• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Midfielders other than Bellingham

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well obviously fucking not but to say the rework of the Main Stand is still a contributing factor to what we can spend on players is BS.

It'll be another 3-4 years before the Anfield Rd investment is repaid but FSG will have known this before they signed off on the work.
 
Last edited:
They haven’t invested in the ground or training facilities either and reaping the rewards.

Do our rivals give bumper deals to elder players in the squad? I wouldn’t be arsed if we had Saka and gave him a deal. Just those who are hitting that cliff.

I believe they also faced on big exit fees on Ozil and Auba I would imagine.
Not convinced about infra costs being the reason why we spend less, FSG have spent similar net spends in 12yrs regardless. Also look at Red Sox, their fans are saying the same.
 
A nudge to Beamy’s comments from the accounts.

Anfield Road expansion

There is a contractual commitment of £49m for capital assets – I assume most or all of this will be the spend on the Annie Road which will be mostly in the current year, and then likely a flurry of activity in the close season to have everything operational for next season. In 2021-22, the club spent £21.4m on assets not yet in use (bring the total at year end to £27.4m). Again, most of this will be the Annie Road, so that puts the potential cost of the project at up to £76.4m, although it’s probably a bit less than that as there may be other bits and bobs in all of those numbers.

NB – the number previously touted in the press / online was £60m. I think this may have been speculation based on an initial tender estimate, and the figure has likely gone up since the preferred contractor has worked through the detailed specification and confirmed a final price. Key point to note is that there is a very clear figure in the accounts, which implies that a fixed price contract has been agreed, so the costs shouldn’t be pushed up by general inflation or other supply chain pressures in the global environment – those costs would sit with the contractor and would come out of their profit margin. To the extent we amend the specification during the process of the build, or if unforeseen complications arise, we would potentially be on the hook for incremental costs.

And just to re-iterate, we appear to be paying for the Annie Road out of our own resources – there is no sign of any additional finance coming in either from third parties or from FSG (as happened with the Main Stand). It would make perfect commercial sense to take on specific debt for the stand, but that would likely lead to all sorts of complications around security for the lenders – the banks probably have a first floating charge over all the clubs assets and it would be expensive to take on debt subordinated to the bank (i.e. at greater risk of default), so the thinking is probably that we can get by via the bank facility at a fairly cheap rate. This has necessarily meant curtailing spending on the squad, and it’s fair to say that’s a gamble that doesn’t seem to be paying off.
 
A nudge to Beamy’s comments from the accounts.

Anfield Road expansion

There is a contractual commitment of £49m for capital assets – I assume most or all of this will be the spend on the Annie Road which will be mostly in the current year, and then likely a flurry of activity in the close season to have everything operational for next season. In 2021-22, the club spent £21.4m on assets not yet in use (bring the total at year end to £27.4m). Again, most of this will be the Annie Road, so that puts the potential cost of the project at up to £76.4m, although it’s probably a bit less than that as there may be other bits and bobs in all of those numbers.

NB – the number previously touted in the press / online was £60m. I think this may have been speculation based on an initial tender estimate, and the figure has likely gone up since the preferred contractor has worked through the detailed specification and confirmed a final price. Key point to note is that there is a very clear figure in the accounts, which implies that a fixed price contract has been agreed, so the costs shouldn’t be pushed up by general inflation or other supply chain pressures in the global environment – those costs would sit with the contractor and would come out of their profit margin. To the extent we amend the specification during the process of the build, or if unforeseen complications arise, we would potentially be on the hook for incremental costs.

And just to re-iterate, we appear to be paying for the Annie Road out of our own resources – there is no sign of any additional finance coming in either from third parties or from FSG (as happened with the Main Stand). It would make perfect commercial sense to take on specific debt for the stand, but that would likely lead to all sorts of complications around security for the lenders – the banks probably have a first floating charge over all the clubs assets and it would be expensive to take on debt subordinated to the bank (i.e. at greater risk of default), so the thinking is probably that we can get by via the bank facility at a fairly cheap rate. This has necessarily meant curtailing spending on the squad, and it’s fair to say that’s a gamble that doesn’t seem to be paying off.

Yeah but that's only bolstering the case against FSG. He's saying that they've paid for a huge capital project out of the club's funds, which is pretty questionable for a business that doesn't generate loads of cash anyway. This is the sort of thing you borrow for - or really, that you might expect rich owners to stump up for themselves, given that it wouldn't affect FFP.

So they've saved some money on interest - great. Problem is we'll lose 10x that just for not being in the CL for one season. They got lucky last time they failed to address a big problem and we flirted with losing the CL money. Only a fucking Alisson header in the last second saved us. It's not going to happen again.
 
Yeah but that's only bolstering the case against FSG. He's saying that they've paid for a huge capital project out of the club's funds, which is pretty questionable for a business that doesn't generate loads of cash anyway. This is the sort of thing you borrow for - or really, that you might expect rich owners to stump up for themselves, given that it wouldn't affect FFP.

So they've saved some money on interest - great. Problem is we'll lose 10x that just for not being in the CL for one season. They got lucky last time they failed to address a big problem and we flirted with losing the CL money. Only a fucking Alisson header in the last second saved us. It's not going to happen again.

I do agree with this, however, my point is we aren’t spending as much as Arsenal because we’ve been paying for these infrastructure upgrades which they are no longer doing. That part is on FSG.

What isn’t on FSG is what the club staff decide to spend what money/assets the club has available. The stadium expansion didn’t impact the decision on not selling Origi when we had money on the table. The changes to Kirkby didn’t influence the decision to keep hold of Keita or Oxlade Chamberlain. These decisions have hampered us improving the squad.
 
I do agree with this, however, my point is we aren’t spending as much as Arsenal because we’ve been paying for these infrastructure upgrades which they are no longer doing. That part is on FSG.

What isn’t on FSG is what the club staff decide to spend what money/assets the club has available. The stadium expansion didn’t impact the decision on not selling Origi when we had money on the table. The changes to Kirkby didn’t influence the decision to keep hold of Keita or Oxlade Chamberlain. These decisions have hampered us improving the squad.

That's true, but even there, over the years we've generally done fantastically well in the market. Even some poor decisions recently probably still leave us well above par in terms of good trading in the last 5 or 6 years.
 
I think both Klopp and FSG needed a reality check a while back.
Klopp got his ealier, now maybe FSG, but I am not having high hopes.
The balls really in FSG's court, Klopp has stated numerous times prime focus is to manage the players he has.

Last thing he wants is to be in the centre of a rift between owner and board which tends to happen when things are going pear shaped like they are right now.

Everyone will have a different reason is their head as to why that is.....don't think Klopp's 1 for arguing with his co workers, if he feels he isn't being helped, he'll simply walk.
 
That's true, but even there, over the years we've generally done fantastically well in the market. Even some poor decisions recently probably still leave us well above par in terms of good trading in the last 5 or 6 years.
I think we’re all guilty of romanticism with the good trading point of view. Fabinho was probably our last good piece of business.
 
Here’s the full Joyce article.

Some quotes bolded for you @binomial

[article]
Liverpool end pursuit of Jude Bellingham and seek midfield alternatives
exclusive

Paul Joyce, Northern Football Correspondent
Tuesday April 11 2023, 8.45pm BST, The Times

Liverpool are drawing up a list of alternative targets to Jude Bellingham after deciding that the scale of their summer rebuild precludes a move for the England midfielder.
The merits of spending far in excess of £100 million on a single player have been widely debated at Anfield as Jürgen Klopp looks to revive the fortunes of his side after an underwhelming
campaign that has left them adrift of the Premier League’s top four.

Klopp has never disguised his admiration for Bellingham and talked the player up last summer, while the Borussia Dortmund star was understood to be enamoured by Liverpool’s long-standing interest in him as he considers his future.
However, rectifying this season’s drop-off and infusing the squad with first-team talent means that committing such a huge chunk of this summer’s funds to one player is no longer regarded by the club as the best strategy. The overall package would also be swelled by wages.

Liverpool are likely to sign at least two midfielders to bolster their engine room and have been linked to numerous targets such as Chelsea duo Mason Mount and Conor Gallagher, Bayern Munich’s Ryan Gravenberch, Brighton & Hove Albion’s Alexis Mac Allister and Moisés Caicedo, Wolverhampton Wanderers’ Matheus Nunes and Leicester City’s Youri Tielemans, who is available on a free transfer.

Mount, in particular, will be the centre of attention should he look to leave Stamford Bridge, where he has one year remaining on his contract. The England international has attracted interest across Europe, including from Manchester United, and would be cheaper than normal given his contract situation. Arsenal also admire Gravenberch, 20, who has struggled for minutes since moving to Bayern from Ajax last summer.

The decision to diversify and focus the search for reinforcements away from the 19-year-old Bellingham will come as a blow to Liverpool supporters who hoped that he would end up at Anfield. Barring an unexpected change in circumstances, it now seems unlikely that will be the case this summer at least.

Liverpool want to target new players as soon as the transfer window opens and there is a risk that the pursuit of Bellingham becomes a drawn-out saga given the level of interest in him. Bellingham also has suitors in Real Madrid and Manchester City, Chelsea and Paris Saint-Germain, but Dortmund know the value of one of the brightest talents in the world and do not want to lose a player whose contract does not expire until 2025.

The club’s plans crystallised during the recent international break after which Klopp said there had been “positive” talks on recruitment and that Liverpool were “busy”.
He also reiterated that the owner, Fenway Sports Group (FSG), was providing significant funds and said: “We will spend in the summer — for who and how many, there is nothing to say.”


Last Friday, however, Klopp hinted that whoever Liverpool now bring in would not appease everyone. “Whatever we do next year will never be enough from people’s point of view and your [the media’s] point of view,” he said. “But, yes, with smart recruitment we will improve, definitely. That is the plan.”

Club can expect criticism but cannot risk putting all its eggs in one basket
There have been plenty of examples in recent years of Liverpool making a stand over recruitment, even if their pragmatism proved relatively unpopular at the time.
In the summer of 2017, the club resisted the obvious temptation to buy a centre back, preferring instead to wait six months to bring in Virgil van Dijk for what was a club record £75 million fee in the new year. Southampton’s refusal to sell the Holland defender earlier, their position stemming from Liverpool’s initial conduct over the transfer, did not persuade Anfield officials to veer from their strategy.

Van Dijk had been earmarked as the best around and while there were other, cheaper, alternatives, the belief was he could solve a problem position for years to come in an instant. There was some turbulence in the short-term but Van Dijk’s belated arrival did prove transformational and he became one of the cornerstones for the Champions League and Premier League success that followed.
Similarly, the decision to sell Philippe Coutinho just as Van Dijk was coming in through the door was hardly greeted as a cause for celebration even if Barcelona’s £142 million offer — and the player’s determination to force through the move he had been denied the previous August — softened the blow. The Brazil star has not been missed.

Liverpool also refused to buckle over Georginio Wijnaldum’s contract demands in the summer of 2021 and allowed a popular player to leave on a free transfer.
Yet, realigning transfer plans and opting not to go all in on Bellingham represents the club adopting a position that will bring more scrutiny — and criticism — than ever before.

The recruitment team, Klopp and FSG, will stand or fall by how next season now plays out. For many Liverpool supporters, the development will be hugely disappointing, such is the clamour that has developed around the Borussia Dortmund midfielder, who turns 20 in the summer.

It was early last July when the disappointment of the club’s failed quadruple bid still lingered (though few of the problems that have since been linked to it were publicly aired) that Klopp spoke about his admiration for the England midfielder.
He’s not on the market, so that’s the first problem with that player,” the Liverpool manager said. “Well, the only problem with that player!”

As such, Bellingham is still not available for transfer, with Dortmund eager to keep the midfielder, who has two years left on his contract, beyond this summer. Yet the lofty price tag that accompanies his talent, thought to be around £120 million, is now an issue for a club who are no longer buying from a position of strength. In many respects, Liverpool have created their own problem.

They chose not to sign a midfielder in the summer of 2022 when interest in Aurélien Tchouaméni of AS Monaco was trumped by Real Madrid, who ended up paying £68 million and committed to a further £17 million in bonuses.

Despite that disappointment, Klopp was confident he had enough depth. “The last thing that would have crossed my mind is that we have to do this [sign a midfielder],” he said nine months ago.

“I know all these things, that we don’t score enough goals from midfield, this and that, but what do we want? This ‘Golden Cow’ that is producing absolutely everything — milk as well!”

By then, the club had invested £64 million, rising to £85 million, in Benfica’s Darwin Núñez to follow on from the initial £37 million used to prise Luis Diaz from Porto. Three months ago, a further £37 million was spent on PSV Eindhoven’s Cody Gakpo to further futureproof the front line.

In the meantime, the midfield has become the issue many feared it would be and results have conspired to leave Liverpool out of the cup competitions and off the pace in the league.

Naby Keita and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain are leaving on free transfers, injuries have reared and the drop off in form from players such as Fabinho has highlighted weaknesses.

Clearly, the club feels an overhaul is now required and signings may be sought in other areas too.

The situation is not being viewed as similar to that of Van Dijk, or even Alisson, who joined for £65 million in the summer of 2018 to solve a pressing goalkeeping conundrum. Rather, it is one that requires more ammunition than a silver bullet. Whether they are shooting themselves in the foot, only time will tell.
[/article]
 
I think we’re all guilty of romanticism with the good trading point of view. Fabinho was probably our last good piece of business.

I suppose until recently you'd definitely say Jota, Diaz and Konate were great business. All 'unlucky' with injuries so far though, so there is that.
 
I suppose until recently you'd definitely say Jota, Diaz and Konate were great business. All 'unlucky' with injuries so far though, so there is that.

Diaz and Jota are excellent

Some great players when fit and firing. All had those injury issues which adds to our current predicament. The Jota we’ve seen over the last year is a far cry from the Jota we signed.
 
Mount is one that has shown he's got a bit about him at the top level. If we can get him for a decent price I'd be confident Klopp could help him move up a level. And he's got that Salah sort of thing, not the first pick, didn't 'make' it at Chelsea and has something to prove.

Lampard returning there pro tem will see Mount back in the side IMO. Whether that will lead to his contract talks being resolved remains to be seen.
 
I have praised FSG to high heavens. I thought them to be frankly better than most owners in this "class" of owner.

But having helped get us into a great spot, they've royally mucked it up. So much so that you wonder, if they just got lucky with Klopp. And now they are reverting to mean.
 
Without this being my usually condescending self, I mean this as a genuine question, but how much do FSG determine the playing staff?

My guess is next to nothing. They will set parameters in terms of budgets. The rest is down to those who are the day to day running of the club. FSG didn’t hand out contract extensions to Henderson and Oxlade Chamberlain. Two hugely wrong decisions. They didn’t say we just sign Thiago, another wrong decision considering he turned 32 this week.

Klopp & co need to take responsibility for this, and Klopp has done so to some extent. Neglecting the middle when spending cash on Diaz, Nunez, Gakpo and Carvalho is daft and mustn’t be repeated.

FSG will face all the heat. But agree with you on this post. We had a laser focused approach to signings. The reason for the success was Klopp's coaching and the background team assembled by FSG. Now that background team is gone. We don't have inside information but one can draw conclusions from the sequence of events. Starting from Thiago, contract extensions handed out and the background team leaving one by one. We don't do things the way we used to.

Neglecting the midfield to sign Diaz, Nunez, Gakpo, Carvalho was bizarre. Worst part is I am not even sure if those signings are that great. Diaz is the best of the lot and he still has some distance to go to match early Mane.
 
This young man is class, can play both wings and through the middle
[article]
LIVERPOOL

Tottenham in fight with Liverpool over Goncalves’ signature

  • eefcf0f54f56f9a25db91a7ad8f5e91b
  • by
    Jit
  • April 12, 2023

ShareTweet

pedro-goncalves111-1000x600.jpg

Tottenham Hotspur are reportedly in a battle with Liverpool over a deal to sign Sporting CP midfielder Pedro Goncalves, as per 90min.
The 24-year-old has been enjoying a brilliant campaign at the Jose Alvalade Stadium this term, scoring 16 goals and notching up 10 assists in 35 appearances in all competitions.
The Portuguese’s impressive displays for Sporting have caught the attention of several big clubs around Europe with Tottenham and Liverpool among those to have registered their interest.
According to the report by 90min, Tottenham are planning to strengthen their engine room for next season and Goncalves is on their radar.
The report further claims that the 24-year-old first came into Tottenham’s sight when they were keeping tabs on Pedro Porro – who joined the North London club during the winter window. And after being impressed by the Portuguese’s talent, Spurs have been monitoring his development closely ahead of a potential summer move.
Battle

However, 90min also states that the Lilywhites are set to face tough competition from Liverpool in getting any potential deal done for Goncalves as the Merseyside club are also eyeing a swoop for the Portugal international – although the report alludes that Spurs’ interest is the most concrete.

Goncalves – valued at around £26m by Transfermarkt – still has more than three years left on his current contract so Sporting are in no rush to let their star man leave this summer. Tottenham and Liverpool will have to offer a lucrative proposal to persuade the Liga Portugal giants in to selling the midfielder if the Premier League duo decide to formalise their interest.
Having endured a dire campaign this term, it has been suggested that Liverpool are looking to strengthen their squad this summer and revamping the engine room is Jurgen Klopp’s priority.
Jude Bellingham has been mentioned as the Reds’ primary target. But, recent reports claim that the Merseyside club have pulled the plug on that deal as they beleive the Borussia Dortmund star is too expensive. So, it appears Liverpool have already shifted their focus on alternative targets and Goncalves could emerge as a serious option.
On the other hand, Tottenham are also seemingly planning to strengthen their midfield department as they have been linked with several creative midfielders in recent times.
They lack quality options in that area so bolstering the number ten position would be a shrewd decision and Goncalves could be a solid signing.
It’s going to be interesting to see who will win the race to sign the Sporting star if Tottenham and Liverpool go head-to-head with each other over this deal during the off-season.
[/article]
 
As per 90min hahahahaha ffs.

His goal against Arsenal though. Mammmmmmma mia

See that's how I don't like with Transfermarkt...how do they value someone like him at 26m, it's preposterous.
 
FSG will face all the heat. But agree with you on this post. We had a laser focused approach to signings. The reason for the success was Klopp's coaching and the background team assembled by FSG. Now that background team is gone. We don't have inside information but one can draw conclusions from the sequence of events. Starting from Thiago, contract extensions handed out and the background team leaving one by one. We don't do things the way we used to.

Neglecting the midfield to sign Diaz, Nunez, Gakpo, Carvalho was bizarre. Worst part is I am not even sure if those signings are that great. Diaz is the best of the lot and he still has some distance to go to match early Mane.

I think the Gakpo signing is the one that can be argued as being bizarre because we needed forwards just as much as we needed midfielders.

And I actually like Gakpo's potential
 
FSG will face all the heat. But agree with you on this post. We had a laser focused approach to signings. The reason for the success was Klopp's coaching and the background team assembled by FSG. Now that background team is gone. We don't have inside information but one can draw conclusions from the sequence of events. Starting from Thiago, contract extensions handed out and the background team leaving one by one. We don't do things the way we used to.

Neglecting the midfield to sign Diaz, Nunez, Gakpo, Carvalho was bizarre. Worst part is I am not even sure if those signings are that great. Diaz is the best of the lot and he still has some distance to go to match early Mane.

We had to sign Nunez or someone to replace Mane though. Diaz was signed year before and assume Carvalho was tracked for a few years, both can be sold presume without loss.

I don’t think signing a midfielder should have had a impact because on that just by itself alone.
 
You can make an argument for Gakpo - even though I have my reservations about him - as a Firmino replacement if that's what we wanted. He was at least moderately priced too.

Nunez I just don't understand. 60-80M was a massive gamble for a player that doesn't quite look right in any position for us.
 
https://www.squawka.com/en/veiga-bellingham-alternative-liverpool-arsenal-transfer-news

[article]
The 20-year-old is attracting interest at home and from England with his present deal at boyhood club Celta Vigo set to expire in June 2026. Veiga to date has made no fewer than 44 appearances in all competitions subsequently registering nine goals (all in this current La Liga campaign) and creating three more.

Going even further, Jamal Musiala is the only U21 midfielder with more goals than Veiga in Europe’s top five leagues this season, in some quarters Veiga is seen as an alternative for the much-wanted Borussia Dortmund star Jude Bellingham.


Liverpool are among those linked by Cadena Ser sports show El Larguero, along with Arsenal and Newcastle United. The Spain-based outlet claim that while Veiga’s advisors are encouraging him to move to the Premier League, Real Madrid are his preferred destination.

His release clause is around £35million but El Larguero also say their sources believe Celta Vigo may sell for even less,
despite Mouriño’s comments.

“We want to keep Gabri Veiga but it will be impossible due to release clause,” the Celta president told reporters.

“We know some bids he has, impossible to match.”
[/article]
untitled-jpg.2579

Bajcetic - Veiga partnership for club and country? 😛

(latest assist on 2 Apr not included)



Untitled.jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom