Is this the reason behind the lack of 'bargain' signings?

[Hansern]

Those players cost Leicester about 2,5 mill £ in transfer fees though, and bar N'Gotty not much in wages either I reckon.

Inler 5 mill £, Andrei Kramaric 7 mill £, Benaloune 5,5 mill £ and Mendy 13 mill £ are probably better examples of Leicesters scouting not always working as it should.

There is obviously a case to be made about paying 29 mill £ for Slimani aswell but he hasnt played that much yet. But at 28 already thats some fee for a club like Leicester.

 

[manwithnoname]

NOBODY'S scouting works "as it should"

 

[Hansern]

I think there is a case to be made for clubs like Juventus, Roma, Sevilla, Dortmund, Leverkusen, Porto and Benfica. They rarely seem to do much wrong when it comes to scouting and signing players.

 

[hmmmmm1]

All our inferior signings over the last 25 odd years, can at least point to some silverware they won for the club. In recent years we can’t even do that. Awful / average players like taroe / Biscan played a big part in a winning a trophy.

 

[mark1975]

We've been shite at transfers because we have had a committee structure in place, with each member having their own agenda, preferences or interests at stake.

It meant we had no adhesive policy in place and ended up with players the manager didn't want and refused to play. It was madness, and further proof the americans overestimated their ability to intellectualise the sport. If transfers are going to improve we need better scouts who can take their eyes of FM 2017 data, we need Klopp to have the final say on targets, not signings, and finally we need the know-how to get that player in a room with Klopp so he can sell the 'vision' or whatever bollocks you want to call it. Klopp shouldn't have to deal with the shite Rodgers had to.

I've often thought the manager is wasted at pre-season matches/tours and whatever else. I'd much rather have him working on the transfer policy rather than watching walking football against Bimbong FC. Leave it to the bloody assistants. As we've seen over the last 20 years, transfers are too important to keep getting so routinely wrong. It's the most important aspect of football.

This. It's also pretty clear that much of that structure is still in place, when you look at the Wijnaldum and Mane signings. It seems to have worked out ok, but we can still argue that we've paid premium for Wijnaldum and well over the odds, which is more or less the blueprint of the last several years.

 

[manwithnoname]

All our inferior signings over the last 25 odd years, can at least point to some silverware they won for the club. In recent years we can’t even do that. Awful / average players like taroe / Biscan played a big part in a winning a trophy.

Yeah, maybe, but I'm not sure what that proves. Shite players are less noticeable in better teams? Sometimes you can win trophies with average players?

So?

 

[Hansern]

This. It's also pretty clear that much of that structure is still in place, when you look at the Wijnaldum and Mane signings. It seems to have worked out ok, but we can still argue that we've paid premium for Wijnaldum and well over the odds, which is more or less the blueprint of the last several years.

I dont think 25 mill is well over the odds for 25 year old Dutch international who had just scored 11 goals as an attacking midfielder for Newcastle.
Yes, we paid maybe 5-7 mill to much because of the premium between English clubs but looking at how he's developing I think its a fee that we can be quite happy with in the end.

34 mill for Mane looks a steal now.

The blueprint for the last few years have been paying over the odds for players that either dont fit into the team or dont improve it.
Mane and Wijnaldum does both.
There seem to be a much clearer transfer strategy now and a much clearer plan of what the team actually needs and what type of players we are looking at. Long may it continue.

 

[mark1975]

I don't think that's completely true. The jury is out on Klavan, Karius and Grujic, the first two haven't been a great success and the latter has barely figured. Wijnaldum was poor for a good six weeks between the City and Spurs games, I wouldn't call that a resounding success, nor enough to say £25m was a fair price. Matip looks great when available and Mane has been brilliant, but we've bought some great players previously under the same set up. It's just that we've bought twice as many shite/divisive players. So like I say, it's not hugely different at all.

 

[Squiggles]

The Wijnaldum price is still up for debate, IMO. Against Spurs £25M looked a steal. He was brilliant. In our poor run he he looked like a complete rip off, who didn't stand up when we needed, among others. Like many others he needs to increase his impact on games as well as consistency if he's to justify his asking price. We will have a better idea at the of next year. The fact Klopp has tasked him with getting into attacking areas gives me some confidence he'll prove himself an important player here.

 

[HC]

I think there is a case to be made for clubs like Juventus, Roma, Sevilla, Dortmund, Leverkusen, Porto and Benfica. They rarely seem to do much wrong when it comes to scouting and signing players.

Curiosity may have killed the cat, id suggest you look at the transfer market site for recent activity over the past couple of years . I looked at Porto and their influx and churn of players on loan and low value signings was obscene .

LFC had 17 in and 16 out inclusive of loans for 2016/2017

Porto had like 33 vs 30 for the same period !So if you're going through twice as many 'professionals' odds on you'll unearth more gems!
That's ignoring the visa issues the UK compared to the Portuguese free reign to plunder SA

 

[Hansern]

I don't think that's completely true. The jury is out on Klavan, Karius and Grujic, the first two haven't been a great success and the latter has barely figured. Wijnaldum was poor for a good six weeks between the City and Spurs games, I wouldn't call that a resounding success, nor enough to say £25m was a fair price. Matip looks great when available and Mane has been brilliant, but we've bought some great players previously under the same set up. It's just that we've bought twice as many shite/divisive players. So like I say, it's not hugely different at all.

Its very different. Karius and Gruijc have been bought as young talented players and Klavan as a back up. Gruijc would have played more if he hadnt been injured but he looked promising.
Matip, Mane and Wijnaldum can all be called a success for the first team.

Look at our transfer dealings under the previous regime. We were buying players that didnt fit into the team or how we wanted to play.
So in other words, its as different as red and green.
The best example is probably Markovic, bought as a 20 mill £ attacking midfielder and played as a left wing back and then out of the team.
Balotelli? Benteke? Borini, Aspas, Moreno. The list is a long painful read. Most of them didnt fit into the team at all.

53% of the players bought since January 2011 have been moved on and sold/loaned out. That tells its own story.

 

[Hansern]

Curiosity may have killed the cat, id suggest you look at the transfer market site for recent activity over the past couple of years . I looked at Porto an influx and churn of players on loan and low value signings was obscene .

LFC had 17 in and 16 out inclusive of loans for 2016/2017

Porto had like 33 vs 30 for the same period !So if you're going through twice as many 'professionals' odds on you'll unearth more gems!
That's ignoring the visa issues the UK compared to the Portuguese free reign to plunder SA

I know, but look at Benfica and Porto's ability to find talented players and then sell them for a premium. Its insane.
Yes, the method might be pretty similar to what Chelsea is doing now but Portuguese clubs have been quite lucky with the 3rd party ownership.

The other clubs are probably a better example towards a club in our situation.

 

[Squiggles]

Its very different. Karius and Gruijc have been bought as young talented players and Klavan as a back up. Gruijc would have played more if he hadnt been injured but he looked promising.
Matip, Mane and Wijnaldum can all be called a success for the first team.

Look at our transfer dealings under the previous regime. We were buying players that didnt fit into the team or how we wanted to play.
So in other words, its as different as red and green.
The best example is probably Markovic, bought as a 20 mill £ attacking midfielder and played as a left wing back and then out of the team.
Balotelli? Benteke? Borini, Aspas, Moreno. The list is a long painful read. Most of them didnt fit into the team at all.

53% of the players bought since January 2011 have been moved on and sold/loaned out. That tells its own story.

Karius is young, but he was bought in to improve the first teem. It was clear he was intended to be our number 1. Mignolet was dropped when in decent form. There's still plenty of time, of course, but he shouldn't be hidden in the 'prospect box' because he's failed to establish himself.

I agree otherwise. There has been a shift towards a more coherant transfer policy but we've only been active in one window so it's hard to draw much in the way of conclusions. Fingers crossed it points towards a brighter future.

 

[Red Bird]

The Wijnaldum price is still up for debate, IMO. Against Spurs £25M looked a steal. He was brilliant. In our poor run he he looked like a complete rip off, who didn't stand up when we needed, among others. Like many others he needs to increase his impact on games as well as consistency if he's to justify his asking price. We will have a better idea at the of next year. The fact Klopp has tasked him with getting into attacking areas gives me some confidence he'll prove himself an important player here.

Agreed. Also, it took a new manager and more than two seasons to see anything resembling any justification for the £25 million fee for Lallana. I'd cut Wijnaldum some slack. He was as complicit in our dismal January as everybody in that central midfield, though: Henderson, Can, Lucas and Lallana all played like drains and it's only when they woke up that we looked a bit sharper and won.

 

[LarryHagman]

I like Wijnaldum but I wouldn't call him a 'success' just yet. He's been good when he's been good but that hasn't been consistent. He'll get the chance because this is his first season, if it wasn't he'd be under threat IMO.
Even more so for Matip, too early to judge. Has looked good when in but that hasn't been often enough. And showed some poor tendencies in Jan.
Karius was brought in as #1 and isn't good enough.

 

[Leo]

Yeah but we went shopping in Primark for a goalie and that's what we got.
A cheap shirt.
It's a struggle to see the potential there when he struggles in almost every department you need to be a number 1 at a big club.

 

[Hansern]

He had a release clause in his contract. We would have paid a lot more if he didnt have one.
Are we gonna judge his ability because of a low release clause?

When you're voted the second best GK in a league filled with good goalkeepers, you obviously got something about you. And with Klopps Mainz connection we will have done our homework on him.

Just give him time. He's looked outstanding in some games and shocking in others. For a young player adapting thst sounds like a blueprint of what usually happens. No point in writing him off so soon.

 

[mark1975]

He had a release clause in his contract. We would have paid a lot more if he didnt have one.
Are we gonna judge his ability because of a low release clause?

When you're voted the second best GK in a league filled with good goalkeepers, you obviously got something about you. And with Klopps Mainz connection we will have done our homework on him.

Just give him time. He's looked outstanding in some games and shocking in others. For a young player adapting thst sounds like a blueprint of what usually happens. No point in writing him off so soon.

I think you've completely missed the point. We're judging Karius on what we've seen. And so far he's been crap. He's young yeah and might turn out ok, but you can't use the potential tag for everyone who's young, we can only really judge on what we've seen. He was playing as a regular in a tough league before he came here, so let's not pretend he came in as a rookie, he just hasn't adjusted well to us or this league.

Time will tell I guess, but you're definitely looking at a few of these signings and talking as though they're an excused success - Wijnaldum because he scored 11 last season and plays for Holland (he's still been inconsistent, which was a huge criticism of him at Newcastle), Karius and Grujic because they are young, Klavan because he was cheap and is only a stop gap (so it doesn't matter how poor he is). Where does it end? It might take a few seasons for us to truly judge them, fine, but that means it's fruitless sitting here, calling them a probably success or whatever, because we really don't know. So I don't see how you can say there has been a definitive improvement and shift in focus. As Squiggles said, with Mane and Matip, the signs are at least promising, and that's all we really have to look to at the moment.

 

[Hansern]

I think you've completely missed the point. We're judging Karius on what we've seen. And so far he's been crap. He's young yeah and might turn out ok, but you can't use the potential tag for everyone who's young, we can only really judge on what we've seen. He was playing as a regular in a tough league before he came here, so let's not pretend he came in as a rookie, he just hasn't adjusted well to us or this league.

Time will tell I guess, but you're definitely looking at a few of these signings and talking as though they're an excused success - Wijnaldum because he scored 11 last season and plays for Holland (he's still been inconsistent, which was a huge criticism of him at Newcastle), Karius and Grujic because they are young, Klavan because he was cheap and is only a stop gap (so it doesn't matter how poor he is). Where does it end? It might take a few seasons for us to truly judge them, fine, but that means it's fruitless sitting here, calling them a probably success or whatever, because we really don't know. So I don't see how you can say there has been a definitive improvement and shift in focus. As Squiggles said, with Mane and Matip, the signs are at least promising, and that's all we really have to look to at the moment.

There has been a clear shift in strategy. If you cant see that then so be it mate.

And no, I havent missed the point. The point I was adressing was that we've shopped in Primark in regards to Karius and his fee.
That obviously makes no sense. Sure you can only judge him by what you've seen so far, but then you should also give him time to adapt. Loads of players have taken over a season to get going in this league. That's very individual. My point is that it makes no sense in giving up on him, like some have done already.

Matip, Mane and Wijnaldum have been a success in my opinion. They've all strengthened the first team and we consider them first team starters now. That says a lot.

 

[mark1975]

There has been a clear shift in strategy. If you cant see that then so be it mate.

And no, I havent missed the point. The point I was adressing was that we've shopped in Primark in regards to Karius and his fee.
That obviously makes no sense. Sure you can only judge him by what you've seen so far, but then you should also give him time to adapt. Loads of players have taken over a season to get going in this league. That's very individual. My point is that it makes no sense in giving up on him, like some have done already.

Matip, Mane and Wijnaldum have been a success in my opinion. They've all strengthened the first team and we consider them first team starters now. That says a lot.

Matip and Mane have been a success, Wijnaldum has been a bit like Lallana and Henderson before him, some promise and alot of inconsistency, not many people were branding them a success in the first season and that's about where Wijnaldum is now. Like I say, he disappeared for 6 weeks predeeding the Spurs game. It's the managers call to put him in the team, that doesn't automatically equate to him being an absolute success, because other players have been persevered with previously when they weren't really performing consistently enough - it didn't mean that because they were starting games they were an automatic triumph.

The only players you can say have been well thought out are Matip and Mane - we needed presense at the back and pace and goals upfront. No brainer, just like when we needed creativity and goals, we bought Sturridge and Coutinho. Just like Clyne, Lovren, Milner, Henderson, Lallana, Firmino and to a lesser extent, Origi all fit the first team. That's 7 players from previous regimes who are more or less guaranteed starters. From this terrible era where we just signed players without a thought for where we would play them or how they would fit. I'm not saying we didn't make poor signings, but I think your assertion that every signing we've made now is "different" - while excusing a few as potential rather than assessing them for what they've offered so far, is blatantly rose tinted and shifting focus to suit your arguement.

Like I said, Matip and Mane are a huge step in the right direction, but we didn't just sign those two and the jury are out on the rest and whether they are A) good/consistent enough B) a "good fit" as you keep eluding to and C) an obvious shift in strategy.

We needed a dominant, confident ball playing keeper and we brought in Karius. I don't think that's a great example of a shift in strategy to start buying players who "fit" the system. He looks as brittle as Mignolet and is arguably an even lesser shot stopper while only a minor upgrade technically.

 

[manwithnoname]

We'll be "talking about Wijnaldum" as long as he's here, because he is, and always has been, a player who can be very inconsistent and go through periods where people will wonder what he does, before having another good spell.

I hope Klopp can improve that, but I have concerns.

 

[Hansern]

Always has been? Did you watch him play regularly for PSV or is that based on one season for Newcastle?

 

[manwithnoname]

Always has been? Did you watch him play regularly for PSV or is that based on one season for Newcastle?

Based on his season playing for Newcastle, in which is tendency to "disappear" was well-documented and a common cause of complaint, despite the acknowledgement that he was one of their best players.

 

[Hansern]

Based on his season playing for Newcastle, in which is tendency to "disappear" was well-documented and a common cause of complaint, despite the acknowledgement that he was one of their best players.

So one season is the same as "always has been". That doesn't make much sense, if any.

 

[mark1975]

So one season is the same as "always has been". That doesn't make much sense, if any.

It makes about as much sense as saying someone is a success because they've just had their first good game in two months.

 

[Hansern]

It makes about as much sense as saying someone is a success because they've just had their first good game in two months.

Hahaha, FFS mate. Are you serious? "A success because they've just had their first good game in two months".
Thats not even close to what the post was about, or why Mane, Matip or Wijnaldum are successful transfers.

But lets just forget it. This is starting to look like some weird Rodgers backing to undermine any good Klopp has actually done.

 

[manwithnoname]

I think it's OK to suggest that 2/3 of season played and some very uneven performances, would make it hilariously premature to label Wijnaldum, Karius or Matip as "successful" just yet.

Mane, on the other hand, you probably could.

 

[mark1975]

Hahaha, FFS mate. Are you serious? "A success because they've just had their first good game in two months".
Thats not even close to what the post was about, or why Mane, Matip or Wijnaldum are successful transfers.

But lets just forget it. This is starting to look like some weird Rodgers backing to undermine any good Klopp has actually done.

There's an unhealthy amount of backing going towards some of Klopp's signings. Proper blind, CDNW faith.

It's like the whole fracas over the suggestion that we could do with a goalscorer, and the ridiculous "only hard-working, minimal scoring attackers fit this system" counter arguement. It's pointless, stupid and incredibly myopic. The ridiculous notion that the current managers way is the only way, that everything they do is unquestionable, and every criticism is completely unfair doubt. They get stuff wrong, all of them.

 

[peekay]

All our inferior signings over the last 25 odd years, can at least point to some silverware they won for the club. In recent years we can’t even do that. Awful / average players like taroe / Biscan played a big part in a winning a trophy.

That is because all of those inferior players were lucky enough to play in the same team as a young Steven Gerrard, Michael Owen, and Jamie Carragher. Introduce a younger version of those three in our lineup, especially a young Steven Gerrard and we are comfortably in top 4 this season and most likely would have won atleast one cup under Klopp.

 

[Leo]

He had a release clause in his contract. We would have paid a lot more if he didnt have one.
Are we gonna judge his ability because of a low release clause?

When you're voted the second best GK in a league filled with good goalkeepers, you obviously got something about you. And with Klopps Mainz connection we will have done our homework on him.

Just give him time. He's looked outstanding in some games and shocking in others. For a young player adapting thst sounds like a blueprint of what usually happens. No point in writing him off so soon.

If he was that highly rated then why didn't a bidding war start over his signature seeing his contract was expiring.