Liverpool transfer model? Edwards is largely to blame
- Thread starter bluebell
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
You sell them when you know they are on the downturn and before anyone else realises.
This post has the Momo seal of approval.
This is where the caveats come in, as I'm sure you're actually well aware.
For a start, a certain amount of investment/losses ARE allowed - is it £100m every few years? If you add on profits that would actually make quite a big difference - pretty much what we'd actually need (which wouldn't exactly be a coincidence, given what we need is what other clubs have - more or less - and what other clubs have is probably roughly in line with the actual limits).
Then there's the straight up flouting, which a lot of other clubs seem to get away with. I think? We always seem to be rather zealously obedient of these rules, if you ask me. Almost like it suits FSG in some way.
Then there are the workarounds, like longer contracts, which can work in the shorter term. Dodgy inflation of sponsorship etc.
Anyone reasonable can see that the biggest reason our owners don't invest is cos they don't fucking want to. But whatever, keep playing dumb if you prefer,
FSG have always been in the position of not wanting to invest from their own pockets. It was never a secret. Remember they came in admiring the Arsenal model.
My question is the logic behind waiting till the last year of a players contract to renegotiate giving all the leverage to the players and letting them walk for free because the club could not meet their salary demand.
I remember in the summer me and the other Loonies were crying out for the club to get MFs and worried that injuries would mean we would struggle to get 4th. I made a list of players I would sell to get funds in. We were laughed at because a few people thought there was no way there could be such a steep drop-off.
I didn't have an issue with the signing of Nunez or Gakpo, but you were also thinking they would get a MF of value not a MF reject who couldn't stay fit.
After the Gakpo deal, Klopp came out and said we needed to sell to buy but he wouldn't sell unless a player asked to leave. That's a problem right there.
If Barca could find funds to finance title charge there's no reason why LFC couldn't get €40m as an advance from somewhere and gotten a capable MF.
Last edited:
You just said “spending can’t be subsidised” and “it’s not a grey” area - which you’ve just followed up with talking about our owners not investing - make your mind up.
It’s £100m losses , rolling over 3 years, if I’m not mistaken and UEFA is bringing in rules to limit contract lengths.
I’m not actually sure what you’re arguing about anymore - but doing “dodgy contracts” doesn’t look like investment to me.
Anyway, the point I was trying to get to, which I think you’re actually getting at as well (until your last post) is that we either do something like what City have allegedly done and cheat the system - in which case we’d have to be supportive of the case against them being dropped and letting everybody else spend what they want.
Or, it looks like the only other way of raising significant funds / income for transfers is by selling off new shares and banking that revenue as described by Beamrider.
What can’t do - is get much additional funding from the owners or take out a loan.
£100m over 3 years isn’t all that much - considering in our best seasons we made a small profit and we’ve regularly made a loss.
So, given we did make a profit last season, and likely break even this season - we could splurge a bit in the summer - but missing out on CL money next season means we’ll have to cover that else where - because that’s a fair bit of revenue lost right there.
I originally replied to your claim that under FFP the only alternative to keeping within spending limits was to borrow from banks etc. That was wrong so I corrected it. It wasn't part of some defence of FFP or attack on FSG or anything more than that at all. Just literally a minor correction.
I don't think your post made mention of any flexibility in the rules or anything, so I was just responding in kind (although I know how many idiots there are on here, so I did add "in theory" just to insure against future tedious exchanges with extreme pedants).
Yep, extreme pedants are very tedious.
By first being prudent with its scouting, avoiding ruinous bidding wars and knowing when to let players go and get fees for them.
Sell some players with zero balance sheet value, sell or release some higher earners, take a loan from the owners of £50m or so to cover acceptable loss, stick the new signings on 7 or 8 year deals. Anfield Rd might bring what £10m extra.
That might generate 100m or so. We probably lose about 50m in CL profits (maybe less? Significant, anyway). Hope that that's enough to get back in the top 4 I suppose. Normal budget of £30m or so. Call it a budget of £80-100m then.
Because Stevie likes to use it as a way to defend FSG at all costs.
3 years being the period at which investigations start by which your losses can't exceed a certain amount.
We've been in the top 2 for revenue in England over the last 3 years.
We have the 4th highest wage cost in England over the last 3 years.
We have the 7th highest net spend in England over the last 3 years.
FFP you're having a laugh.
A loan you say… to cover “acceptable losses” brought on by buying players.
So I was right after all.
Thanks
Last edited:
If we stipulate that you are right can we get back to single paragraph posts that only vaguely have anything to do with the thread topic?
That’s not how classic 6CM works.
You really are a fucking cretin aren't you.
Fine, you're on ignore with the other ubertwats.
Does that mean I’m not an ubertwat? That’s my sole purpose.
Whoa. I’d have totally different people on my block list if I wanted to use that facility.
Yeah I get that. I seem to attract the kind of bumptious people who like picking losing arguments and then don't have the balls to admit defeat, so just end up lying and shifting the goal posts etc. Well, that's Stevie and Frogfish anyway. Hansern is just thick. I don't block every person like that, but Frogfish and Stevie just pick on me way more than anyone else.
You probably just literally ignore the people you think are worst. Well so do I, it's just that they don't directly interact with me, so no need to block them.
I engage with those in the middle ground more. I’ll still challenge those on the extreme of my points of view.
I still won’t block though.
I still won’t block though.
I wonder if he is a significant part though.
The 4 reasons mostly cited are :
- FSH won’t “open their wallet”
- Lijnders has too much influence
- Edwards (towards the end) /l& then Ward failed in their role
- Klopp is too loyal to his players
It’s probably a bit of all of them without one single issue being the dominant overriding factor.
If anything - Ljinders is the least likely to severely impact - unless you believe the narrative of him seemingly having more influence than Klopp himself.
[article]
News From Liverpool: Jurgen Klopp’s “power is increasing” in transfer decisions, claims journalist
Liverpool
The club remain in the process of appointing a new sporting director ahead of Wards imminent exit, which comes at a time of major rebuilding of the squad.
At least four senior players are on their way out, including Roberto Firmino, Naby Keita and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, while Liverpool are expected to sign three new midfielders.
Further additions could come at centre-back and in the goalkeeping ranks, while more surprises cannot be ruled out at this stage as the Reds face a season without Champions League football.
It is not the ideal time for the man in charge of transfers to be leaving, but that is the situation Liverpool have been dealt with.
According to The Athletics David Ornstein, speaking to NBC Sports, Klopps power is increasing when it comes to transfer decisions.
That, in the period between Wards departure and his successors arrival, will be alongside the likes of head of recruitment Dave Fallows, chief scout Barry Hunter and Fenway Sports Group president Mike Gordon.
There has long been a sense that Klopps influence has held more sway in the boardroom in recent transfer windows, which has been a concern.
The manager is said to have pushed hard for the signing of Darwin Nunez, for example, while assistants Pepijn Lijnders and Vitor Matos have been consulted for deals over the likes of Luis Diaz and Cody Gakpo.
While those signings are likely to shape Liverpools attack for years to come, other decisions have been more of a worry.
One of those, as touched upon by Sky Sports Melissa Reddy last week, was Klopps personal intervention during talks over a new contract for Jordan Henderson in 2021.
Henderson was courting interest from Atletico Madrid and Paris Saint-Germain with two years remaining on his previous deal, before putting pen to paper on an extension through to 2025.
Reddy claims that figures within the clubs recruitment staff had flagged concerns that the squad was veering away from the right football age.
The captains output is now waning, but Liverpool have committed to improved terms until beyond his 35th birthday one of a number of questionable calls ahead of this summers midfield revamp.
It would be wrong to question Klopps eye for a player, but it should be pointed out that, for example, before the club signed Sadio Mane and Mohamed Salah, his preferred targets were Mario Gotze and Julian Brandt.
A marriage between the confident analytics of Wards predecessor, Michael Edwards, and Klopps own judgment appeared to be the perfect fit for Liverpool.
[/article]
News From Liverpool: Jurgen Klopp’s “power is increasing” in transfer decisions, claims journalist
Liverpool
The club remain in the process of appointing a new sporting director ahead of Wards imminent exit, which comes at a time of major rebuilding of the squad.
At least four senior players are on their way out, including Roberto Firmino, Naby Keita and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, while Liverpool are expected to sign three new midfielders.
Further additions could come at centre-back and in the goalkeeping ranks, while more surprises cannot be ruled out at this stage as the Reds face a season without Champions League football.
It is not the ideal time for the man in charge of transfers to be leaving, but that is the situation Liverpool have been dealt with.
According to The Athletics David Ornstein, speaking to NBC Sports, Klopps power is increasing when it comes to transfer decisions.
That, in the period between Wards departure and his successors arrival, will be alongside the likes of head of recruitment Dave Fallows, chief scout Barry Hunter and Fenway Sports Group president Mike Gordon.
There has long been a sense that Klopps influence has held more sway in the boardroom in recent transfer windows, which has been a concern.
The manager is said to have pushed hard for the signing of Darwin Nunez, for example, while assistants Pepijn Lijnders and Vitor Matos have been consulted for deals over the likes of Luis Diaz and Cody Gakpo.
While those signings are likely to shape Liverpools attack for years to come, other decisions have been more of a worry.
One of those, as touched upon by Sky Sports Melissa Reddy last week, was Klopps personal intervention during talks over a new contract for Jordan Henderson in 2021.
Henderson was courting interest from Atletico Madrid and Paris Saint-Germain with two years remaining on his previous deal, before putting pen to paper on an extension through to 2025.
Reddy claims that figures within the clubs recruitment staff had flagged concerns that the squad was veering away from the right football age.
The captains output is now waning, but Liverpool have committed to improved terms until beyond his 35th birthday one of a number of questionable calls ahead of this summers midfield revamp.
It would be wrong to question Klopps eye for a player, but it should be pointed out that, for example, before the club signed Sadio Mane and Mohamed Salah, his preferred targets were Mario Gotze and Julian Brandt.
A marriage between the confident analytics of Wards predecessor, Michael Edwards, and Klopps own judgment appeared to be the perfect fit for Liverpool.
[/article]
- Status
