Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

User avatar
FiNeRaIn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 6231
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 17:44
Location: Los Angeles

Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by FiNeRaIn » 02 Sep 2009 19:04

Published in the times today, net Spending for newcomers to the premier league as follows.


2005

West Ham 8 million
Wigan 4.8 Million
Sunderland 4million

2006

Watford 7.3 million
Sheff Utd 7 milllion
Reading 2 million

2007
Sunderland 33.6 million
Derby 13.3 million
Birmingham 10.1 million

2008

Stoke 19.8 million
West brom 13.3 million
Hull 6.25 Million

2009

Wolves 15 million
Birmingham 11.6 Million
Burnley 5.85m

Reading are below every one of those leagues clubs league position wise in the modern game.

We also spent by FAR the least, more than half of what everyone else spent upon their arrival to the premier league.

Interesting stats.
Last edited by FiNeRaIn on 02 Sep 2009 19:16, edited 1 time in total.

Berry
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: 24 Mar 2005 10:03

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Berry » 02 Sep 2009 19:07

As in the immortal words of Brucie "Didnt we do well!"

Deathy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3998
Joined: 01 Sep 2008 08:45

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Deathy » 02 Sep 2009 19:08

What about it? We finished 8th after only spending £2m.

User avatar
FiNeRaIn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 6231
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 17:44
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by FiNeRaIn » 02 Sep 2009 19:09

Deathy What about it? We finished 8th after only spending £2m.


Make of it what you will deathy. Where did we finish the second season with the same squad?

Deathy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3998
Joined: 01 Sep 2008 08:45

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Deathy » 02 Sep 2009 19:10

FiNeRaIn
Deathy What about it? We finished 8th after only spending £2m.


Make of it what you will deathy. Where did we finish the second season with the same squad?


That's another thread altogether. :roll:


User avatar
FiNeRaIn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 6231
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 17:44
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by FiNeRaIn » 02 Sep 2009 19:11

Just interesting stats. We played the system and lost :(

User avatar
ZacNaloen
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7239
Joined: 13 Oct 2008 13:34
Location: 'If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair color.' -Mark Schnitzius

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by ZacNaloen » 02 Sep 2009 19:14

Reading are below every one of those leagues clubs league position wise in the modern game.




We're 5 games in :|

Alivey
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 05 Feb 2009 18:29

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Alivey » 02 Sep 2009 19:15

SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!

User avatar
FiNeRaIn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 6231
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 17:44
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by FiNeRaIn » 02 Sep 2009 19:16

ZacNaloen
Reading are below every one of those leagues clubs league position wise in the modern game.




We're 5 games in :|


Yep, but stats don't lie. I'm just amazed we thought we could buck the trend of the modern game and do it our own way.


User avatar
ZacNaloen
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7239
Joined: 13 Oct 2008 13:34
Location: 'If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair color.' -Mark Schnitzius

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by ZacNaloen » 02 Sep 2009 19:17

We did buck the trend, how many of those teams were also relegated within two seasons?

Berry
Member
Posts: 461
Joined: 24 Mar 2005 10:03

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Berry » 02 Sep 2009 19:18

Havent you got a home to go to?

Alivey
Member
Posts: 507
Joined: 05 Feb 2009 18:29

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Alivey » 02 Sep 2009 19:21

I think the most interesting stat is the stat that shows how greedy the pretend pole in charge of this club is!!!!!!!! we replaced SIDWELL with players that we already owned that werent good enough to even to challenge for his position. QUITE simply, THANK GOD COPPELL IS OUT!! now we need either Madjetski to SHOW ME THE MONEY or he can GO, GOODBYE FAREWELL AUF WEIDERSEHEN GOODBYE

Archies Volley II
Member
Posts: 133
Joined: 02 Sep 2008 11:26

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Archies Volley II » 02 Sep 2009 19:27

FiNeRaIn
ZacNaloen
Reading are below every one of those leagues clubs league position wise in the modern game.




We're 5 games in :|


Yep, but stats don't lie. I'm just amazed we thought we could buck the trend of the modern game and do it our own way.


But we did buck the trend to get there in the first place (assume us Hull in 08 and Burnley in 09 would be the bottom 3 for money spent in promotion season) and in that first season in the Prem.

As Coppell said on Sky on Sunday he should have freshend up the squad in the second season but that doesn't mean needed to spend millions.

Mistakes were made, new players in the second season we may well still be there, but how much those players should have cost is not so clear cut - in my mind anyway.........


Still Hate Futcher!
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 31 Jul 2008 17:28
Location: Cloud 9

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Still Hate Futcher! » 02 Sep 2009 19:29

Alivey THANK GOD COPPELL IS OUT!!


Yeah, what did Coppell ever do for us! (Meant in a Life of Brian 'What did the Romans ever do for us' way, before anyone thinks I'm actually agreeing with the above).

Jeffers217
Member
Posts: 387
Joined: 12 Oct 2004 10:58

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Jeffers217 » 02 Sep 2009 19:33

YAWN- move on FineRain mate that's 2/3 yrs ago. And one name for you...STEVE SIDWELL...big factor

ankeny
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1127
Joined: 21 Nov 2007 17:41
Location: Just a heartbeat away from Elm Park

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by ankeny » 02 Sep 2009 19:37

The bigger question is,what did we spend in the second season to establish ourselves in the prem?

User avatar
RoyalBlue
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 11986
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:39
Location: Developed a pathological hatred of snakes on 14/10/19

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by RoyalBlue » 02 Sep 2009 19:38

Deathy What about it? We finished 8th after only spending £2m.


And then crashed out big time the season after. Since then the slide has continued. That's what about it!

User avatar
FiNeRaIn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 6231
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 17:44
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by FiNeRaIn » 02 Sep 2009 19:39

Jeffers217 YAWN- move on FineRain mate that's 2/3 yrs ago. And one name for you...STEVE SIDWELL...big factor


lolwhat? Those include this years stats. I've presented information published TODAY in a well respected national newspaper. You can choose to interpret this any way you want.
The fact remains- we showed the least ambition to stay in the premiership out of all the clubs who have been there in the last 5 years. I think it makes interesting reading.

Terminal Boardom
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7791
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 19:50
Location: No more egodome until the daft old coot leaves

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Terminal Boardom » 02 Sep 2009 19:48

Nothing new here. Move along.

User avatar
Harpers So Solid Crew
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5273
Joined: 06 Jul 2004 08:39
Location: enjoying the money

Re: Article in the Times: Promotion Team spending in the prem

by Harpers So Solid Crew » 02 Sep 2009 19:49

Bollox, we had a team that got 106 points, it needed less spending on it, IMHO. As proven by finishing 8th that season.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 106 guests

It is currently 22 Aug 2025 07:27