Other Matches - 13th to 15th Sept. 2014
- Thread starter Frogfish
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
So that means there isn't a limit? We've got a significantly smaller ground than United for starters and owners who aren't running up debts. We've also been out the CL for a good few years now. Not that small significant details like that matter in cloud-cuckoo land.
Yeah, but don't expect that to matter.
He's not happy unless we're getting beat and he's jizzing over one of our rivals.
OK here's an idea. Scrap Lallana and maybe Lovren or even Markovich.
Use the money that we paid for them to buy a world class player.
Problem solved.
Di Maria wanted to stay at real, but they didn't give him a new contract. We couldn't compete financially with PSG and man United. Falcao is now the 3rd highest paid player in the world, so I doubt we could afford that either.
We need to get players who can be world class, not existing players who are. We did it with Suarez, we did it with Torres. Ideally we've tried to do it with Mario, Markovic and can.
The Reus delusion. Why do you think the best, group 'A' players in the world want to come to Liverpool? Because we finished 2nd last year? Because we won the league 20years ago? Because we won the champions league 9years ago? Because we've got billionaire owners that will pay whatever they want in wages and transfer fees?
Lallana and Lovren are good players, and the best players we can realistically sign, at the top of our 'level'.
People thinking that we can sign the group 'A' players are a little retarded.
People are really underestimating the spending power we had this summer.
By selling Suarez, we had the funds to outbid any offer on the market. And this was probably the most critical window for quite awhile.
So this idea that players wouldn't want to come to us, or that we couldn't have spent more aggressively is silly. Players will follow the money even if it means playing in Addis Ababa, and we probably couldn't condensed a few signings into higher quality options.
What United did may or may not work out. But even if they don't make UCL this year, they have elite talents in Mata and Di Maria tied to the club for the forseeable future. If you ask me who the best run club in the world is at the moment, it has to be Chelsea. They've figured out that developing top talent is very important, but you absolutely have to buy top players for your first team. Their approach will give them more financial flexibility than any other club for several years, and really cement their position amongst the elites.
We need to finish top 4 again this year, and then be very very aggressive next summer. Buying depth wasn't the wrong approach this window, but we really should've done better to bring in more established talent for the money we paid.
By selling Suarez, we had the funds to outbid any offer on the market. And this was probably the most critical window for quite awhile.
So this idea that players wouldn't want to come to us, or that we couldn't have spent more aggressively is silly. Players will follow the money even if it means playing in Addis Ababa, and we probably couldn't condensed a few signings into higher quality options.
What United did may or may not work out. But even if they don't make UCL this year, they have elite talents in Mata and Di Maria tied to the club for the forseeable future. If you ask me who the best run club in the world is at the moment, it has to be Chelsea. They've figured out that developing top talent is very important, but you absolutely have to buy top players for your first team. Their approach will give them more financial flexibility than any other club for several years, and really cement their position amongst the elites.
We need to finish top 4 again this year, and then be very very aggressive next summer. Buying depth wasn't the wrong approach this window, but we really should've done better to bring in more established talent for the money we paid.
Because, quite frankly, we had as much money to spend as anybody this window, and the first team opportunities to go with it.
Whirly, I think your way off mate.
We would never be able to sustain the wage bill additions utd have made this summer. I'm sure we probably offer as much /more than arsenal for Sanchez and look what happens.
Utd can pay players more and are a safer champs bet to most it would seem in pre season.
We would never be able to sustain the wage bill additions utd have made this summer. I'm sure we probably offer as much /more than arsenal for Sanchez and look what happens.
Utd can pay players more and are a safer champs bet to most it would seem in pre season.
Who? Who was out there, that wanted to come to us that we simply ignored to buy those players..?
You have to sign players anticipating growth though. You have to pitch yourself as a club that can sustain any wage bill due to growing kit deals and the like, not as one who has limited funding to attract talent. And as I keep saying, we had the spending power to beat any offer this summer.
If you don't think we could've matched what United paid on that loan deal for Falcao, then that's very conservative thinking. Transfermarkt is calling the loan fee just around 7M, wages be damned. And that 350k a week might just be worth spending if it means a direct rival of ours still can't score goals.
I don't think I'll ever be convinced that we actually aggressively went after Sanchez. The whole 'wife wanting to live in London' excuse screams of a massive cop out from our transfer people/staff.
At the end of the day, we're in an okay position. But it's hard not to say that we could've done much much better with the resources at our disposal.
Cavani, people are complaining that we're lacking work ethic?
Cavani = work ethic a plenty
@Whirly had a decent list of players.
It's not about the spending power, it's the pulling power too. You don't automatically attract top end players because you have money. Look at the level of players City were signing a few years ago, compared to now. You build to get to that point, United have a massive stadium and 20 years of continued success behind them, Chelsea have spending power and London. You banged the Sanchez drum for ages through the Summer, despite it being reported practically everywhere the exact reasons why he didn't join. Yet all you could go on about is how we "fucked up", or whatever.
I'm not really sure what point you're making about Chelsea, it's not just about who they identify or what their strategy is, their setup and sheer financial power (not to mention a few dodgy outgoings) have set them up to play in that ball park, it's a nonsensical point, because we're not operating on a level playing field. They have an experienced manager who's won everything, a billionaire owner, they are in the capital and have recent European and Domestic pedigree. We don't tick any of those boxes, so the comparison has got holes all over it. A young inexperienced manager who's won nothing, no CL football for the best part of 5 years, no league title in over 20, a stable self sustaining financial setup that allows to pretty much just spend what we accrue + profits - it's a completely different environment.
Yeah, Monaco had a ton of pulling power last summer when they brought in Falcao and James last summer.
And lets talk about PSG's pulling power, signing Ibra and Thiago Silva, arguably the best striker and CB in the world at the time.
Or what about Anzi's pulling power, when they signed Samuel Eto'o, and one of the top young strikers in the world in Lacina Traore.
There's also Zenit's pulling power when they signed one of the top wingers at the time in Hulk, a top MF in Witsel, and so on.
How about those comparisons then? Because you don't need a billionaire owner to spunk 60M on Thiago Silva and Ibrahimovic, you need 60M. And we had much more than that available this summer.
So, Cavani is a slam-dunk, unquestioned, grade A world class player, is he? We add him, but subtract both Lallana AND Lovern, and we're a better team, are we?
You're talking about clubs that are either financially strong and/or have the value of recent success behind them, we have neither, so your point is still going nowhere. Could we have got better than Lallana? Maybe. Could we have shopped in the same market as those clubs for those players? For the most part, could we fuck.
I mean, considering Lallana and Lovren haven't really contributed anything, and we've dropped 6 points so far, it might be worth discussing. There's development, potential, injury, and form to take into account, but it's not a totally invalid argument.
Granted, I was never in the Cavani camp.
That point about Monaco is seriously laughable, they were taken over by a Billionaire in 2011 - Monaco were one of the biggest spenders in Europe in 2013, spending roughly £140 million, including a club record £50 million for Radamel Falcao from Atletico Madrid.
A billionaire owner who's ready to splash £140m obviously doesn't count towards pulling power.
A billionaire owner who's ready to splash £140m obviously doesn't count towards pulling power.
We had just as much spending power this summer as those clubs did when they bought all of those players. And we had just as much recent relevant success as well. So why exactly wouldn't we be able to shop in that same market?
Your owner means absolutely nothing when you get the sort of money we did for Suarez, because you have the money. Your argument is horribly broken.
Whirly, we didn't need ONE player, we needed several... We would have needed several, even if Suarez had stayed. We're not in a position to spunk away 60/70m on one player. We're just not. Why do you continue to insist that we are?
Plus, your continued insistence that Liverpool can compete with the likes of London, Paris or Monte-fucking-Carlo to all but hose who grew up loving Liverpool FC is just silly at this point, mate. We're dealing with players who are already (or about to become) so wealthy that their grandchildren need never work, so where they spend their lived IS a huge factor. You will rebut this opinion until the end of days, but I challenge you to find five people who ARE NOT already emotionally invested in Liverpool to tell you honestly that they'd chose Liverpool over most of the cities that we've already discussed ad naseum.
Plus, your continued insistence that Liverpool can compete with the likes of London, Paris or Monte-fucking-Carlo to all but hose who grew up loving Liverpool FC is just silly at this point, mate. We're dealing with players who are already (or about to become) so wealthy that their grandchildren need never work, so where they spend their lived IS a huge factor. You will rebut this opinion until the end of days, but I challenge you to find five people who ARE NOT already emotionally invested in Liverpool to tell you honestly that they'd chose Liverpool over most of the cities that we've already discussed ad naseum.
I already said that the approach we took wasn't necessarily the wrong one, but for the amount of money we spent, we should've done better.
The Paris/Monaco locations are valid, I see your point. But what about Anzi, or Zenit? I'm not super familiar with St. Petersburg, and I know it's considered a great city, but it definitely comes with limitations.
That's the same Lallana who played his FIRST game for us yesterday, right..? And Lovern who played his 4th game?
To be fair, if you assume that the incumbents are going to shite and the player we didn't buy is going to rule the world, everything is a valid argument.
Well we only lost one player right?
How's it horribly broken? You still have a wage structure in place, you can't adjust both your wage structure AND buy big, because you've sold a player for £60m, it might give you more flexibility than usual, but by and large you have a setup and caps in place for how much you're able to sustain as a club. You sound like you're talking from a Football Manager manual.
- Status
