[Archived] CTTP

[67splitscreen]

'Current Transfer Purchase Price'.

Very interesting, it's often been debated what players would cost in today's market.

£ per points Sam is the current Daddy.

My link

[cn174]

He'd still be worth every penny

[bluebruce]

Not sure I understand what system he is using to decide these equivalent prices. Shearer was the British transfer record by what, about ten percent? So surely his price now would be something like £34 million.

I hasten to point out...the figures given for Blackburn spending more than United on their squad are flawed. I'm assuming he has calculated the "modern day" cost, and the players were all bought at different times. In fact this surprises me more, since most of United's squad were bought earlier. But I researched this myself a few years ago, and from the resources I had, United's squad that year had cost more to assemble. Also, they spent more in that season than we did.

[47er]

Not sure I understand what system he is using to decide these equivalent prices. Shearer was the British transfer record by what, about ten percent? So surely his price now would be something like £34 million.

I hasten to point out...the figures given for Blackburn spending more than United on their squad are flawed. I'm assuming he has calculated the "modern day" cost, and the players were all bought at different times. In fact this surprises me more, since most of United's squad were bought earlier. But I researched this myself a few years ago, and from the resources I had, United's squad that year had cost more to assemble. Also, they spent more in that season than we did.

At the time we bought him Shearer had no equal. You wouldn't get Rooney for 22m and Shearer is better than he was. Berbatov cost 30M and is not in the same class as Shearer was. Shearer won us games all season, every game, every season.

So 22m?---you're having a laff.

[LeChuck]

At the time we bought him Shearer had no equal. You wouldn't get Rooney for 22m and Shearer is better than he was. Berbatov cost 30M and is not in the same class as Shearer was. Shearer won us games all season, every game, every season.

So 22m/---you're having a laff.

Hang on...those comparisons are all over the place.

At the time we bought Shearer, he was a young promising, striker who had scored 43 goals in 158 games.

What he went on to become is completely irrelevant, so the Berbatov comparison is way off. When Berbatov left Spurs he was a better player than when Shearer left Southampton.

£22 million for a Southampton striker with that goal scoring record certainly isn't cheap! Of course he went on to be an absolute bargain, but you've got to try and look at the prices without the benefit of hindsight.

[47er]

Hang on...those comparisons are all over the place.

At the time we bought Shearer, he was a young promising, striker who had scored 43 goals in 158 games.

What he went on to become is completely irrelevant, so the Berbatov comparison is way off. When Berbatov left Spurs he was a better player than when Shearer left Southampton.

£22 million for a Southampton striker with that goal scoring record certainly isn't cheap! Of course he went on to be an absolute bargain, but you've got to try and look at the prices without the benefit of hindsight.

He was "the next big thing".Capped by England at 21. Dalglish knew it and Fergie knew it. That's why it was a record price at the time and a record price now is not 22M.

[LeChuck]

He was "the next big thing".Capped by England at 21. Dalglish knew it and Fergie knew it. That's why it was a record price at the time and a record price now is not 22M.

It's not a million miles from where Andy Carroll is now and I don't think he's valued anywhere near that, England U21 caps don't really add any value.

It's so hard to come up with a figure because there are so many ways of interpreting it. You mention 'record' a few times, but David Platt was sold for £2 million more (roughly 30%) a year earlier.

Personally I think £22m is too high, I don't think an England U21 striker with that goal scoring record playing for a mid-table team would go for £22 million in today's market. Rooney was a special case because of the way he burst onto the scene at 16 years old, Shearer's rise was much more progressive.

If you look at that article, the same system values Warhurst at £15.8 million!

[bluebruce]

It's not a million miles from where Andy Carroll is now and I don't think he's valued anywhere near that, England U21 caps don't really add any value.

It's so hard to come up with a figure because there are so many ways of interpreting it. You mention 'record' a few times, but David Platt was sold for £2 million more (roughly 30%) a year earlier.

Personally I think £22m is too high, I don't think an England U21 striker with that goal scoring record playing for a mid-table team would go for £22 million in today's market. Rooney was a special case because of the way he burst onto the scene at 16 years old, Shearer's rise was much more progressive.

If you look at that article, the same system values Warhurst at £15.8 million!

There was less than a one year age difference between Shearer's and Rooney's debut. Shearer scored a hat trick against Arsenal on his, Rooney scored one against Arsenal on his. The latter Arsenal team was better, so we will call that pretty even for bursting onto the scene. Shearer did take a little longer to be sold, presumably because nobody was willing to pay Southampton's price. Shearer went for a British record because he was THE hottest rated prospect in English football. It is very fair to suggest a Shearer-style sale now would fetch a lot more than £22 million. Do you seriously think Newcastle would take less than £20 million right now for Carroll? And Shearer had been at it in the top flight for longer. Moreover, if you want to make the modern day comparison you have to use Man City as the theoretical buyers. We all know how being the richest club inflates the prices. A Shearer now to a Rovers equivalent would definitely be going for £30 million or more.

[modes98]

He was "the next big thing".Capped by England at 21. Dalglish knew it and Fergie knew it. That's why it was a record price at the time and a record price now is not 22M.

But being the next big thing doesn't mean that you go for the highest price. He did at the time but football has evolved since then.

I wouldn't mind knowing how much we got for him on this CTTP scale, I think I'll match him higher than Ronaldo so £100m

[bluebruce]

Oh I forgot to add...Rooney's record at Everton in all comps was 17 in 77, Shearer's at Southampton was 43 in 158.

[47er]

It's not a million miles from where Andy Carroll is now and I don't think he's valued anywhere near that, England U21 caps don't really add any value.

Personally I think £22m is too high, I don't think an England U21 striker with that goal scoring record playing for a mid-table team would go for £22 million in today's market. Rooney was a special case because of the way he burst onto the scene at 16 years old, Shearer's rise was much more progressive.

Who's talking England Under 21's? Shearer was a full England international when we bought him.

[67splitscreen]

Not forgetting this is the LT putting their words to some of the interpretation's, maybe in the book the index that's been used would explain it better.

[S15]

I've read some @#/? hypothetical statistics in my time as a fertilised sperm worm, but this is the most useless thing I've ever 'learnt.' I say learnt, I should say 'been told.'

Worse yet, it seems to have started a serious discussion.

[bluebruce]

I've read some @#/? hypothetical statistics in my time as a fertilised sperm worm, but this is the most useless thing I've ever 'learnt.' I say learnt, I should say 'been told.'

Worse yet, it seems to have started a serious discussion.

Fair point. Though personally I'm mostly contributing to point out how useless it is.

[tony gale's mic]

There was less than a one year age difference between Shearer's and Rooney's debut. Shearer scored a hat trick against Arsenal on his, Rooney scored one against Arsenal on his. The latter Arsenal team was better, so we will call that pretty even for bursting onto the scene. Shearer did take a little longer to be sold, presumably because nobody was willing to pay Southampton's price. Shearer went for a British record because he was THE hottest rated prospect in English football. It is very fair to suggest a Shearer-style sale now would fetch a lot more than £22 million. Do you seriously think Newcastle would take less than £20 million right now for Carroll? And Shearer had been at it in the top flight for longer. Moreover, if you want to make the modern day comparison you have to use Man City as the theoretical buyers. We all know how being the richest club inflates the prices. A Shearer now to a Rovers equivalent would definitely be going for £30 million or more.

£30 million?!

The crucial point that everyone somehow seems to be missing in this thread is the standard of the Premiership has risen hugely since Shearer moved to us.

Back when Shearer played for Southampton, hardly anyone vaguely approaching the world's best was playing in England. Our most talented players of those times had gone abroad (Platt, Gascoigne, Lineker) and the standard of the Premiership was pretty low. In relation to other European leagues it was probably at a similar level to what the French League is currently. Napoli had paid Barcelona £5 million for Diego Maradona just under ten years previous to Shearer's transfer. The transfer record at the time of Shearer's transfer was £13 million for Gianluigi Lentini.

So at the time of his transfer, Shearer had scored 13 league goals in 41 games in a league which was a far cry from the standards of Serie A and La Liga. No European experience, one England cap.

The league which Rooney starred in was of a much higher standard and he'd starred for England in a major tournament which would push anyone's price right up. Even he "only" went for £24 million and transfer fees havent inflated that much since 2004.

I'd say Shearers transfer fee today would be £10-12 million probably, though it really is hard to say.

[Rover Down Under]

Back when Shearer played for Southampton, hardly anyone vaguely approaching the world's best was playing in England. Our most talented players of those times had gone abroad (Platt, Gascoigne, Lineker) and the standard of the Premiership was pretty low.

Ironically, that is when we had the best England team since '66 (and arguably better) - I mean the 1990 squad, not Graham "Carlton Palmer is great" Taylor. Evidence enough that the EPL has destroyed England?

I remember when we bought Shearer, he was considered a bit of a gamble, everyone wondered when he'd score his first goal until about 50 minutes into the new season, then about 30 minutes later, then the home game against Arsenal..then...and then...and then...and the rest is history.

The standard of the Prem was actually just about right I reckon. Teams played on a level playing field, transfers & wages weren't as stupid, club debt was very rare, anyone could win anything. Depends if you define standard as having the World's best players or actually having a quality league to enjoy (as opposed to a league with top quality players).

The comparisons made in this report / book are a bit off. We spent more because we had to get a team to get us out of Div 2 and then a team to get us to the top of Div 1. Man U and the other teams had already spent wads of cash prior to 1992, they already had Ince, Pallister, Irwin, Bruce, Cantona (91?), Robson, Kanchelskis before we even bought Batty, Shearer, Flowers, Warhurst, Ripley, Sutton, Le Saux, Berg. We had to replace/improve on a battered, aged, Irish CB, one aging and one aged midfielder playing out his last days, a lightweight winger, a gaffe prone mediocre goalie, a dwarf of a left back and the legendary but journeyman Speeeeeeedie! All the other established top flight teams had solid foundations of players already purchased and established quality academies, scouts and feeder clubs. It's like comparing spending of Microsoft v IBM since 1975, or Virgin v BA since 1985, the whole picture is missing.

[bluebruce]

£30 million?!

The crucial point that everyone somehow seems to be missing in this thread is the standard of the Premiership has risen hugely since Shearer moved to us.

Back when Shearer played for Southampton, hardly anyone vaguely approaching the world's best was playing in England. Our most talented players of those times had gone abroad (Platt, Gascoigne, Lineker) and the standard of the Premiership was pretty low. In relation to other European leagues it was probably at a similar level to what the French League is currently. Napoli had paid Barcelona £5 million for Diego Maradona just under ten years previous to Shearer's transfer. The transfer record at the time of Shearer's transfer was £13 million for Gianluigi Lentini.

So at the time of his transfer, Shearer had scored 13 league goals in 41 games in a league which was a far cry from the standards of Serie A and La Liga. No European experience, one England cap.

The league which Rooney starred in was of a much higher standard and he'd starred for England in a major tournament which would push anyone's price right up. Even he "only" went for £24 million and transfer fees havent inflated that much since 2004.

I'd say Shearers transfer fee today would be £10-12 million probably, though it really is hard to say.

And the money in the league wasn't as much as it is now. Prem teams generally pay more than those in other leagues. Shearer was a Rooney-level signing, no question in my mind. And Rooney's fee was £30 mill including add-ons, which you'd expect have been paid. £10-12 million is a nonsense IMO. Anyway, bored of expressing this redundant point now.

[tony gale's mic]

Shearer was a Rooney-level signing, no question in my mind.

...if you actually believe that a striker who had scored 13 league goals in a season against average defences would be worth the same as a forward who had scored 9 league goals against top class defences and starred for England in the Euros, then yes, he was a Rooney level signing.

But he quite clearly wasn't.

[Exiled_Rover]

...if you actually believe that a striker who had scored 13 league goals in a season against average defences would be worth the same as a forward who had scored 9 league goals against top class defences and starred for England in the Euros, then yes, he was a Rooney level signing.

But he quite clearly wasn't.

Yep, clearly Shearer is massively overrated(!)

[tony gale's mic]

Yep, clearly Shearer is massively overrated(!)

Congratulations, you've managed to miss the point completely.

This isn't based on what's happened since. Managers don't possess crystal balls. This is based on what had happened at the time of the transfer.

Someone who at 21 has scored a decent amount of goals for Southampton in a league far below the standards of the best and who hadn't done much other than that ranks as a good prospect.

Someone at 19 who's spent the last two years playing well in a good Everton side in a league which was up there with the best and who has exploded onto the international scene and starred in a major tournament ranks as a potential world beater.

The fact that Shearer subsequently went beyond all expectations at Rovers and Rooney never quite fulfilled his potential throughout his career are irrelevant when determining what their transfer fee wouldve been at the time.

[Al]

I've read some @#/? hypothetical statistics in my time as a fertilised sperm worm, but this is the most useless thing I've ever 'learnt.' I say learnt, I should say 'been told.'

Worse yet, it seems to have started a serious discussion.

Or maybe you should have said 'learned'.

[Al]

Congratulations, you've managed to miss the point completely.

This isn't based on what's happened since. Managers don't possess crystal balls. This is based on what had happened at the time of the transfer.

Someone who at 21 has scored a decent amount of goals for Southampton in a league far below the standards of the best and who hadn't done much other than that ranks as a good prospect.

Someone at 19 who's spent the last two years playing well in a good Everton side in a league which was up there with the best and who has exploded onto the international scene and starred in a major tournament ranks as a potential world beater.

The fact that Shearer subsequently went beyond all expectations at Rovers and Rooney never quite fulfilled his potential throughout his career are irrelevant when determining what their transfer fee wouldve been at the time.

That is based on an assumption which is far from proven that the league was far below the standard of the best. The English clubs were, and had been for years, a, if not the, force in Europe.

Shearer is simply the best striker I have ever seen.

[Exiled_Rover]

That is based on an assumption which is far from proven that the league was far below the standard of the best. The English clubs were, and had been for years, a, if not the, force in Europe.

Shearer is simply the best striker I have ever seen.

Hey now, just because an old, crocked, Shearer was banging them in for Toon at the twilight of his career doesn't mean anything. Obviously the quality of the league now is that much superior(!)

[tony gale's mic]

Hey now, just because an old, crocked, Shearer was banging them in for Toon at the twilight of his career doesn't mean anything. Obviously the quality of the league now is that much superior(!)

Crikey.

Is your problem with reading or is it with comprehension?

Once more, someones transfer fee at the age of 21 has absolutely nothing to do with what they eventually achieved (which is impossible to predict), and everything to do with what they had achieved at the time.

That is based on an assumption which is far from proven that the league was far below the standard of the best. The English clubs were, and had been for years, a, if not the, force in Europe.

In 1992 the English clubs were a force in Europe?

I suggest you go back and do a bit of reading...

[LeChuck]

Once more, someones transfer fee at the age of 21 has absolutely nothing to do with what they eventually achieved (which is impossible to predict), and everything to do with what they had achieved at the time.

I can't believe how many people are struggling with that.

I don't think anyone disagrees that Shearer is the best English striker in the past two decades or so, but we're discussing his ability/reputation when we signed him. He had an average goal record and was playing for a mid table team.

If anything it's more of a compliment to Rovers to say the Shearer we signed wasn't a top level player, WE turned him into one.