|
||||||||
Liverpool Supporters Thread (Part 21) |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#526 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,681
|
Quote:
If its true he'll get 200k a week is then that's just ridiculous. Only winners out of this are Liverpool.
Time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#527 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: West London
Posts: 5,658
|
Quote:
Liverpool won't be winners in this situation unless they spend the money properly. Ultimately Liverpool are losing one of their best players, the fee is irrelevant if they don't spend that money well. If they get 45 or so million then they've done a brilliant job in getting a cracking fee, none of that will matter though unless they then go and invest it and improve the team.
Time will tell. As you say, time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
|
#528 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
|
Quote:
Well history shows when they get big fees they pretty much waste the money.
|
|
|
|
|
#529 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
|
Quote:
I have a dream.
City - " Yes Raheem, we will pay the £50m for you, plus a salary of £200k per week w/bonuses. However, there is one condition, ditch your agent or we pull out". Won't happen, but I would so love it if it did! |
|
|
|
|
|
#530 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,541
|
Quote:
Well history shows when they get big fees they pretty much waste the money.
As you say, time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
|
#531 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4,845
|
I really hope we don't use the money to get bentenke he's too inconsistant in my opinion
|
|
|
|
|
#532 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Under Your Bed
Posts: 5,492
|
Quote:
Well history shows when they get big fees they pretty much waste the money.
As you say, time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
|
#533 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
|
Quote:
Liverpool have to gamble on players and don't get to spend silly money as often as Chelsea, City and United. Those clubs have spent big money with poor returns too but things are watered down by the signings that do work - and the fact they pick up a title every few years.
Rogers has spent over 200 million since he arrived according to which ever tabloid you want to google. |
|
|
|
|
|
#534 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
|
Quote:
I'm sorry but I don't consider Liverpool to be the poor relation when it comes to spending money because you've spent a pretty penny over the years.
Rogers has spent over 200 million since he arrived according to which ever tabloid you want to google. Utd can spend a fortune on Falcao and Di Maria and it doesn't cripple them the following summer if there not as successful as hoped. Chelsea could buy a Torres and Shevchenko and again it didn't really effect there spending power. City can do the same. Liverpool are not really in a situation to afford expensive mistakes. I don't think you'll see Liverpool reinvesting the money on one player. I just can't see the club ever spending £50 mil on one player in the near future. |
|
|
|
|
|
#535 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,156
|
In the last 5 years Liverpool have spent £316.5m. If you compare that with the top 4 :-
Chelsea £408m Man Utd £354m Man City £322m Liverpool £316m Arsenal £253m Liverpool aren't the poor relations when it comes to spending. As others have said, its about buying the right players. If Rodgers was sacked tomorrow whatever else he can complain about its not a lack of money being made available for transfers. |
|
|
|
|
|
#536 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
|
Quote:
In the last 5 years Liverpool have spent £316.5m. If you compare that with the top 4 :-
Chelsea £408m Man Utd £354m Man City £322m Liverpool £316m Arsenal £253m Liverpool aren't the poor relations when it comes to spending. As others have said, its about buying the right players. If Rodgers was sacked tomorrow whatever else he can complain about its not a lack of money being made available for transfers. |
|
|
|
|
#537 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
|
They've agreed. £49 Million
|
|
|
|
|
#538 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,156
|
£49m is terrific business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#539 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: On top of the sherry trifle.
Posts: 10,106
|
Great price for a player yet to prove his worth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#540 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
|
Well done to FSG. Wanted £50 mil and got pretty much that
|
|
|
|
|
|
#541 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,541
|
£49m is great for Liverpool. Let's just hope they spend it on wisely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#542 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,975
|
Quote:
In the last 5 years Liverpool have spent £316.5m. If you compare that with the top 4 :-
Chelsea £408m Man Utd £354m Man City £322m Liverpool £316m Arsenal £253m Liverpool aren't the poor relations when it comes to spending. As others have said, its about buying the right players. If Rodgers was sacked tomorrow whatever else he can complain about its not a lack of money being made available for transfers. |
|
|
|
|
|
#543 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,156
|
Quote:
That's only part off the issue though, you also have to consider the net spend. Over the last 3 years with BR in charge liverpools net spend has been half of Utd's for example at £100m. Chelsea has been the best performing. Also, each club has different recruitment policies.
If you spend £150m in a summer, even if you bring in £150m and your net spend is zero, that should still be enough of a spend to make a positive influence on the team. Its a bit like Southampton selling all the players last summer. If you hand the entire sum to Koeman and say "Build your own team" then he should be able to do that if he is a good enough manager. It gives him a nice blank canvas to work from even if in terms of net spend its a small or even negative amount. |
|
|
|
|
|
#544 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
|
Quote:
£49m is terrific business.
Liverpool should let the Torres sale remind them of what not to do this time around. |
|
|
|
|
|
#545 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
|
Quote:
Isn't it just?
Liverpool should let the Torres sale remind them of what not to do this time around. |
|
|
|
|
#546 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 35,635
|
This is such positive news and a great fee but please lets see us not blow the money on crap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#547 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
|
Quote:
Torres, Suarez sale was worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#548 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
|
Benteke will sign I think.
Personally I would love the club to go all out for Lacazzete and see if they can tempt lyon. We have time which is good thing. Suarez hurt as regardless of how much we got for him he couldn't be replaced. While I would of liked to of seen sterling grow and become world class here it's not like his not replaceable. |
|
|
|
|
|
#549 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Nth East
Posts: 21,589
|
Utd supposedly in for Benteke now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#550 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 8,216
|
Quote:
Benteke will sign I think.
Personally I would love the club to go all out for Lacazzete and see if they can tempt lyon. We have time which is good thing. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:20.




