Who will be the biggest flop of the transfer window?

Scroll to see replies

How is that logic fail? All I said was that statistically in terms of goals and assists he's better than Man United's current crop of central midfielders. I'm comparing midfielder to midfielder here so bringing a defender into this is more of a logic fail.

In that post, you used the fact that he scored more goals than those players as a basis for him being a good signing. Replace Skrtel/Herrera with Henderson. Would Henderson be a good signing for Utd at £29mil?

Bringing a defender into it is not logic fail, it shows you how bad the basis of comparison was. I'm saying nearly anyone got more goals than those players you mentioned, it doesn't mean that it's worth Man Utd buying them for that price.

Reply 21

username1155480

Everyone Liverpool sign to replace the void left by Suarez will be a flop.

Reply 22

username1315644

Original post by Alex Doran

I am actually a Hull fan so ...

Never said you were a fan, but based on your posting history you have a strong pro Liverpool bias. I wonder what you post ratio for team threads are?

Reply 23

Alex Doran

Original post by Fizzel

Never said you were a fan, but based on your posting history you have a strong pro Liverpool bias. I wonder what you post ratio for team threads are?

If you know of a Hull thread then please show me, there aren't a lot of fans on here.
Also if you actually read the posts rather than just what thread they are on you would realise I am normally quite critical of Liverpool.

Reply 24

username1315644

Original post by Alex Doran

If you know of a Hull thread then please show me, there aren't a lot of fans on here. Also if you actually read the posts rather than just what thread they are on you would realise I am normally quite critical of Liverpool.

That still doesn't explain why you post in the Liverpool thread, no Hull thread post in the Arsenal thread. Being critical doesn't change, anything plenty of people are critical of the team they support, again look in the Arsenal thread once in a while.

Reply 25

AnharM

I think you guys are being a bit too harsh on Liverpool players...I think Rodgers hasn't finished buying yet. I'm a Chelsea fan that recognises Rodgers spots potential from a mile away. Sturridge for £12m anyone? Look at him now...yes, they won't be the same without Suarez. But for sure, they could be a better team overall, because they won't be relying on Suarez now. Players will step up.

I'm quite worried Costa might flop...but I hope Lukaku stays so he can come through when Costa does flop. I feel like Costa is a bomb waiting to explode...this guy could get a handful of red cards every month.

Reply 26

h3isenberg

Original post by RVNmax

I also used assists. Maybe I should have used tackles and pass completion too? It is well known that Man United's midfield goal scoring has been very poor these past few seasons, that's why. That wouldn't be the case for a team like Man City because Yaya Toure knocked in 20 goals last season.

Yaya Toure scored more goals last season than Lukaku. Goals are arguably the most important statistic for a striker. If I was comparing strikers I wouldn't say that Yaya Toure, a midfielder, was a better striker than Lukaku.

Reply 27

sr90

Volunteer Team

Original post by AnharM

I'm a Chelsea fan that recognises Rodgers spots potential from a mile away. Sturridge for £12m anyone?

I'll give you that one, but what about Aspas, Alberto, Toure, Borini, Allen, Assaidi, Cissokho, Moses? Brenton's flops outnumber the good deals.

If you look at the Liverpool team from the second half of last season, only 4 were Brenton's signings.

Reply 28

AnharM

Original post by sr90

Did he buy all those players? Or did the club buy them because they didn't have the funds to buy more established players? I think Sturridge was the first player he thought was already "there", and was on the market for cheap. It was a great buy. Since they're in the Champions League now, they've got more money to spend.

Aspas was a flop, yes. Moses was a squad player at best. They needed him just to make the numbers. All these players...I don't know if Rodgers actually wanted to buy any of them. It was only when Sturridge was bought, did he speak so highly of a player that he knew at Chelsea.

Lallana is a decent-good player, nobody is expecting him to be a Iniesta or something, while players like Lambert will sit on the bench. I swear they bought Remy? I'm sure he'll start alongside Sturridge. He has the potential to become big. They'll fit into the system that Rodgers has made. Henderson for example, was a lost-cause. He somehow made him good...Rodgers man-management is phenomenal.

Reply 29

samir12

Original post by sr90

You are oblivious to the fact that Rodgers went for targets like Willian and Mikhtaryan but could not compete with little money and no CL. He had to buy and loan the players you mentioned to make up the numbers.

He has CL and money to spend now so you can say he has no excuses if the transfers he made so far flops.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 30

wrexhamfc

Original post by sr90

Aspas, Alberto, Toure, Borini, Allen, Assaidi, Cissokho, Moses

Aspas - agreed that he's a flop.
Alberto - I would hesitate to call a 21 year-old a flop after one allegedly homesick-riddled year. If he fails on loan this season, then I agree.
Toure - free signing and performed ably enough in the early part of the season; I don't label him a flop, especially as he was always intended to be fourth-choice.
Borini - didn't scale the heights that Rodgers perhaps expected of him, but will still be sold for a profit, ergo not a flop in my eyes.
Allen - reluctantly agree that he's a flop. I like him, but he has yet to justify his fee.
Assaidi - bought for £2.4M, his reported move to Stoke is valued at £7M. A profit of nearly 200% does not constitute a flop.
Cissokho/Moses - Flops, agreed, but bargain-basement loan deals failing to work out hardly worries me. Sahin was more concerning.

So of the eight "flops" you named, I would only deem four of those (and the jury is still out for one of those four) to actually be flops. Considering that half of them cost under £2.5M, that is not as poor a record as you make it out to be. It has to be said though that I'm not bowled over by Liverpool's activity this summer so far, although Remy, Origi and Lovren will prove good deals (assuming all three go through).

Reply 31

sr90

Volunteer Team

Original post by AnharM

Did he buy all those players? Or did the club buy them because they didn't have the funds to buy more established players?

Original post by samir12

Little money? Complete myth. They have a higher gross & net spend than Arsenal over the past 3 seasons.

Chelsea - £288m (£188m net)
Manchester City - £233m (£153m net)
Manchester United - £182m (£154m net)
Spurs - £172m (Minus £38m net)
Liverpool £153m (£96m net)
Arsenal - £147m (£25m net)

Reply 32

James222

over hyped young english players at liverpool

Reply 33

sucess

D Costa, Chelsea ruin strikers and I'm a Chelsea fan

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 34

Endless Blue

Original post by sr90

I know this was a while ago but had to correct it.

Moses and Cissokho were loanees, so not significant really. Allen hasn't flopped, perhaps he hasn't fulfilled his price tag but his distribution is excellent and he is a fantastic rotation option.

Borini could be sold for £14m lol, if so I'd call that a success. Similar with Assaidi.

Alberto has been loaned out this season, so it's too early to say whether he's going to flop or not. He was clearly an investment for the future.

I will concede that Aspas hasn't adapted at all, and Toure is not great but ultimately is 4th choice CB.

Rodgers hasn't been perfect but he's not nearly been as bad as he is made out to be.

This summer I think he's done well so far.

Also why do other fans call him Brenton?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 35

SinaPars

Original post by sucess

D Costa, Chelsea ruin strikers and I'm a Chelsea fan

Posted from TSR Mobile

Lol yep.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 36

AnharM

Original post by sr90

Against the likes of Chelsea for Willian? You can't be serious? Not only did Chelsea offered more money to the club, they offered a better salary for Willian AND Champions League football. There are three things that matter in football transfers. Salary is a huge deal to players, Liverpool can't pay over the odds.

Reply 37

samir12

Original post by sr90

It is the managers job to identify targets, a point you make yourself. Every club in the country will have a Plan B in case their main transfer targets are not obtained, surely if he was as brilliant as you claim he'd have identified more Sturridge's and less Aspas'?

Little money? Complete myth. They have a higher gross & net spend than Arsenal over the past 3 seasons.

Chelsea - £288m (£188m net)
Manchester City - £233m (£153m net)
Manchester United - £182m (£154m net)
Spurs - £172m (Minus £38m net)
Liverpool £153m (£96m net)
Arsenal - £147m (£25m net)

You included the season where Dalglish and Comolli wasted all loads of money on Caroll, Downing. FSG learned from that and were not willing to give Rodgers as much money to splash out. Liverpool cannot offer high wages like Chelsea and Man City (think even Arsenals wage bill is higher than Liverpools) which makes a huge difference. If you just include spendings from the past 2 seasons where Rodgers has been in charge, it won't look as bad as the ones you stated.

Signings like Sturridge and Coutinho effectively outweighed the poor ones he made imo simply because those two signings got Liverpool to where they are now. No one is saying Rodgers is brillliant, he isn't great either just not as bad as people say he is and unfairly criticised for his transfers he had to make with certain constraints.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 38

Zerforax

Original post by Fizzel

I think I might go with Lambert, but at £4m its hard to flop.

I think Shaw will be fine, even under Moyes we had a lot of the ball, our full backs tend to be going forward more often than backwards. LVG will work well with a player of his age anyway. I'd think Herrera is far more of a risk, I think CM is the hardest position to adapt to in a new league, the dynamics of the league are so different there.

Even if we kept Lambert on our bench for 2 years, it's hard to argue that buying an experienced striker for so little money (especially in today's market) amounts to being a flop. You can't even buy a lot of 16-18 year olds these days for that kind of money.

I do think more teams will press Man Utd than did under SAF which puts more pressure on the defence. Teams were beaten before they stepped onto the pitch against Man Utd under SAF. LVG may bring that back over a few seasons but teams will look at this new Man Utd side and think they can beat it now.

Don't underestimate how much teams will want to beat you. The media love that **** and most players now have only known Man Utd as the best club in England over 20 years - the pride in beating Man Utd as an institution is a massive incentive.

Original post by sr90

In the last 3 years, Arsenal's higher wage bill probably makes up that difference between £70mil.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/may/01/premier-league-club-accounts-debt-wages
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/apr/18/premier-league-club-accounts-debt

In 2012/13, Arsenal's wage bill was £154mil compared to Liverpool's £132mil.
In 2011/12, Arsenal's wage bill was £143mil compared to Liverpool's £119mil.

I don't have the 2013/2014 figures yet but considering Ozil was bought on high wages, I imagine the gap was a similar amount.

So £22mil + £24mil + guesstimate of £23mil = £69mil more in wages in the last 3 years.