Gerrard's transfers - hit or miss?

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,546]

2 minutes ago, Zander1 said:

Agree to disagree on that point. I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but allowing for the £26million you've quoted + any other cost for transfer fees, would £30m be a reasonable estimate of his spend? Over 3 years that's really not a huge amount in the modern game.  Given where we were when he took over, it's difficult to envisage us having won the league spending less over those three years.

Of course its a huge amount in the modern game because no matter how modern the game is, scotland barely produces any money

Our ST revenue is around what 23mill, 25 tops, winning the treble in scotland is probably worth around 5mill, other matchday revenue, merch etc say another 10, that doesnt even cover our wage bill

Scottish football is a financial dead zone, gerrard had to spend what he did, im not denying that, but a wage bill that is higher than your domestic revenue is spending huge wether needed or not

[Zander1 180]

30 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Of course its a huge amount in the modern game because no matter how modern the game is, scotland barely produces any money

Our ST revenue is around what 23mill, 25 tops, winning the treble in scotland is probably worth around 5mill, other matchday revenue, merch etc say another 10, that doesnt even cover our wage bill

Scottish football is a financial dead zone, gerrard had to spend what he did, im not denying that, but a wage bill that is higher than your domestic revenue is spending huge wether needed or not

Fair enough - I just think that the point of this thread is (I think) to assess how good Gerrard has been in the transfer market. To do that you have to look at if, overall, he's brought in good players for the money spent. For the reasons I've mentioned, I think the answer is yes. The financial state of Scottish football doesn't really change that imo.