As GSH reported on August 11, the West Ham board had committed to spending in the range of £40 million for the summer window, a figure the club settled on because it represented more than what a typical Championship club spends in an average window. It was the number discussed with prospective directors of recruitment before Nils Koppen was hired. Once in the building, Koppen was asked explicitly to be creative with both permanent transfers and loans within that ceiling.
Part of Koppen’s plan was to target younger up-and-coming players who could make the leap to the Premier League if promoted, or at least be sold for more at a future date. The bulk of the transfer budget went to 2 players that fit that category. £22 million of the total went on Arne Engels, brought in as the direct successor to Mateus Fernandes in midfield. The transfer confirmed that the budget was reserved for targets Koppen heavily scouted, and he had specifically flagged Engels and recent signing Edvin Austbø.
If you are wondering about the strategy behind the others, West Ham’s approach for Manor Solomon and Joël Piroe was pursued on the back of proven Championship success, giving Nuno two players who'd already shown they could produce at this level. Joel Veltman's free transfer was viewed differently. He was signed to be a steady presence and the leadership he could bring to the dressing room. The loan trio of Adama Boiro, Morato and Divine Mukasa were framed internally as competition pieces, players brought in specifically to challenge for starting spots rather than guaranteed first names on the team sheet.
It's genuinely Koppen executing the creativity on the deals that West Ham asked for. He worked to a fixed, self-imposed number, and spent it with a fairly clear framework in mind. Whether that discipline pays off in results will be the real test of the season ahead, but it stands in contrast to clubs of their size who have been relegated in the past. The board wasn’t looking to spend the most money; they were looking to be strategic and not overpay for players who didn’t necessarily want to be in East London or weren’t part of their rebuilding project.
To the dismay of some supporters who felt West Ham should have spent more because they brought in over £200 million on the sale of players that included Fernandes, Crysencio Summerville, Freddie Potts, James Ward-Prowse and El Hadji Malick Diouf, that was never part of the club’s strategy. The total spend for West Ham came in at £45.8 million, putting them 6th all-time for club spending immediately after being relegated to the Championship.
Both Aston Villa and Newcastle hold the top two spends in the same season before the 2016-17 Championship campaigns. Newcastle achieved automatic promotion, winning the league with 94 points, and Villa finished 10th that season. These examples show how spending the most doesn’t necessarily mean automatic promotion. Coming in 3rd is Stoke City, who spent 54.5 million in 2018 and have not been promoted since their last relegation. After a season in the Premier League, Middlesbrough spent £48.2 million when they were immediately relegated and haven’t been back. Burnley, who were relegated with West Ham this past season, spent £47 million the last time they went down and came back up, only to go right back. This rounds out the top five, with West Ham next on the list.
What this list proves is that it's not about how much money a club spends but how it's spent, and that it's more about the players who remain at West Ham and Nuno, who will get them back. If the club fails to be promoted, it won’t be from a lack of players; it will fall squarely on some of the same key players that stayed after relegation and the manager who couldn’t get it done.
Add us as a preferred source on Google