That's such a strawman argument. If we spent £2bn a year on wages, we could have any super star we wanted as we could pay 25 players £1.5m a week. That's not the great rebute you thought it would.Do you really think that a post ending with “time to move on” is supportive of the ownership? Are you ok?
Also, I agree fully that the wages are the thing that’s holding us back. But it’s not the ratio compared to our revenue. If we had a revenue of £4b, would you be expecting us to spend 60% of that on wages? You probably would, I suppose, but anyone else wouldn’t.
Wages should be taken into account on a £ note figure, not a percentage of something else. Fucking lunatic fringe stuff that’s popular with nerds on X.
But on our current situation, absolutely we should be paying 55-60% of revenue on wages. I'm not saying do what Villa are doing, but there's a vast middle ground.
We have 4 players on over £100k a week, 5 years ago we probably had double that. We're going backwards, everyone else is going forward.
This isn't sustainable to bringing success, same as spending all your revenue on wages isn't. Liverpool aren't a million miles ahead us financially, yet they can offer big wages, pay big transfer fees. But that's "not sustainable" right?
There's absolutely no ambition here. We're just trying to unearth the next £100m player by throwing shit at the wall and hoping it sticks. All that money spent and we have a ridiculously poor assembled squad. You or I could better it seems, as everyone can see the issues and they're not being addressed, and if they are, not sufficiently. Instead of signing these 3 players for the price of one transformative player, we should just sign the one transformative player.
We're moving backwards, it's indefensible.
u fukken wot m8