into kindergarten terms for you:

1. Overall value = the total value of a squad, independent of how much was spent to amass that squad; e.g. cost of Milner $0 but increased squad value by £12m
2. Wage bill = the salaries paid each week to a squad

Milner increased squad value by £12m and added £150k/week to the wage bill, for $0 in "money spent". By my argument, there is an expected return. But if money spent is the only factor affecting league performance, what is the expected return? Zero $ spent = Zero expected return?

Secondly, there is no way that any one except you, would start any analysis of the overall value or wage bill (or spending) until the transfer market closes...so all your sabre rattling and mouth-madness is premature, like your brain. Here, read this article...it might help your perspective. http://www.reggaeboyzsc.com/forum1/s...ty+Liverpool#p ost378365

[Rockman]

Not needed,the superior salary is all encompassing!

[Sir X]

Ouch maybe we can get pogba and pirrilo on a free transfer , wages too - sarcasm

[Rockman]

All I have to say is Pool should move to Italy!

[Sir X]

Really , explain free transfers , Milner to liverpool and pirrilo,pogba to juventus ,money spent be it purchase or free transfer where wages are demanded , are supposed to do one thing to a team , add to its value ,hence the value to sell before value is declined.Dont speak for me , speak for paul .

Paul stated as much about value to team , apparently he sees the correlation ,how and when do you seperate the two,how can you ? they are supposed to do one thing ,add value,be it free transfer in or purchase, money is being spent i.e salaries and purchase price.

Dont be silly in your haste to defend claffy. and yes i am offended by the term disingenious, you are either aloof or ignorant to how value is added to a team, all coming from your nepotistic bias to pauls foolishness.

[Peter R]

X, You are being disingenuous! In Football when people speak about "money spent" or use the term "net spend" it has NOTHING to do with wages. You are making up your own rules. If you wish to speak about wages as "money spent" do so, but don't mix up the concepts.

I am not an accountant but I can tell you that "money spent" to buy players would be considered a Capital expenditure, i.e. an investment in the club, much like buying a building or vehicles lets say for a company. Keeping the buildings and vehicles maintained would be an expense and thus equivalent to the players' wages.

You are correct that in the end it's all money spent, but it's deception (on your part) to use the jargon associated with buying and selling of players to include wages paid.

Anyway, here is some food for thought. You can draw your own conclusions.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/spo...-spenders.html

[Sir X]

Suh money spent nuh involve wage bill ? doesnt spending increase squad value ?...but my predication will be true ,but not because of BR ....Yuh a accoutant yuh say or yuh juss a tek up a internet title ?


Diss bredda narmal,yuh a mek up yuh own accounting principle ,people people unnuh ear diss,money spent-(purchasing) nuh include wages (man play fi free) and dat should not add to squad value(it should bring it down or be neglible)The value builds through obeah ....Mi dunce ..lol...tell yuh long time,yuh tink yuh too smart claffy.

The icing on it ,a nuh BR fault ,its all on FSG for buying poorly and wasting it on salaries that decrease the squad value and of course league position....i guess..


But yuh conclude one thing right ,it will be a disaster ,Claffy

[Paul Marin]

I am still waiting for your prediction for next season, league position relative to money spent? Last summer you roasted me about top 4 and to stay off your wagon, then you changed with BR as 5th being par,an indication of your backing the rucks at the clubs expense, so can I get an answer for the up and coming disaster.

Disgrace, I have told you before, there is no correlation to league position and money spent. It is in the wage bill and overall squad value. So if Bournemouth spend £100m, and Chelsea spend £5, the Cherries will still be behind the Blues because their squad will be still worth over £300m more. You need to get your head out your a$$ and stop asking questions that show your dunce-ness.

Your prediction will probably be true, but not b/c of Rodgers. The dismissal of BR's assistants shows that the real target of your frustration (although I think you really are just mekin nize true yu first love is Citey, Chelsea, Napoli, Real Madrid) should be FSG.

[Sir X]

No C.L,a season similar to the one we just experienced, what Paul and BR calls par.

[Peter R]

define disaster please...not all disaster is created equal.

[Sir X]

I said disaster, now if yuh can find yuh coward brethren!

[Peter R]

What's your prediction?