Signing players from lower Premier League clubs

[Halmeister]

It doesn't really work for us, does it?

With the news coming today that we have signed Danny Ings, myself and a few of my mates have been having a debate and I wanted to expand it to this forum.

Over the years we have regularly signed players from teams below us, often from teams battling relegation, and have expected them to make the step up when they've come to us. I have a list - which I will get to shortly.

Anyway, one of my mates reasons that signing Ings is a good signing (despite never watching him) because he will fill out the squad, he is young, English and we will make our money back if he fails. If he doesn't fail then bingo! We've won.

I agree with those sentiments, but it's more the policy that gets my goat than anything else. Throughout my time of watching Liverpool, we have nearly won the league twice... both times we had a fantastic starting eleven without much back up. We then tried to add back up the following year (admittedly having lost important players, too) and failed miserably. In addition to this, in the days when we used to regularly win leagues, a squad consisted of about 15 players. Obviously the game has changed, but bolstering the squad when the first team is utter log is a bit like putting the cart before the horse.

I feel that Ings is on a bit of a hiding to nothing. Either he won't play because we will have signed someone better, or he will play which means we haven't improved the first team and we are likely battling for Europa League and midtable obscurity. Bit of a pointless signing, no?

Anyway, I had a look at our signings from lower level premier league clubs over the last decade or so and it is frightening. So surely it is time to knock this approach on the head? Here's the list:

Danny Ings - Tribunal fee from Burnley - unknown outcome
Lallana - £20m from Southampton - poor signing so far
Lovren - £20m from Southampton - " "
Lambert - £4m from Southampton - " "
Mignolet - £10m from Sunderland - okay-ish
Joe Allen - £15m from Swansea - massive MEH
Charlie Adam - £10m from Blackpool - Shite
Stewart Downing - £20m from Villa - Shite
Jose Enrique - £5m from Newcastle - starting to seem more focused on his instagram after a decent start
Brad Jones - £2.5m from Middlesbrough - Shite
Paul Konchesky - £3m from Fulham - Garbage
Andy Carroll - £35m from Newcastle - Dear Lord, what were we thinking?
Jordan Henderson - £16m from Sunderland - has become a good signing
Glen Johnson - £18m from Portsmouth - I really don't know if we can call his signing a success or not?
Robbie Keane - £20m from Tottenham - I'll include him on this list just for how spectacularly bad it was
Yossi Benayoun - £5m from West Ham - Good signing
Jermain Pennant - £7m from Birmingham - Shite
Javier Mascherano - £18m from West Ham - Class, but an odd situation that is not really in keeping with the others
Bolo Zenden - free from 'boro - a bit shit
Peter Crouch - £7m from Southampton - Alright-ish
Bellamy - £7m from Blackburn - " "
Steve Finnan - £3.5m from Fulham - Good signing
Harry Kewell - £5m from Leeds - shite.

I could go on but The Chase is starting and I want to wrap this up. So in that list there are four, maybe five, success stories, yet we keep going for this approach and it doesn't really seem likely to end judging by our interest in Benteke. Should we knock this approach on the head - afterall, there is a reason why these players have been battling relegation. Or can we find success using it?

 

[peterhague]

No arguments from me, but apparently Rodgers has convinced FSG that this is the way to go.

Depressing.

 

[Leo]

It's more about identifying the right players more than anything.
It worked for Ginsoak signing Ferdinand,Keane,Cantona,Cole etc but we've a habit of signing them at the completely wrong time.
It's usually on the back of a decent season where their value is at the absolute peak and there's usually no comeback in regards to selling on.

That being said I think Ings could be a shrewd signing in the circumstances.
He's arriving at the right time in his career and even if he flops we'll certainly receive a decent fee for him when we decide to sell.

 

[Halmeister]

It's more about identifying the right players more than anything.
It worked for Ginsoak signing Ferdinand,Keane,Cantona,Cole etc but we've a habit of signing them at the completely wrong time.
It's usually on the back of a decent season where their value is at the absolute peak and there's usually no comeback in regards to selling on.

That being said I think Ings could be a shrewd signing in the circumstances.
He's arriving at the right time in his career and even if he flops we'll certainly receive a decent fee for him when we decide to sell.

Ahh but those signed in the 90s when you could argue the game is different. Ferdinand signed a bit later from a really strong Leeds team. Plus, hadn't Cantona just won the league with Leeds?

What we seem to be doing a lot of is signing the "best" players from teams battling relegation and expecting them to step up, before watching on angry and confused when they don't.


I'm worried that this could be more of the same, without speaking too much about Ings as this is about the policy in general, rather than Ings himself.

 

[mark1975]

Signing Ings for compensation and Milner on a free from City is a slight change in tactic, no? We're not really overpaying on either and we're not hitting on them on the back of career defining seasons. Ings you could argue is more like the type of deal we should be making with players at lower positioned clubs.

 

[Aidan O' Neill]

It's more about identifying the right players more than anything.
It worked for Ginsoak signing Ferdinand,Keane,Cantona,Cole etc but we've a habit of signing them at the completely wrong time.
It's usually on the back of a decent season where their value is at the absolute peak and there's usually no comeback in regards to selling on.

That being said I think Ings could be a shrewd signing in the circumstances.
He's arriving at the right time in his career and even if he flops we'll certainly receive a decent fee for him when we decide to sell.

He paid pretty much record amounts for the time for all of them except Cantona who had fallen out with Wilkinson.

 

[Leo]

Ahh but those signed in the 90s when you could argue the game is different. Ferdinand signed a bit later from a really strong Leeds team. Plus, hadn't Cantona just won the league with Leeds?

What we seem to be doing a lot of is signing the "best" players from teams battling relegation and expecting them to step up, before watching on angry and confused when they don't.


I'm worried that this could be more of the same, without speaking too much about Ings as this is about the policy in general, rather than Ings himself.

Well yeah it's becoming more clear with every year passing that there is far more value signing players from Spain and Germany.
But that's hardly worked for us either the past few years.
Aspas,Alberto,Moreno have all looked shite too.
Sahin promised far more than he delivered also.

 

[mr_moo]

Depressing reading those signings. Can't disagree with it. Not much of a change in tact with new signing mark apart from small fee paid for Ings, wages though!!! Neither signing excited you really.

 

[Halmeister]

Signing Ings for compensation and Milner on a free from City is a slight change in tactic, no? We're not really overpaying on either and we're not hitting on them on the back of career defining seasons. Ings you could argue is more like the type of deal we should be making with players at lower positioned clubs.

I didn't mention Milner as I think he'll be a good signing. Ings I'm less sure about, but I get the feeling we'd be after Ings anyway even if his contract wasn't up.

This thread was more in response to the links to Benteke and perhaps Clyne (who I also rate). I'll be interested (or dismayed) to see who else we're linked with throughout the summer.

 

[mark1975]

Depressing reading those signings. Can't disagree with it. Not much of a change in tact with new signing mark apart from small fee paid for Ings, wages though!!! Neither signing excited you really.

That not really what I was saying, are there really that many homegrown players to get excited about anyway? Most are already owned by the big clubs. I don't know what will happen with Ings, but it's a punt I'd rather see than say £15m on Allen, £6m on Alberto, etc.

 

[Leo]

He paid pretty much record amounts for the time for all of them except Cantona who had fallen out with Wilkinson.

They were still value for money though.
It's more about identifying the quality than anything else.

 

[mark1975]

I didn't mention Milner as I think he'll be a good signing. Ings I'm less sure about, but I get the feeling we'd be after Ings anyway even if his contract wasn't up.

This thread was more in response to the links to Benteke and perhaps Clyne (who I also rate). I'll be interested (or dismayed) to see who else we're linked with throughout the summer.

Benteke completely smacks of the same crappy policy, agreed fully on that.

 

[Nir.Barak]

Amazing how every summer is the same and people still get their hopes up.
Last season it was Lambert and people said "it's okay as cover", but it hasn't fucking been okay has it? done nothing more than a youth player would have done, and his "small" price tag, added to all the other shit "value" players we wasted money on, could have gotten us a real player.
And now this shit, I'm amazed people aren't disgusted we're down this path again.
Fuck "Ings is good value of money", Danny Ings is a waste of space and money.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results" too fucking right.
We're on a highway to mediocrity and games like last Saturday's are fast becoming a fantasy for us.

 

[Halmeister]

Well yeah it's becoming more clear with every year passing that there is far more value signing players from Spain and Germany.
But that's hardly worked for us either the past few years.
Aspas,Alberto,Moreno have all looked shite too.
Şahin promised far more than he delivered also.

I haven't entirely given up on Moreno yet, and I think Sahin would have thrived in a more familiar position for us and more game time. Rodgers shuffling him about was an early hint towards how he'd play players all over the park except their natural position.

I think foreign is the way to go, unless we're signing discarded players with quality from the teams above us.

 

[mr_moo]

That not really what I was saying, are there really that many homegrown players to get excited about anyway? Most are already owned by the big clubs. I don't know what will happen with Ings, but it's a punt I'd rather see than say £15m on Allen, £6m on Alberto, etc.

Fair enough. Rather we spent 15m on proven foreigner though if English isn't available, more chance of getting a better deal generally

 

[Halmeister]

Amazing how every summer is the same and people still get their hopes up.
Last season it was Lambert and people said "it's okay as cover", but it hasn't fucking been okay has it? done nothing more than a youth player would have done, and his "small" price tag, added to all the other shit "value" players we wasted money on, could have gotten us a real player.
And now this shit, I'm amazed people aren't disgusted we're down this path again.
Fuck "Ings is good value of money", Danny Ings is a waste of space and money.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results" too fucking right.
We're on a highway to mediocrity and games like last Saturday's are fast becoming a fantasy for us.

This is a similar viewpoint to mine, though I suspect you may be slightly more agitated than I am!

I was definitely saying similar things to this when we signed Lambert last year, though, for sure. Didn't see the point in that signing. Not really seeing the point in signing Ings. The age factor is the only thing keeping me from lambasting the decision altogether.

 

[Leo]

I haven't entirely given up on Moreno yet, and I think Şahin would have thrived in a more familiar position for us and more game time. Rodgers shuffling him about was an early hint towards how he'd play players all over the park except their natural position.

I think foreign is the way to go, unless we're signing discarded players with quality from the teams above us.

It's becoming tougher every year to sign top European players.
We struck gold with Suarez but there was obviously red flags surrounding him with his disciplinary record.
We can't compete with the likes of Valencia or Psg anymore never mind the superpowers.
That's why we probably have to try and sign them young nowadays and hope they turn into top players before they fuck off to Madrid or whoever.
I think the only way we can compete these days is with a sugar daddy.

 

[Halmeister]

We spent around £250 million on that list above with only a handful being successful. Christ, we have really pissed some money up the wall.

 

[Leo]

Amazing how every summer is the same and people still get their hopes up.
Last season it was Lambert and people said "it's okay as cover", but it hasn't fucking been okay has it? done nothing more than a youth player would have done, and his "small" price tag, added to all the other shit "value" players we wasted money on, could have gotten us a real player.
And now this shit, I'm amazed people aren't disgusted we're down this path again.
Fuck "Ings is good value of money", Danny Ings is a waste of space and money.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results" too fucking right.
We're on a highway to mediocrity and games like last Saturday's are fast becoming a fantasy for us.

Can you elaborate on the point that Danny Ings is a waste of space apart that he played for Burnley?

 

[peekay]

The list is depressing. One of the arguments I have heard from people who support this approach is "He is English. Even if he is not a success, we wont loose that much money". They just focus on the money in and money out.

But the problem is that by focusing on the money in and money out we are not accounting for the money lost due to the player being mediocre here. This is especially true when we overpay for mediocre players and then end up loosing out on quality signings just because we are 5-8 million off and wages are 20-30 K off. There is an opportunity cost which is being missed here.

As long as the player delivers on the pitch, I am less concerned about the value at which they leave. If Suarez had stayed here for two more years and delivered like the 2013-2014 season, I really wouldn't have cared if he left on a free.

 

[Halmeister]

It's becoming tougher every year to sign top European players.
We struck gold with Suarez but there was obviously red flags surrounding him with his disciplinary record.
We can't compete with the likes of Valencia or Psg anymore never mind the superpowers.
That's why we probably have to try and sign them young nowadays and hope they turn into top players before they fuck off to Madrid or whoever.
I think the only way we can compete these days is with a sugar daddy.

This. I agree with this. It can be done and I think it is the way forward for us. We pissed away our right to splash out on top players. Every year we see the Portuguese clubs do it, the likes of Udinese and other Italian clubs, and Atletico Madrid have been doing it for years. We have signed some players like that, such as Coutinho and Suarez, but the lower end of the premier league table is not the place to be looking for this type of signing.

In my opinion, we need to look hard at what the scouts etc are doing at the clubs I mentioned above. A few years of signing the next stars will see us overtake the likes of City and Utd in my opinion. We need to do it soon before it is too late, though.

 

[Dirkus_Circus]

Sterling from QPR was a great bit of business even though it was thought at the time that we may have spent too much for a prospect.

 

[Halmeister]

Sterling from QPR was a great bit of business even though it was thought at the time that we may have spent too much for a prospect.

Yeah, I didn't want to include him or Ibe or Shelvey, though as they were signed as youth players at the time. Not with the intention of coming into the first team as many of those above were.

 

[Dirkus_Circus]

Yeah, I didn't want to include him or Ibe or Shelvey, though as they were signed as youth players at the time. Not with the intention of coming into the first team as many of those above were.

Fair enough, but there were some higher stakes with Sterling and the somewhat pricey fee.

 

[Nir.Barak]

Can you elaborate on the point that Danny Ings is a waste of space apart that he played for Burnley?

Waste of space as in, the 5 mill we would pay Burnley means 5 mill less for buying a good striker mate.
But oh no, if you support his signature, good for you, I'm sure he'd rocket us to 5th next season.

 

[Leo]

Waste of space as in, the 5 mill we would pay Burnley means 5 mill less for buying a good striker mate.
But oh no, if you support his signature, good for you, I'm sure he'd rocket us to 5th next season.

We won't be signing a top striker.
We couldn't get one last summer with 140 million to spend after a world cup.
Is Lukaku a waste of space too?

 

[mark1975]

Waste of space as in, the 5 mill we would pay Burnley means 5 mill less for buying a good striker mate.
But oh no, if you support his signature, good for you, I'm sure he'd rocket us to 5th next season.

It's a daft assumption to make that £5m difference would see us lose out, I don't think that's the case at all, I think if a player is there then we have a market value in mind already, we don't go in for Ings and go "Oh shit, we can't afford such and such now", we'd have a market value in our heads anyway. Argue the toss over whether we go all out for players enough, fine. When we lost out on a couple of attackers, we bought Sakho because the money was there and he became available, it was an opportunist buy that might pay off in the longterm.

We've spent big money elsewhere on shite, so pulling up punts on younger players seems to be missing the point. I don't think we've missed out on big name players because of signings like this one, we've missed out on big players because either A) they don't want to come to us, B) we couldn't afford them anyway, or C) we spent £20m-£30m on someone who's worth nowhere near that much.

Ings is a youngster relatively, I'd rather see us pump £4m on him as an option, than say £16m on Balotelli, or £12m on Borini. Also, I don't why you have to be so patroising about it with the last bit, while already writing him off as both shite and costing us signing a top striker, it's crap reasoning.

 

[dantes]

I don't think this is any sort of policy. Nobody would be stupid enough to come up with it, write it down, and then follow it. What has happened is that Rodgers had some really good players, he pissed them off / mismanaged most of them, so they stopped running as much. Rodgers then felt pissed off / betrayed, and is now signing players who are not very good but will run tirelessly for him.

 

[hmmmmm1]

The hate for the ings and milner signings are a little OTT, these are exactly the type of pick ups we used to watch our rivals do whilst we signed the likes of Christian Poulson.

 

[Halmeister]

I don't see many people hating on the Milner signing. I also can't recall too many of our rivals making signings comparable to this Ings one, though I'm willing to hear some examples.