DS Forums

 
 

Liverpool Supporters Thread (Part 21)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-07-2015, 15:47
JMTD
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,681
If its true he'll get 200k a week is then that's just ridiculous. Only winners out of this are Liverpool.
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.
JMTD is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 12-07-2015, 16:06
Jokanovic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: West London
Posts: 5,658
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.
Well history shows when they get big fees they pretty much waste the money.
As you say, time will tell.
Jokanovic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 16:08
1manonthebog
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
Well history shows when they get big fees they pretty much waste the money.
Sadly this is true, we've still not bought anyone exciting and I don't think we will.
1manonthebog is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 16:12
NorthernNinny
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
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!
City will be used to dealing with iffy agents. Look at the charmer that represented Carlos Tevez.
NorthernNinny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 16:13
Matt35
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,541
Well history shows when they get big fees they pretty much waste the money.
As you say, time will tell.
That is true. Andy Carroll comes to mind. Raheem certainly hasn't come out of this well, even though a lot of the blame is on his agent. First thing raheem should do is get rid of him but I don't think he will.
Matt35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 16:17
bexmil89
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
bexmil89 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 16:55
TheSloth
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Under Your Bed
Posts: 5,492
Well history shows when they get big fees they pretty much waste the money.
As you say, time will tell.
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.
TheSloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 17:03
NorthernNinny
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
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.
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.
NorthernNinny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 17:37
misawa97
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
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.
I think the difference is Liverpool cannot afford to spend big on players and those players not being a success.

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.
misawa97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 17:57
Eddie hunter
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.
Eddie hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:00
1manonthebog
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
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.
I saw a Meme about this on Facebook, everyone can see the issue bar LFC, they are buying crap or rather "Potential" Rather than wasting money on half a dozen "Potential" players buy 1 decent player, but sadly this is not their buying style.
1manonthebog is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:01
1manonthebog
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
They've agreed. £49 Million
1manonthebog is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:03
Eddie hunter
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,156
£49m is terrific business.
Eddie hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:07
pork.pie
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.
pork.pie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:08
misawa97
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
Well done to FSG. Wanted £50 mil and got pretty much that
misawa97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:10
Matt35
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,541
£49m is great for Liverpool. Let's just hope they spend it on wisely.
Matt35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:19
mikeyddd
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,975
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.
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.
mikeyddd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:25
Eddie hunter
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,156
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.
Recruitment policies is certainly an issue however net spend less so. Rodgers has had the money to totally reshape a squad regardless of players leaving too. For example if the £50m for Sterling is spent this summer in addition to monies already spent that is enough to make a significant difference to the squad regardless of a player leaving and £50m being brought in. It reduces the net spend but its still a big spend.

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.
Eddie hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:32
NorthernNinny
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
£49m is terrific business.
Isn't it just?

Liverpool should let the Torres sale remind them of what not to do this time around.
NorthernNinny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:35
1manonthebog
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,324
Isn't it just?

Liverpool should let the Torres sale remind them of what not to do this time around.
Torres, Suarez sale was worse.
1manonthebog is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:38
asyousay
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.
asyousay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:41
NorthernNinny
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,095
Torres, Suarez sale was worse.
I think there's still time for some of those players to come good though. Carroll has moved on, there's no value left there.
NorthernNinny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:42
misawa97
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.
misawa97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:50
Grouty
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Nth East
Posts: 21,589
Utd supposedly in for Benteke now.
Grouty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2015, 18:51
Dandem
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 8,216
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.
I also hope the club focus on Lacazette. It may not happen, the player might not be able to be convinced under any circumstances, but I'd still like the club to try.
Dandem is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:20.