Context is everything. Once upon a time Liverpool, backed by the US futures-based wealth of John W Henry, would have been seen as a menace, buying success and driving out local concerns who generate their income organically. These days, with soccer essentially functioning as the entertainment wing of the petro- chemical industry, Liverpool seems like a plucky underdog taking on the unimaginable resources of Roman Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour.
The numbers, for what they're worth, show Liverpool spent a net £21.5million on transfers this season; Chelsea a net £49.4m and Manchester City a net £43.2m. Quibbling over net spends has been a feature of Liverpool (and Arsenal) for a decade or so and a quick scan of fan sites will find plenty of pages that seek to prove that in terms of points per net pound spent, Liverpool and Arsenal have dominated the Premier League for years. But there is a more serious issue in this era of superclubs, which is the value of coaching.
The likes of Liverpool, Borussia Dortmund and Atletico Madrid show it is possible to compete without enormous resources, that with a clear strategy and an inspired coach it is possible, at least in the short term, for more ordinary clubs to compete with the staggeringly rich, that success in football is about more than just who has the deepest pockets. In fact, there's even a sense that Liverpool is thriving despite its signings. Of the eight players who have arrived over the past year, only Simon Mignolet can really be judged a success so far. Kolo Toure has been prone to spectacular gaffes, while Mamadou Sakho, Tiago Ilori, Iago Aspas, Luis Alberto and the two loan signings, Victor Moses and Aly Cissokho, rarely play.
