Is TAA worth breaking the wage structure ?
- Thread starter moron
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
I refuse to believe that because we didn't have specific people in specific roles other directors simply ignored the situation. Which other business would this happen in? I've worked in little shitty pubs and on the board of billion quid companies and neither of them would have ignored what is essentially a leaking roof, no matter who was employed at the time.
Has anybody left the club and been happier, or more successful? Shaggy or Suarez perhaps? I hope Trent will do a Gerrard and realise just turning out in front of the kop is more rewarding than a title at a plastic club.
Its going to be difficult though as I don't think Trent is worth more than the £200k he's on now. Virgil and Mo are world class but Trent can look a bit sloppy by comparison and I don't think he deserves parity.
I miss him bombing on at RB but without a top DM (Fab) we got found out. I really didn't like the inverted RB bollocks as too often the space was out on the right and nobody was out there. It felt like we built the team around that and it didn't really turn out to be a game changer. It boils my piss to see Bradley doing the inverted thing, or worse, Gomez!
Its going to be difficult though as I don't think Trent is worth more than the £200k he's on now. Virgil and Mo are world class but Trent can look a bit sloppy by comparison and I don't think he deserves parity.
I miss him bombing on at RB but without a top DM (Fab) we got found out. I really didn't like the inverted RB bollocks as too often the space was out on the right and nobody was out there. It felt like we built the team around that and it didn't really turn out to be a game changer. It boils my piss to see Bradley doing the inverted thing, or worse, Gomez!
I think the point has been made earlier. If we stupidly let him go we'd end up spending 80m plus the wages to replace him and probs end up with something inferior. So just pay the cunt. If he wasn't brilliant and in his prime I wouldn't be that arsed, but he is and he is.
Erm...Old Trafford
I work in a University, and people would ignore the fuck out of almost any problem.
@Woland if we let him go, there is no fucking way we would buy an RB for 80M. We would look for Robbo level purchases
I think his own lack of interest in his former role has kindof highlighted that while HE is worth 80m and high wages, his value to our team is significantly less. It's the same reason he didn't work out for England in lieu of objectively worse footballers.
I am not saying that's an argument for getting rid of him, and there is no argument to letting him go on a free, the fact that we're in this position with him is crazy, but that is how we'll look at it.
I think it's also fair to say that he isn't worth as much as he was two years ago, and I hate that that's the case.
It’s an opinion based on fiction created in your own mind.
What I’m saying is - it’s bollocks and we can discount it.
Doubt it. And if we do we're going backwards
I don't think he's worth any less. I think he's worth more. If he was on a long contract and Madrid came knocking we'd be talking well north of a hundred.
Let me put it another way, do you think he has markedly improved as a player in the last two years? I'm not sure he has. The bulky version of him for me was objectively worse.
We went from "he's the best RB in the entire world and has redefined what is possible with the position" to "is he a right back, and what is his best position?"
To be clear, I love Trent. I think on a great team you want these difference makers. I just don't know what he wants.
His value to the team is significant as there isnt the same type of footballer out there imho.
He’s also a local lad and in his prime.
We should get that contract sorted without any doubt.
His role for England is down to playing for the wrong type of manager.
Were you convinced with him as a CM? Or even inverting? Do you think he was more devastating making long diagonals and balls over the top or closer to the touch line and up the pitch. The stats say old trent mode was better. Slot prefers it. My eyes prefer it.
The question is whether Trent is... fulfilled by it? He'll be fine with it, he'll do some amazing shit either way, but if he's got the need to have a big change, and it isn't happening in CM, he may like the idea of a different adventure in another way.
And we could always sell him a year or two down the line and recover his wages!
To be honest I don't read much analysis, I don't watch the dickheads on sky, I don't listen to any liverpool podcasts, I don't watch England or give a fuck what their dickhead manager thinks, I just go and watch him most home games. He's great. Best we've ever had. I'm not sure this whole positional thing is nearly as big a deal as I read it is on here.
Those quotes are more what I thought at the time vs now, rather than any sort of punditry.
The positional thing is only an issue if it's an issue for Trent. I think it at least was an issue, based on what he has said and how focused he appeared, but maybe I'm wrong.
I dont think Trent’s decision rests on where he plays. I think he’s happy playing at RB. The full backs under Slot sees loads of the ball and are very attacking. He’ll be involved and have the chance to win something with us, thats the most important thing.
I also think the media and fans are reading way to much into previous comments about playing in midfield.
He’ll agree a new contract in the near future I reckon.
And yes, I want him in my team going forward. He’s an absolute baller.
Fair enough. I can't remember actually ever listening to him.
We did a cost review exercise one time with a view to finding overhead savings. We were told we couldn't touch the football side of things, so we ended up making tiny savings here and there when we could have saved millions by eliminating waste at Melwood.
There was a disconnect between the board and the football operations. Mike Gordon was the only person who was across both. I've no idea how that works now, as I don't imagine Michael Edwards has any input on the running of the business, but while I'm sure the contract positions of those three guys would have been commented on by the board, I think it's unlikely that they'd have gone hands on to resolve things or given people out at Kirby a rocket up their arse for failing to do so.
This is how Emre Can was allowed to leave on a free - the admin side of the business wanted to renew, even if it meant giving him the release clause his agent was asking for (which was why the football side objected). Football prevailed. They didn't want to set a precedent.
I thought that was madness back then, I still think it's madness now.
Well all this about FSG being genius is bullshit then eh. Always thought they were opportunistic cunts but can't see why anyone would want to ignore these three huge problems.
View: https://x.com/LFCTransferRoom/status/1832473243258597392?t=PIjmBCyxU0qM1U35YSpJHQ&s=19
View: https://x.com/LFCTransferRoom/status/1832473243258597392?t=PIjmBCyxU0qM1U35YSpJHQ&s=19
He also did two other long range cross field passes and in both cases gave the ball away to the opposition in that game. Then there was a miss placed pass in defence that could have proven very costly. That pass in that clip was his main highlight and a cross to Kane that he should have put away but didn't.
Seeing how tight the club is these days. They would just replace him with Connor Bradley and not buy anyone.
Which would make sense. We can't possibly find a like-for-like replacement to TAA, and we'd be hard pressed finding an available right back that's better than Bradley.
I dont understand
