• Transfers: the reality

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:16 am**

Fascinating article by Martin Samuel in the Sunday Times today, reviewing Ian Graham’s book, “How to win the Premier League.”
It examines the rather poor returns, in terms of success, of a significant majority of transfers and shows how a large turnover is usually a route to failure, rather than success.
In 2024-5, PL clubs spent £2.4 billion on transfers, an average of £120.5m per club. Of the players bought, only12.7 % went on to play 50% of the minutes available to them. Even more remarkably, only 6.7 % went on to play 70% of the minutes available.
In other words, only 1 in 15 became major contributors to the team.
He examines transfers of over £10m from to 2021. The choice of this fee level was to take out of consideration players signed for reserve teams or with long term development in mind. 46% of these players failed to start 50% of games over the first two seasons following their transfer.
These figures were replicated through the five biggest leagues.
Liverpool signed the lowest number of players this season, but won the league. Spurs signed no new players the year they got to the Champions League final.
On the main transfer thread, various people have posted about the need to avoid the degree of churn of the last two seasons. Graham would agree, suggesting that the optimum number of new players is three.
He suggests that, even with the best research and care, a club is unlikely to achieve a more than 70% success rate with its transfers.
Graham was Liverpool’s director of research, so he was in the perfect position to observe and analyse all of this.
Samuel’s conclusion is one which we can hope that AP has come to, following his experience over the past two seasons:
“Whoever a club buys, whatever it spends, it will still rest upon the same fundamentals which make organisations successful-or disfunctional. These include the management, culture, strategy, connection with customers, investment in the future and the ability to develop people.”
SP built up a tremendous ethos over the course of the season. It would be foolish to chase dream transfers at the expense of that ethos.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:19 am**

Samuel has to be the best sports journalist in the country these days.

That sounds like a a great article and no doubt it's written with panache and well-argued, and I wouldn't disagree with his main point BUT ... I don't think that Liverpool and Spurs can be lumped together seamlessly as having had 'successful seasons'.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:21 am**

Interesting but im not sure it's that simple to be honest. For a lot of players, it takes over a year to settle so it may be the 2nd year where teams start to perform better.

I remember Klopp giving Liverpool a huge overhaul when he came in and Pep as well, but the success wasn't instant. Maybe it's not the signing of a lot of players, it's the expectation of instant rewards on the back of it.

Also, I would suggest United for example need a complete rebuild from top to bottom but according to this they'd be better just replacing 3.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:22 am**

This emphasises the lunacy of our last season at this level. And lessons need to be learned. (That said it does contradict our season we went up under Kompany. Although that window was a necessity out of his hands).

Consistency. Team spirit. Familiarity all cannot be underestimated. Again though to slightly counter that. Ferguson always knew when to freshen things up. Players often peaked when they had won their first title or other trophy. And list some of the drive. Not all but some. Will be interesting to see what Liverpool do this time. I imagine they should add a few.

On Burnley. I’d be happy if we signed three new players for starting positions. Certainly none of the madness of last time. Where the team the fans loved. And the players that warned the right to start that first game against Man City. Were cast aside for players that hadn’t. That was dreadful for team spirit.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:48 am**

Just done a quick tot up of the players in our squad who started games. Old players and new players as far as I remember (sub appearances not counted)
12 players here at the end of last season and started 304 games
13 new signings started 211 games.I suppose given the outgoings in the close and early start of the season, that stat had to be expected.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:01 am**

It doesn't help that clubs buy the majority of players to try and make profit on instead of to fit seamlessly into the team.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:10 am**

mdd2 wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:48 am
Just done a quick tot up of the players in our squad who started games. Old players and new players as far as I remember (sub appearances not counted)
12 players here at the end of last season and started 304 games
13 new signings started 211 games.I suppose given the outgoings in the close and early start of the season, that stat had to be expected.

be interesting to see the comparable stat worked out the VK Prem season

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:23 am**

Rowls wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:19 am
Samuel has to be the best sports journalist in the country these days.

That sounds like a a great article and no doubt it's written with panache and well-argued, and I wouldn't disagree with his main point BUT ... I don't think that Liverpool and Spurs can be lumped together seamlessly as having had 'successful seasons'.

Finishing 4th in the Premier League and runners up in the Champions League was an incredibly successful season for Spurs.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:27 am**

Interesting stuff, although the top clubs are never going to play anyone for close to 90% of the time given the number and intensity of their matches.

Also got to factor in injuries. Maybe spending £20m on someone who provides good cover and does a job for the 10-15 games he plays is seen as a successful signing rather than a flop. Kiwior at Arsenal is a good example. £20m, only started about a dozen games but would still be seen as a good signing.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:29 am**

Bordeauxclaret wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:23 am
Finishing 4th in the Premier League and runners up in the Champions League was an incredibly successful season for Spurs.

Thanks Bordeaux. I'd mis-read it entierly as being about this season.

Glad to know you *can* interact with me directly, even if it's only when I'm factually wrong.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:34 am**

Claret53 wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:16 am
Fascinating article by Martin Samuel in the Sunday Times today, reviewing Ian Graham’s book, “How to win the Premier League.”
It examines the rather poor returns, in terms of success, of a significant majority of transfers and shows how a large turnover is usually a route to failure, rather than success.
In 2024-5, PL clubs spent £2.4 billion on transfers, an average of £120.5m per club. Of the players bought, only12.7 % went on to play 50% of the minutes available to them. Even more remarkably, only 6.7 % went on to play 70% of the minutes available.
In other words, only 1 in 15 became major contributors to the team.
He examines transfers of over £10m from to 2021. The choice of this fee level was to take out of consideration players signed for reserve teams or with long term development in mind. 46% of these players failed to start 50% of games over the first two seasons following their transfer.
These figures were replicated through the five biggest leagues.
Liverpool signed the lowest number of players this season, but won the league. Spurs signed no new players the year they got to the Champions League final.
On the main transfer thread, various people have posted about the need to avoid the degree of churn of the last two seasons. Graham would agree, suggesting that the optimum number of new players is three.
He suggests that, even with the best research and care, a club is unlikely to achieve a more than 70% success rate with its transfers.
Graham was Liverpool’s director of research, so he was in the perfect position to observe and analyse all of this.
Samuel’s conclusion is one which we can hope that AP has come to, following his experience over the past two seasons:
“Whoever a club buys, whatever it spends, it will still rest upon the same fundamentals which make organisations successful-or disfunctional. These include the management, culture, strategy, connection with customers, investment in the future and the ability to develop people.”
SP built up a tremendous ethos over the course of the season. It would be foolish to chase dream transfers at the expense of that ethos.

Not Martin Samuel but Jojnathan Northcroft

Fans beware: Half your club’s transfers will fail
Former Liverpool stats guru Ian Graham’s research – and success at Anfield – suggests wheeler-dealer approach does not work and less is more when it comes to buying talent
https://archive.ph/izl81

It is worth noting that that Pace and co arrived at the club with a full understanding of how stability played a part in the relative success under Dyche/Garlick - it was a feature of that first press conference - then decided to rip it up for £25m (over 2 instalments) against the managers wishes, the rest as they say has been a far from that which has contributed to the huge churn.

if you want Samuel - who indeed is a very talented writer but has got somewhat lost in his pact with certain Premier League figures - you can find his latest column here

Blame Man United for their mess and stupid rules just letting them rot
new
Years of mismanagement caught up with Ruben Amorim’s side in farcical Asia tour but raft of financial regulations make it difficult for clubs not to slowly bleed out
https://archive.ph/amIX1

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:40 am**

I agree with the OP and Samuels, but we could all see VK ****** up making so many changes to that championship winning team. It wasn't rocket science.
I don't believe we will make the same mistake, not just because it didn't work first time, but because we don't have that kind of money to blow anymore.
We need to strengthen, obviously, and we need to offload some of our bloated squad, especially with loanees returning, but IF we can keep last seasons starting XI, then 3 or 4 players is all we need.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:47 am**

Stupid owners appoint poor managers who buy poor players -then wonder why it hasn’t delivered instant success.

This results in the manager getting sacked and the process repeated. Man U are the perfect example.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 12:17 pm**

The "three a year" is fine when you've already built the foundations.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 12:46 pm**

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:40 am
I agree with the OP and Samuels, but we could all see VK ****** up making so many changes to that championship winning team. It wasn't rocket science.
I don't believe we will make the same mistake, not just because it didn't work first time, but because we don't have that kind of money to blow anymore.
We need to strengthen, obviously, and we need to offload some of our bloated squad, especially with loanees returning, but IF we can keep last seasons starting XI, then 3 or 4 players is all we need.

This just highlighted it for me. And we never recovered. Never mind trying to play Man City football against Man City. 5 new players started that night. Taking shirts off players that hadn’t earned the right to keep the shirt. It was theirs to lose.

And it was a free hit. Had we lost 5-0 or more. As we often did. The excuse was their to bring in Trafford, Koleosho and Amdouni etc.

As a minimum Muric, Zaroury and Brownhill should have started that night. (And yes, in time Trafford has started to prove himself).

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 1:02 pm**

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 11:40 am
I agree with the OP and Samuels, but we could all see VK ****** up making so many changes to that championship winning team. It wasn't rocket science.
I don't believe we will make the same mistake, not just because it didn't work first time, but because we don't have that kind of money to blow anymore.
We need to strengthen, obviously, and we need to offload some of our bloated squad, especially with loanees returning, but IF we can keep last seasons starting XI, then 3 or 4 players is all we need.

I generally agree with everything that you say here, although I think we will need more than 3 or 4 upgrades to stand a fighting chance of survival and that’s assuming we keep key players.

I reckon we need a left back, centre half, centre mid, attacking midfielder/wide player and a striker, again assuming we keep our best players.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 1:03 pm**

CyrilEbokiPoh wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 12:46 pm
This just highlighted it for me. And we never recovered. Never mind trying to play Man City football against Man City. 5 new players started that night. Taking shirts off players that hadn’t earned the right to keep the shirt. It was theirs to lose.

And it was a free hit. Had we lost 5-0 or more. As we often did. The excuse was their to bring in Trafford, Koleosho and Amdouni etc.

As a minimum Muric, Zaroury and Brownhill should have started that night. (And yes, in time Trafford has started to prove himself).

I think we treated it as an extension to pre season to be honest. It was an experimental line up and experimental system in a game where we were unlikely to pick up any points anyway

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 1:37 pm**

I would always rather have less with emphasis on quality and key positions. Even for a team like Man United, who on the face of it need 7 - 10 players in. The first thing they need to do is stop buying players who won't improve them. Of all the players they've bought, it's hard to argue any are better than say McTominay and Mason Greenwood who've both gone out the door. Strong argument to say both of those improve the first 11.

When Liverpool were short and GK and a CB, they got Allison and Virgil Van Dijk. Just those two alone are a huge stride towards a successful side. United sign Onana, Yoro amd De Ligt for 150 million ish. Not awful, but filed alongside the likes of casemiro for 70m in a key CM position, having no class striker and getting Anthony and Hojilund for a combined fee of 140 million. The incompetence there is just crazy.

But I'd still wager if they got 3 players in key positions who actually made a difference, that would be better than trying to get 10 in. For one, there's only so much time and money available. Two, players you want out on huge contracts will be hard to budge en masse. Three, some players who aren't doing much atm might lift their game with the right 3 arrivals. Any centre back is going to do better with VVD next to them. A world class striker suddenly makes wingers more productive, and gives midfielders more options. A midfielder that can control the game helps everyone around them. The right goalkeeper helps their back 4 and wins points not loses them.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 1:43 pm**

willsclarets wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 1:37 pm
I would always rather have less with emphasis on quality and key positions. Even for a team like Man United, who on the face of it need 7 - 10 players in. The first thing they need to do is stop buying players who won't improve them. Of all the players they've bought, it's hard to argue any are better than say McTominay and Mason Greenwood who've both gone out the door. Strong argument to say both of those improve the first 11.

When Liverpool were short and GK and a CB, they got Allison and Virgil Van Dijk. Just those two alone are a huge stride towards a successful side. United sign Onana, Yoro amd De Ligt for 150 million ish. Not awful, but filed alongside the likes of casemiro for 70m in a key CM position, having no class striker and getting Anthony and Hojilund for a combined fee of 140 million. The incompetence there is just crazy.

But I'd still wager if they got 3 players in key positions who actually made a difference, that would be better than trying to get 10 in. For one, there's only so much time and money available. Two, players you want out on huge contracts will be hard to budge en masse. Three, some players who aren't doing much atm might lift their game with the right 3 arrivals. Any centre back is going to do better with VVD next to them. A world class striker suddenly makes wingers more productive, and gives midfielders more options. A midfielder that can control the game helps everyone around them. The right goalkeeper helps their back 4 and wins points not loses them.

I’ve said this since LVG, Mourinho and co were there. I’d bin them all off and play the kids.

They’d accept mid table and youth coming through. And that was before they were THIS Bad.

Not that I care. Can’t stand them or their fans.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 2:52 pm**

I would hope, and expect, there to be far more outgoings than incomings this summer. This data is further proof that less is more, and spending 50-60m on 3-5 signings of real quality is far better than 100m on 13 average ones. I would expect that:

Outgoings
Sambo
Benson
Redmond (gone)
Shelvey (gone)
Tresor
Banel
Agyei
Sonne
Ekdal
Amdouni
Churlinov
Hountondji
Dodgson
Delcroix
Massengo
Obafemi
Costelloe
(Some of these may be loans)

Incomings
Keeper
Right back
Centre mid
Striker x 2

This would leave us with a squad of 26, more than enough in the PL to have cover and competitiveness.
Crazy how bloated this squad has been allowed to become.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 3:16 pm**

Claret53 wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:16 am
Fascinating article by Martin Samuel in the Sunday Times today, reviewing Ian Graham’s book, “How to win the Premier League.”
It examines the rather poor returns, in terms of success, of a significant majority of transfers and shows how a large turnover is usually a route to failure, rather than success.
In 2024-5, PL clubs spent £2.4 billion on transfers, an average of £120.5m per club. Of the players bought, only12.7 % went on to play 50% of the minutes available to them. Even more remarkably, only 6.7 % went on to play 70% of the minutes available.
In other words, only 1 in 15 became major contributors to the team.
He examines transfers of over £10m from to 2021. The choice of this fee level was to take out of consideration players signed for reserve teams or with long term development in mind. 46% of these players failed to start 50% of games over the first two seasons following their transfer.
These figures were replicated through the five biggest leagues.
Liverpool signed the lowest number of players this season, but won the league. Spurs signed no new players the year they got to the Champions League final.
On the main transfer thread, various people have posted about the need to avoid the degree of churn of the last two seasons. Graham would agree, suggesting that the optimum number of new players is three.
He suggests that, even with the best research and care, a club is unlikely to achieve a more than 70% success rate with its transfers.
Graham was Liverpool’s director of research, so he was in the perfect position to observe and analyse all of this.
Samuel’s conclusion is one which we can hope that AP has come to, following his experience over the past two seasons:
“Whoever a club buys, whatever it spends, it will still rest upon the same fundamentals which make organisations successful-or disfunctional. These include the management, culture, strategy, connection with customers, investment in the future and the ability to develop people.”
SP built up a tremendous ethos over the course of the season. It would be foolish to chase dream transfers at the expense of that ethos.

As far as the penultimate paragraph is concerned, fair enough, but there’s an element missing (it’s assumed I suppose). There needs to be quality, and as far as development goes, not everyone can develop enough to get to the level of quality that’s needed to survive at the highest level.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 3:20 pm**

DanH90 wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 2:52 pm
I would hope, and expect, there to be far more outgoings than incomings this summer. This data is further proof that less is more, and spending 50-60m on 3-5 signings of real quality is far better than 100m on 13 average ones. I would expect that:

Outgoings
Sambo
Benson
Redmond (gone)
Shelvey (gone)
Tresor
Banel
Agyei
Sonne
Ekdal
Amdouni
Churlinov
Hountondji
Dodgson
Delcroix
Massengo
Obafemi
Costelloe
(Some of these may be loans)

Incomings
Keeper
Right back
Centre mid
Striker x 2

This would leave us with a squad of 26, more than enough in the PL to have cover and competitiveness.
Crazy how bloated this squad has been allowed to become.

I’d definitely keep both Ekdal and Amdouni out of that list. Maybe Sonne. I’m not sure.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:10 pm**

DanH90 wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 2:52 pm
I would hope, and expect, there to be far more outgoings than incomings this summer. This data is further proof that less is more, and spending 50-60m on 3-5 signings of real quality is far better than 100m on 13 average ones. I would expect that:

Outgoings
Sambo
Benson
Redmond (gone)
Shelvey (gone)
Tresor
Banel
Agyei
Sonne
Ekdal
Amdouni
Churlinov
Hountondji
Dodgson
Delcroix
Massengo
Obafemi
Costelloe
(Some of these may be loans)

Incomings
Keeper
Right back
Centre mid
Striker x 2

This would leave us with a squad of 26, more than enough in the PL to have cover and competitiveness.
Crazy how bloated this squad has been allowed to become.

Granted the levels are different. But we need an approach akin to cotterills time here. Quality over quantity.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:17 pm**

Sorry if I've missed the definition of ' minutes available'.
Big squads, massive increase in subs that can be made, settling into new clubs, injuries, clubs that are abusing the signing of players. and I could probably go on.
Nothing surprising here and I don't know anybody who is happy at the direction the PL has taken. Football is no longer the game, the businessmen have been allowed to destroy the game at the highest level

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:26 pm**

CyrilEbokiPoh wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:10 pm
Granted the levels are different. But we need an approach akin to cotterills time here. Quality over quantity.

.

I don't remember too much quality, to be fair, more mediocrity.
But he did a fair job of stabilising the club.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:31 pm**

Goliath wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 10:21 am
Interesting but im not sure it's that simple to be honest...

The author may not have come up with the correct answer, but transfer market success is dead simple, in fact any idiot can do it: just read JakubClaret's posts,because he knows exactly how to do it should be properly and let's be honest, if Jakub knows, it has to be within the grasp of any idiot.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:34 pm**

boatshed bill wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:26 pm
.

I don't remember too much quality, to be fair, more mediocrity.
But he did a fair job of stabilising the club.

Cahill
Sinclair
McGreal
Hyde
Harley
Duff
Akinbiyi

All in that first season from memory

Pretty sure he also signed whittingham that year who was good at that level.

There more to follow too. With the limited (bugger all) money he had.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:35 pm**

AfloatinClaret wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:31 pm
The author may not have come up with the correct answer, but transfer market success is dead simple, in fact any idiot can do it: just read JakubClaret's posts,because he knows exactly how to do it should be properly and let's be honest, if Jakub knows, it has to be within the grasp of any idiot.

No need for that dig

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:37 pm**

CyrilEbokiPoh wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:34 pm
Cahill
Sinclair
McGreal
Hyde
Harley
Duff
Akinbiyi

All in that first season from memory

Pretty sure he also signed whittingham that year who was good at that level.

There more to follow too. With the limited (bugger all) money he had.

i just remember the fairly average on pitch stuff, nothing too exciting but stable.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:42 pm**

boatshed bill wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:37 pm
i just remember the fairly average on pitch stuff, nothing too exciting but stable.

And I would take that in a breath next season

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:46 pm**

CyrilEbokiPoh wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:42 pm
And I would take that in a breath next season

Fair enough.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 9:03 pm**

AfloatinClaret wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:31 pm
The author may not have come up with the correct answer, but transfer market success is dead simple, in fact any idiot can do it: just read JakubClaret's posts,because he knows exactly how to do it should be properly and let's be honest, if Jakub knows, it has to be within the grasp of any idiot.

It's extremely simple but true to form some people make simple things extremely complicated. I'm no idiot btw. It's like anything if you set your stall out right & lay good foundations you can't really go wrong.

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 9:21 pm**

AfloatinClaret wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:31 pm
The author may not have come up with the correct answer, but transfer market success is dead simple, in fact any idiot can do it: just read JakubClaret's posts,because he knows exactly how to do it should be properly and let's be honest, if Jakub knows, it has to be within the grasp of any idiot.

I think this is out of order. Message boards are about opinions. If your opinion is different than his, it really doesn't mean that he is "an idiot ".

Posted: **Sun Jun 01, 2025 9:31 pm**

Goalkeeper wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 01, 2025 9:21 pm
I think this is out of order. Message boards are about opinions. If your opinion is different than his, it really doesn't mean that he is "an idiot ".

I think half term starts back up tomorrow so I'd expect things to quieten down on that front.

Transfers: the reality

Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality

Re: Transfers: the reality