The Liverpool FC Thread XII
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Zerforax
Johnson obviously offers something Rodgers wants since he's been playing ahead of Moreno/Manquillo
Johnson has been okay but he needs to stop losing the ball in positions which can be costly as it leaves his side completely exposed. (Newcastle and Leicester games are examples of this).
This is Rodgers we are talking about, he'll happily play poor performing players over good performing players so it doesn't say much.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by samir12
Johnson has been okay but he needs to stop losing the ball in positions which can be costly as it leaves his side completely exposed. (Newcastle and Leicester games are examples of this).
This is Rodgers we are talking about, he'll happily play poor performing players over good performing players so it doesn't say much.
This is Rodgers we are talking about, he'll happily play poor performing players over good performing players so it doesn't say much.
I think he offers so much more going forward than the other fullbacks and considering how poor we've been in attacking play, I guess Johnson seems more important?
Well he was praised for picking youth over reputation in his first season.
We have to spend money in order to compete, you can't try to win to the league with players like Manquillo, Moreno, Henderson, Lambert, Markovic etc.
Are they good players? Of course. Are they top quality players? No
This isn't FIFA, where you can buy a cheap player for 3M and he will progress to be the next Messi, you have to buy proven players, not a 'might be a world class player when he's 27', from Suarez to Lambert, and you ask yourselves why we don't score goals, you can't have Lambert in your XI and want to compite with likes of City, Chelsea, United, etc..
Are they good players? Of course. Are they top quality players? No
This isn't FIFA, where you can buy a cheap player for 3M and he will progress to be the next Messi, you have to buy proven players, not a 'might be a world class player when he's 27', from Suarez to Lambert, and you ask yourselves why we don't score goals, you can't have Lambert in your XI and want to compite with likes of City, Chelsea, United, etc..
Original post by Zerforax
I think he offers so much more going forward than the other fullbacks and considering how poor we've been in attacking play, I guess Johnson seems more important?
Well he was praised for picking youth over reputation in his first season.
Well he was praised for picking youth over reputation in his first season.
Johnson recently made some good forward runs and beat his man, just needs to improve his passing and crossing really.
Last seasons success got to Rodgers head though imo, he made a lot of questionable decisions this season and was quite stubborn. It took the Palace game to bring him back to reality.
Original post by luke829
We have to spend money in order to compete, you can't try to win to the league with players like Manquillo, Moreno, Henderson, Lambert, Markovic etc.
Are they good players? Of course. Are they top quality players? No
This isn't FIFA, where you can buy a cheap player for 3M and he will progress to be the next Messi, you have to buy proven players, not a 'might be a world class player when he's 27', from Suarez to Lambert, and you ask yourselves why we don't score goals, you can't have Lambert in your XI and want to compite with likes of City, Chelsea, United, etc..
Are they good players? Of course. Are they top quality players? No
This isn't FIFA, where you can buy a cheap player for 3M and he will progress to be the next Messi, you have to buy proven players, not a 'might be a world class player when he's 27', from Suarez to Lambert, and you ask yourselves why we don't score goals, you can't have Lambert in your XI and want to compite with likes of City, Chelsea, United, etc..
You've spent £230m under Rodgers, which is more than Manchester City have spent in the same period of time. It's not a case of not spending, it's a case of spending poorly.
I said in the summer that you'd have been better off buying a few quality players over quantity. United were ridiculed for spending £150m, we may have overpaid but every player who we signed (apart from Falcao who is only on loan) has come in and instantly improved the team. It's the same for Chelsea, and the same for Arsenal. United and Arsenal did not spend the money in the best way either, but the players who did come in have slotted in well. You can't say that any of Liverpool's signings have done this.
I'm sure some of them will come good eventually. Fellaini was a laughing stock last season and now he's an integral part of our midfield. Henderson was widely critisised when he first joined Liverpool too, and he's gone on to be a good signing. However Rodgers needs to stop faffing around with ''potential'' and go for the finished article.
(edited 9 years ago)
When you couldn't get Sanchez then at least get Cuadrado
Original post by Jgco2chem
When you couldn't get Sanchez then at least get Cuadrado
Yeah true although they needed a versatile forward more than anything somebody who could play between the lines, on a flank and up top if need be so Cuadrado wasn't the guy.
They should have gone all out for a guy like Lavezzi or Gaitan, failing that Remy. There were players available. Markovic I have hopes for, haven't watched benfica much since 2013 but he had a pretty good season there. Song also would have been a good option for Liverpool's midfield. I think there's enough quality to get rid of the teams they are currently facing though if he were to change the system around a bit.
Top 3 is still attainable imo.
We just needed a decent mobile forward, didn't have to be world class. Having an immobile striker upfront is imo the main cause of our attacking problems, there's a reason why Rodgers got rid of Caroll in his first season, why he brought in Lambert and Balotelli was just mind boggling. Our attacking midfielders need to make runs into the box aswell, but it will help massively if we had a striker that made space for them.
We should have gone up the road when we got the Suarez money and thrown it at City for Aguero tbh. We needed to replace like for like - or at least try. Markovic may go down as one of our worst ever signings. Did we even need him ffs?
Original post by Mackay
We should have gone up the road when we got the Suarez money and thrown it at City for Aguero tbh. We needed to replace like for like - or at least try. Markovic may go down as one of our worst ever signings. Did we even need him ffs?
Balotelli is still worse than Markovic. If Balotelli is sold in January without scoring in the PL then he goes down as one of the biggest flops ever imo
Original post by Bromaldehyde
Balotelli is still worse than Markovic. If Balotelli is sold in January without scoring in the PL then he goes down as one of the biggest flops ever imo
I doubt he'll go in January tbh. But, if he does, he won't go to a top tier side. He's no higher than Europa League standard.
Original post by sr90
You've spent £230m under Rodgers, which is more than Manchester City have spent in the same period of time. It's not a case of not spending, it's a case of spending poorly.
I said in the summer that you'd have been better off buying a few quality players over quantity. United were ridiculed for spending £150m, we may have overpaid but every player who we signed (apart from Falcao who is only on loan) has come in and instantly improved the team. It's the same for Chelsea, and the same for Arsenal. United and Arsenal did not spend the money in the best way either, but the players who did come in have slotted in well. You can't say that any of Liverpool's signings have done this.
I'm sure some of them will come good eventually. Fellaini was a laughing stock last season and now he's an integral part of our midfield. Henderson was widely critisised when he first joined Liverpool too, and he's gone on to be a good signing. However Rodgers needs to stop faffing around with ''potential'' and go for the finished article.
I said in the summer that you'd have been better off buying a few quality players over quantity. United were ridiculed for spending £150m, we may have overpaid but every player who we signed (apart from Falcao who is only on loan) has come in and instantly improved the team. It's the same for Chelsea, and the same for Arsenal. United and Arsenal did not spend the money in the best way either, but the players who did come in have slotted in well. You can't say that any of Liverpool's signings have done this.
I'm sure some of them will come good eventually. Fellaini was a laughing stock last season and now he's an integral part of our midfield. Henderson was widely critisised when he first joined Liverpool too, and he's gone on to be a good signing. However Rodgers needs to stop faffing around with ''potential'' and go for the finished article.
To be fair to Liverpool, you aren't including wages in your comparison. Net transfer spend isn't any where near as significant as total wage spend. Liverpool just can't afford the £200+k a week wages that City can.
Original post by sr90
You've spent £230m under Rodgers, which is more than Manchester City have spent in the same period of time. It's not a case of not spending, it's a case of spending poorly.
I said in the summer that you'd have been better off buying a few quality players over quantity. United were ridiculed for spending £150m, we may have overpaid but every player who we signed (apart from Falcao who is only on loan) has come in and instantly improved the team. It's the same for Chelsea, and the same for Arsenal. United and Arsenal did not spend the money in the best way either, but the players who did come in have slotted in well. You can't say that any of Liverpool's signings have done this.
I'm sure some of them will come good eventually. Fellaini was a laughing stock last season and now he's an integral part of our midfield. Henderson was widely critisised when he first joined Liverpool too, and he's gone on to be a good signing. However Rodgers needs to stop faffing around with ''potential'' and go for the finished article.
I said in the summer that you'd have been better off buying a few quality players over quantity. United were ridiculed for spending £150m, we may have overpaid but every player who we signed (apart from Falcao who is only on loan) has come in and instantly improved the team. It's the same for Chelsea, and the same for Arsenal. United and Arsenal did not spend the money in the best way either, but the players who did come in have slotted in well. You can't say that any of Liverpool's signings have done this.
I'm sure some of them will come good eventually. Fellaini was a laughing stock last season and now he's an integral part of our midfield. Henderson was widely critisised when he first joined Liverpool too, and he's gone on to be a good signing. However Rodgers needs to stop faffing around with ''potential'' and go for the finished article.
With spending money im not talking just about the fees, im talking about wages too, you cant attract world class players offering them 85k a week, this stupid FSG transfer policy of "buy cheap (expensive), young players, with low wages" is taking us to mediocrity, we could and should have bought Sanchez, he might prefer London but if we offered him 170k a week he would have chosen us and we would've got a world class player in our team, what have we got instead? Lambert, Balotelli, Markovic, etc..
3 world class players (Sanchez, Lloris, Hummels type of players) and 3 very good players (Bender, Lacazette, Bony type of players), with that you win the league, not with the likes of Lambert, Lovren, Manquillo, etc.
The people who do the transfers have no ambition, of course, you can buy potential players, it isn't bad at all but you have to complement it with proven and world class players, otherwise it doesn't work..
I'm just tired of this average players like Lovren, Johnson, etc... look at the ****e we have spent the money on, why didn't we buy half the players we bought but quality players instead of average players?
Liverpool think like a midtable club, we need to think big, not good players from relegation-mid table teams. It's just sickening
(edited 9 years ago)
^Rubbish. Liverpool can't sign those players because they can't attract those players. Sanchez CHOSE Arsenal OVER Liverpool.
Original post by GorlimtheUnhappy
^Rubbish. Liverpool can't sign those players because they can't attract those players. Sanchez CHOSE Arsenal OVER Liverpool.
No he chose LONDON over Liverpool, the city, not the team.
Original post by sr90
You've spent £230m under Rodgers, which is more than Manchester City have spent in the same period of time. It's not a case of not spending, it's a case of spending poorly.
I said in the summer that you'd have been better off buying a few quality players over quantity. United were ridiculed for spending £150m, we may have overpaid but every player who we signed (apart from Falcao who is only on loan) has come in and instantly improved the team. It's the same for Chelsea, and the same for Arsenal. United and Arsenal did not spend the money in the best way either, but the players who did come in have slotted in well. You can't say that any of Liverpool's signings have done this.
I'm sure some of them will come good eventually. Fellaini was a laughing stock last season and now he's an integral part of our midfield. Henderson was widely critisised when he first joined Liverpool too, and he's gone on to be a good signing. However Rodgers needs to stop faffing around with ''potential'' and go for the finished article.
I said in the summer that you'd have been better off buying a few quality players over quantity. United were ridiculed for spending £150m, we may have overpaid but every player who we signed (apart from Falcao who is only on loan) has come in and instantly improved the team. It's the same for Chelsea, and the same for Arsenal. United and Arsenal did not spend the money in the best way either, but the players who did come in have slotted in well. You can't say that any of Liverpool's signings have done this.
I'm sure some of them will come good eventually. Fellaini was a laughing stock last season and now he's an integral part of our midfield. Henderson was widely critisised when he first joined Liverpool too, and he's gone on to be a good signing. However Rodgers needs to stop faffing around with ''potential'' and go for the finished article.
Even on a conservative estimate, I think it works out at 100mil net spend over 3 seasons. I actually think it's more like £80-90mil net spend but I cant be bothered with trawling through the numbers to dispute transfer values.
Wages aren't taken into account. In Rodgers' first transfer window we significantly cut the wage bill by basically offloading most of the high earners and bringing in young players on much lower wages.
We had a very streamlined squad for last season so we would've always struggled with numbers if we didn't increase the squad size this summer. Frankly if Sturridge hadn't been injured for almost half a season, I think we'd easily be a few points better off which would put us next to Man Utd/Arsenal.
FSG are obviously playing a longer game. Man City and Chelsea always have bought established stars in their peak. Man Utd used to take the most promising youngsters and make them into stars but you can see a shift into buying more established stars now too (which is way more expensive to do). We can't compete on that level due to FFP and our smaller revenues so a bit of patience is needed. Let's not forget that Rodgers identified plenty of star buys last summer and this summer but those players didn't want to come to us. We wanted Sanchez but had to settle for Balotelli for example.We would've been sorted if Sanchez had signed since he could've played up front when Sturridge was out or next to/on a flank when he was fit.
Rumours of AVB being linked with Rodgers' job is so disrespectful. The man hasn't achieved anything.
Rodgers deserves time - fact. Balotelli already being lined up for a summer transfer away. Some club will obvs take a punt on him, but I'd expect it to be someone of Newcastle's level. He's certainly not CL standard anymore.
Rodgers deserves time - fact. Balotelli already being lined up for a summer transfer away. Some club will obvs take a punt on him, but I'd expect it to be someone of Newcastle's level. He's certainly not CL standard anymore.
Liverpool cannot match City, Chelsea or United in terms of wages, however Arsenal aren't exactly known for paying huge wages either. That hasn't stopped them dipping into the market.
How do you know this? Liverpool had just sold their best player, he'd probably never heard of their manager or most of their squad. Living in London obviously has its appeal but it's hard to think of one area where Liverpool are better than Arsenal right now. Is it that inconceivable to suggest that he just picked the better team?
Original post by A Mysterious Lord
No he chose LONDON over Liverpool, the city, not the team.
How do you know this? Liverpool had just sold their best player, he'd probably never heard of their manager or most of their squad. Living in London obviously has its appeal but it's hard to think of one area where Liverpool are better than Arsenal right now. Is it that inconceivable to suggest that he just picked the better team?
(edited 9 years ago)
Just seen the Napoli board are very unimpressed with Rafa's campaign in Serie A so far this season. He is also out of contract at the end of this season, could a great return happen?
Original post by sr90
Liverpool cannot match City, Chelsea or United in terms of wages, however Arsenal aren't exactly known for paying huge wages either. That hasn't stopped them dipping into the market.
How do you know this? Liverpool had just sold their best player, he'd probably never heard of their manager or most of their squad. Living in London obviously has its appeal but it's hard to think of one area where Liverpool are better than Arsenal right now. Is it that inconceivable to suggest that he just picked the better team?
How do you know this? Liverpool had just sold their best player, he'd probably never heard of their manager or most of their squad. Living in London obviously has its appeal but it's hard to think of one area where Liverpool are better than Arsenal right now. Is it that inconceivable to suggest that he just picked the better team?
Liverpool finished 2nd in the league, they were the most exciting team in the league, meanwhile Arsenal finished 4th, like always, besides that Liverpool are arguably the biggest team in England with United, and Arsenal are behind those 2 giants.
It's all about money, do you really think Nasri, Aguero, etc joined City for their amazing history? NO, they moved there because they were paid 180k, 200k, 250k a week, I don't know how much, but a lot... Liverpool refused to pay Sanchez's wages, and that's why he is at Arsenal and not at Liverpool
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- HELP !! Deciding whether I should do an apprenticeship or go to university for chem
- Working Class / Left wing football clubs?
- What is Your Favorite Football Club
- Bundesliga
- The Liverpool FC Thread XVII
- Liverpool vs Bristol for history
- UCAS Éducation Section
- Whats everyone up to?
- Latin Scansion in the Aeneid
- What team do you support and why?
- School Transcripts for UCAS Application- CBSE
- diary of a first year medic
- Make it More Princess-ey !!
- A Levels 2023 Personal Blog
- Year 13 Latin resources
- Cambridge requirements for Indian students
- Indian cbse student gets stuck on UCAS
- do i need to take an english test?
- Things EA Sports FC Needs To Change From FC 24
- rosarian v a-levels. ~r's gyg 2024⭐
