- How come Arsenal get all this abuse as soon as one poor penalty goes in our favour?
- Stop complaining, try smiling instead
By Tony Attwood
The gross transfer spend by Premier League clubs in the summer of 2026 was, in simple terms, quite a lot. And a lot of the money didn’t really seem to make too much difference to the performance of clubs on the pitch. Here we can see the amount of money spent (which is of course an approximation based on the clubs statements) and the result of this in terms of their league position.
| Pos re Euros spent | Club | Total Spent (millions) | Current league pos |
| 1 | Manchester City | €550 | 3 |
| 2 | Chelsea | €408 | 5 |
| 3 | Tottenham | €362 | 11 |
| 4 | Newcastle | €322 | 12 |
| 5 | Aston villa | €307 | 10 |
| 6 | Liverpool | €238 | 4 |
| 7 | Arsenal | €232 | 1 |
As we all know the exact amount of money spent (minus the money received for players sold) can be a matter of contention so the figures need to be seen as approximations rather than exact replicas, but the point is still well made – spending more and more money on buying players doesn’t guarantee that the club rushes to the top of the table. It can help – but it is not guaranteed, and I do have a suspicion that sometimes the amount of money a club declares it has paid for a player is varied, depending on how well he has done, and if they want to keep him. What’s more saying a club has paid more but received less is good for reducing tax liability, while the reverse makes the club’s negotiator look like a star.
What’s more, clubs don’t act alone, for most clubs tend to spend money in each window, buying in new players, selling those no longer felt to be doing the business or those for whom they feel they can make a profit which will help them balance the books. The figures above don’t take account of the money received for players sold.
The level of players coming and going is always a surprise, but is explained by the fact that many players are brought in on spec – players who it is hoped could later be sold for a fair profit, or who although not ready yet for the first team, might be so later. Except a subsequent manager might not be ready to wait for “later”.
Unfortunately for most clubs their ability to judge the likelihood of clubs getting their guesswork right through this maze is poor, not least because they are trying to judge the player’s ability as seen in the past and his current ability to fit in with a) the manager b) the chief coach and c) the other players. Players, like children, can have rows which continue long after one player has left a club and can reignite if the players find themselves in the same team once again, some years later.
The figures here are for just one transfer window – that of last summer. According to these figures nine clubs made a profit in the last window and thus 11 made a loss. Such a difference shows what a gamble the window is. Making a loss is of course quite acceptable if the result is a rise up the leaguem and the owner and/or the bank can bail the club out – and if the benefits of those purchases might be seen in years to come.
But even that can lead to a problem, for if the club is already selling out each game in terms of attendance there is little extra funding that arises from being top of the league. Yes there might be some more TV coverage and the like, but it is not like the days of terraces where the average attendance might rise from 30,000 per match to 55,000 as a result of some high publicity spending.
And spending on transfers does not automatically turn into a rise up the table. Tottenham, who have had two 17th place finishes have been high spenders for the last several years and yet have struggled to turn that expenditure into better positions in the league. Does their bank manager understand it is not the owner’s fault?
The table below shows the previous season’s income and expenditure on players and the number of of players arriving and leaving (in the final column). Figures are from Transfermarkt and so have been translated into pounds sterling by Untold’s untrustworthy desktop calculator. But the question, “has Tottenham got value for its 202.1 million?” seems to have the same answer whether that money was spent in pounds or euros. Eiher way it was a huge amount of money.
| Club | € out | € In | Balance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Liverpool | €269.60m | €31.20m | -€238.40m |
| 2 | Tottenham H | €366.35m | €164.25m | -€202.10m |
| 3 | Ipswich T | €220.65m | €19.36m | -€201.29m |
| 4 | ManC | €526.20m | €337.02m | -€189.18m |
| 5 | Coventry C | €160.55m | €5.15m | -€155.40m |
| 6 | Hull C | €175.65m | €20.27m | €155.39m |
| 7 | ManU | €173.20m | €55.65m | €117.55m |
| 8 | Brentford | €124.30m | €12.85m | €111.45m |
| 9 | Arsenal | €227.10m | €135.15m | -€91.95m |
| 10 | Fulham FC | €102.40m | €20.50m | -€81.90m |
| 11 | Bournemouth | €80.80m | €13.40m | -€67.40m |
| 12 | Leeds United | €99.70m | €35.10m | -€64.60m |
| 13 | Sunderland | €70.90m | €32.75m | -€38.15m |
| 14 | Newcastle U | €313.00m | €279.10m | -€33.90m |
| 15 | Brighton | €180.10m | €192.15m | +€12.05m |
| 16 | Everton | €102.75m | €128.95m | +€26.20m |
| 17 | Nottingham F | €138.20m | €164.70m | +€26.50m |
| 18 | Chelsea | €407.48m | €447.80m | +€40.32m |
| 19 | Crystal P | €85.30m | €129.30m | +€44.00m |
| 20 | Aston Villa | €300.20m | €365.25m | +€65.05m |
What is always obvious is that by and large buying and selling players is both an expensive and a time consuming game of chance. For although our table shows the money that has been spent on players, there is also the issue of monthly salaries, plus agents’ fees and who knows what else.
And that is only the start. It is usually only a matter of days before the agent of player X who has been with the club two years, knocks on the manager’s door to announce that he has just heard that player Y bought last month is on a significantly higher salary….
Looking from the outside the clubs that run into trouble are quite simply those that invest heavily on a squad and then don’t make it to the holy grail of the European competitions (or if last season were in the Uefa League don’t graduate to the Champions League. For everything in football is based on assumptions – spend this much money on players and assume the club will make it into the Champions’ League. They also assume that the club will get through the first round of matches and pick up some extra income from a few extra games in the knock out stage. If that doesn’t happen, then financial disaster is just around the corner.
And then we find another problem, because fans really don’t like to hear the news that the club has brought in a new manager, he has spent a fortune, the club has made no progress, and now there is no more money for the next manager to spend on another group of players. The owner has only two choices: invest a load more money, or sell the club. And the latter is usually not an option since rich people tend not to buy failures. (Unless they are called “Tottenham”.)
But a season with an early exist from Europe and from the FA Cup can lead to a disaster – which is why we see so many clubs change managers early on. But the problem then is that the new manager will want to bring in his own players, and the players then sold in the next window will never bring in as much as they cost, for by this point all the other clubs know them as “failures.”
The way things are going I think it is quite likely that in the next couple of years we might well see several long established mid-table teams from the Premier League get into real financial trouble having tried to push themselves up into the European spots but failed, and so are now lumbered with higher salaries than they can afford, and players associated with failure who are now worth less than was paid for them on the transfer market just one year before.
This is why I have celebrated Arsenal’s rise from 8th at the start of Arteta’s reign up through the position of 5th to the three seasons of coming second… the club found its way up the league table step by step, and was able to reduce the club’s debts.
Indeed the club’s debts are now lower than they have been at any time since Wenger’s days, and as they move into profit (as I suspect they will this season), the chance of buying new players and bringing more exciting youngsters will, I believe, grow year by year.
If Manchester City are finally dealt with in terms of their financial adventures, that could leave Arsenal with a really strong position to move even further forward. If you have been around long enough to remember, you will recall the era in which Wenger took us through a series of seasons in which we always came first or second. I’m looking forward to something even more exciting.
