Preface

You know you’re in trouble when a blog post carries a preface! This post is hefty by blog standards, even mine, and it is statistically and graphically rich, but that’s not the reason for this quick heads up. That said, don’t start reading expecting a quick 300 word blog!

I had most of the data here at hand and this is a post that I’ve been meaning to pull together for some time. However, I’ll be perfectly straightforward and admit that writing this was motivated by some of Gabrielle Marcotti’s Tweets on Tuesday and, to a greater degree, his article on Wednesday.

It’s not that his article was without merit, far from it, but to me it lacked balance and adequate context. Some of the comments below that article showed me exactly who it resonated with, so I wanted to set MON’s spend in a fairer context.

I also received a slight boost in traffic on Tuesday, as I suspect all Aston Villa websites did, but visitors weren’t coming here to read me peddling a baseless rumour, they were actually coming from Liverpool and Man Utd websites to the Transfers page. This information was then being used as a barometer of O’Neill’s management credentials. Unfairly so in my opinion.

And lastly, I’ve just been chatting with Mr Marcotti, so far as one can engage in a chat on Twitter, and I found him a thoroughly engaging and not an unreasonable man. So much as one can appear engaging and not unreasonable on Twitter. There is a little snark in this post, just a soupçon really, but it’s not personal, I am aiming it at opinion only. I just wanted to make that clear, it’s not my style, but some frustration inevitably crept into my writing here and I may be guilty of making a jab a couple of days ago that wasn’t justified.

That must all sound incredibly boring and probably quite pretentious, so if you’re still with me at this point, to lighten the mood before you begin, here is a picture of some cute kittens. The post commences when you’re done with the cuteness.  Awwwww, aren’t they simply adorable!!

One of the interesting things about Tuesday’s silly MON rumours was the reaction of fans of other clubs, specifically the clubs frequently tipped as future employers of our manager. Liverpool and Man Utd fans, I think, are fairly divided about MON’s credentials, while the majority of Celtic fans would have him back in a heart beat. That’s my impression anyway, I could, of course, be way off.

A lot of discussion centred around the money MON has spent on re-building the Aston Villa squad to date and that seemed to be held up as if some kind of barometer of his abilities as a manager.

These Tweets were typical of many floating around the Twitisphere, the top was re-Tweeted a lot, the second is a link to this site:-

Both points are incredibly blinkered and shortsighted, so I’d like to address them here.

Establishing Context

Amusingly, it was as if the amount of money that we have spent on bringing new players to Villa Park in the last few years was a secret and the information was passed around like a new discovery. I’m not surprised that so many people hadn’t been paying attention, but to then hold that spend against the spend of the clubs we’re chasing over the same period is disingenuous at best. At worst, well, let’s just say that I don’t want to get into petty name calling.

However, it’s a really simple concept; first you have to accept that the preceding decade or two actually happened and that the likes of Liverpool and Man Utd spent heavily during it. How many times did we hear about Man Utd breaking another British transfer record over the years? Until MON brought Ashley Young to Villa in January 2007 our club record transfer fee was the £9.5m we paid for Juan-Pablo Angel. That was in 2001. To date, Ash remains the 3rd most expensive player at the club behind James Milner and Stewart Downing.

Once a squad full of players costing big bucks to bring in has been assembled, they tend to be worth similar amounts, sometimes more, when they’re sold on. Occasionally a lot more. The effect on the net transfer spend is obvious, I won’t waste anyone’s time with a patronizing explanation, even in jest.

Oh, go on then…

How many apples did Liverpool get for Xabi Alonso again? Need I mention Christiano Ronaldo? Until last summer, when Gareth Barry went to Man City for £12m, the only player to leave Villa Park in a double digit sale was Dwight Yorke in 1998. In fact, that £12.6m deal with Utd remains our record transfer fee received. You see what I’m driving at here?

OK, let’s get a little more serious. Graph Time!

This graph details the amounts spent and received in transfer fees by 8 key Premiership teams and Newcastle since the Premiership began. It’s as clear as day that there’s no real comparison between Villa and the likes of Liverpool and Man Utd who have spent, but also received big fees, and certainly nothing like the vulgarity of Chelsea and Man City.

During the 2003/04 season, Chelsea spent £153million. They followed that up with £47m in 2004/05 and £91m in 2005/06, all net. It absolutely beggars belief that someone would  forget or dismiss that and then put Chelsea’s spending, at a time when they were able to take their foot off the gas, against our investment during a period of regeneration.

There’s also a certain amount of irony in the fact that we’re effectively operating in the wake of inflation that they left in the transfer market after they were finished throwing their money around. We’re now being judged on how much we spend on players who are effectively more expensive than they should be because of the Chelsea’s and Man City’s of the world.

Ultimately, sight should not be lost of the fact that Chelsea have laid out considerably more than half a billion pounds on purchasing players since the Premiership began in 1992.  I suspect in these times of mega bank bailouts that we’ve become desensitized to the term ‘billion’, never mind ‘million’, but that is still mind blowing for me.  More than half a BILLION pounds.

Spend to Sell Ratio

Liverpool and Man Utd’s approach to spending on players has changed somewhat since their new owners took charge, although it’s fair to concede that the £80m received for Ronaldo frequently distorts the picture.

Liverpool

Prior to Hicks and Gillette getting their hands on Liverpool the club was spending 2.42 times as much on new players as it was making on selling players. During the Hicks and Gillette years, though, that rate is more like 1.40.

Man Utd

The two clubs are almost neck and neck in terms of outlay on buying players, but Utd have made considerably more back. As I say, Ronaldo’s fee clearly makes a huge difference. Prior to the Glazers’ arrival, Utd were spending 2.07 as much as they received on players on bringing new players in, but since then it’s just 1.07. However, take out the £80m and it would have been 2.20, assuming everything else remained equal.

Aston Villa

Under Randy Lerner, Villa have spent 3.38 as much as we’ve received back which is a massive change from the 1.78 rate under Doug Ellis. This highlights the neglect we had suffered for so many years under Doug’s stewardship and we’re really just running to catch up now.

The current overall ratio of spend to sell is 2.28 at Villa, 2.12 at Utd, and 1.93 at Liverpool, but the other two have each spent more than £150m more than us gross over the years.

The point here being that for many years Liverpool and Man Utd spent at a high ratio in comparison to what they recouped on sales, while Villa did not. Villa happen to be addressing years of remaining overly prudent at around the same time that the bigger clubs, or certainly these two, for whatever reasons, are pulling their spending back.