Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    When you couldn't get Sanchez then at least get Cuadrado
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    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?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (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.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    ^Rubbish. Liverpool can't sign those players because they can't attract those players. Sanchez CHOSE Arsenal OVER Liverpool.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    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.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    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.

    (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?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    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?
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (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?
    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
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luke829)
    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
    Liverpool offered higher wages but he didn't budge, his mind (or perhaps his wife's) was already made up.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by luke829)
    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
    They offered him more money than Arsenal did though :dontknow:

    I doubt foreign players pay much attention to the Premier League, Dani Alves didn't know who Manchester City were last season.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Mysterious Lord)
    No he chose LONDON over Liverpool, the city, not the team.
    So you think the likes of Chelsea and Tottenham didn't think about signing him?

    He chose Arsenal over Liverpool FC.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sr90)
    They offered him more money than Arsenal did though :dontknow:

    I doubt foreign players pay much attention to the Premier League, Dani Alves didn't know who Manchester City were last season.
    I doubt it, and if we did we should have offered him more. And I don't understand why didn't we ask for Sanchez in the Suarez deal, 40M + Sanchez was a lot better than 75M for Suarez, we spend that money on potential anyway..

    All this bull**** about 'squad depth', yes it's fine to have a lot of players, but 15 quality players is a lot better than 22 sh*t players, we should have never bought Lambert, Balotelli, Markovic (for that price at least), Lovren (20M and Kolo, a free agent is better than him), Lallana (16M, not more than that).

    20M on Lovren
    25M on Lallana
    16M on Balotelli
    20M on Markovic
    4M on Lambert (3rd choice, not 1st choice)
    = 85M

    85M spent on average players, we should have bought 2 world class players, not 5 average players... Lovren bench, Lallana rotation, Balotelli benched by 32 yo Lambert, Markovic bench, Lambert our world class striker.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Monsieur Gamma)
    So you think the likes of Chelsea and Tottenham didn't think about signing him?

    He chose Arsenal over Liverpool FC.
    Tottenham dont have CL, Chelsea didn't go for Sanchez as they already got Fabregas and Costa and they have FFP to think about.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: February 4, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.