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

    19
    ReputationRep:
    surprised you guys did not buy anyone new at all..

    I hope its because rodgers is still letting all his summer signings settle, rather then him being convinced by this rise in form youve had over the last month..

    Not convinced though - I can just see another sturridge injury, you guys struggling again - and then regretting not buying another attacking option.

    if sturridge misses another chunk of the season, and stirlings form drops again (as it probably will, given his age) then It may be that the difference between top4 and not would have been purchasing some alternative attacking choices this window
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fallen_acorns)
    surprised you guys did not buy anyone new at all..

    I hope its because rodgers is still letting all his summer signings settle, rather then him being convinced by this rise in form youve had over the last month..

    Not convinced though - I can just see another sturridge injury, you guys struggling again - and then regretting not buying another attacking option.

    if sturridge misses another chunk of the season, and stirlings form drops again (as it probably will, given his age) then It may be that the difference between top4 and not would have been purchasing some alternative attacking choices this window
    It will be a combination of the high cost of buying in January, the lack of targets (and generally a quiet window) and with Sturridge coming back from injury. We don't have a small squad and the team seem to be improving so makes little sense to throw money and waste? No doubt FSG look at Torres/Carroll saga but also Sturridge/Coutinho purchases.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    It will be a combination of the high cost of buying in January, the lack of targets (and generally a quiet window) and with Sturridge coming back from injury. We don't have a small squad and the team seem to be improving so makes little sense to throw money and waste? No doubt FSG look at Torres/Carroll saga but also Sturridge/Coutinho purchases.
    I get what you mean - and I have no idea what attacking players may have been avaliable - as I have not been following the transfers this month..

    but for instance, had rodgers + co, organised a stricker before christmas, got everything lined up, and purchased one at a reasonable time (e.g. bony) then I honestly think you would be sat in the final of the league cup right now.. as the only thing that stopped you beating chelsea, was the lack of a decent goal scorer in those games..

    And if just feels like that may mirror the rest of the season. - I am sure they have a huge number of reasons why it was not possible to sign the attacking players they may have wanted, but all
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fallen_acorns)
    I get what you mean - and I have no idea what attacking players may have been avaliable - as I have not been following the transfers this month..

    but for instance, had rodgers + co, organised a stricker before christmas, got everything lined up, and purchased one at a reasonable time (e.g. bony) then I honestly think you would be sat in the final of the league cup right now.. as the only thing that stopped you beating chelsea, was the lack of a decent goal scorer in those games..

    And if just feels like that may mirror the rest of the season. - I am sure they have a huge number of reasons why it was not possible to sign the attacking players they may have wanted, but all
    Is the League Cup worth spending 25mil on a striker + committing 100k a week for 5 years on wages?

    Sturridge is back now so we've got that decent goalscorer back if we can rely on him to stay fit.

    We'll have another overhaul in the summer when it makes more sense to. I would've been pleased if we had been able to sort a new GK considering Valdes got snapped up but we've been on a strong run and playing well. We also typically play better in the 2nd half of the season compared to the 1st so I guess the club decided to put faith in the players?

    We can't ignore how much FFP has impacted the game too. Think the transfer market was very quiet because of that.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    Is the League Cup worth spending 25mil on a striker + committing 100k a week for 5 years on wages?

    Sturridge is back now so we've got that decent goalscorer back if we can rely on him to stay fit.

    We'll have another overhaul in the summer when it makes more sense to.
    with the first part - no. definetly not.. but that new striker would not be only benificial to the league cup.. your still challenging in 3 other competitions, with only 1 good striker, and a young player who can do a competant job in the position.

    the 2nd part - is a very big 'IF'.. we made one of those 'if's with arsenals defense last half of the season.. and it backfired hugely.. sure going to a season with only 2 senior CBs was a risk, but it would have been ok IF they had stayed fit.. as it turns out they did not, and it cost us. - I just see the same happening with liverpool and sturridge.

    Yep, agree that the summer is the best time to do things, but not getting CL football is such a big risk, and we have seen you struggle to compete for the top players with CL football, let alone without.. the 25m you spoke about may not be worth a leage cup.. but if sturridge gets injured, then it is definetly worth a top4 finish, and not loosing stirling if you dont
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fallen_acorns)
    with the first part - no. definetly not.. but that new striker would not be only benificial to the league cup.. your still challenging in 3 other competitions, with only 1 good striker, and a young player who can do a competant job in the position.

    the 2nd part - is a very big 'IF'.. we made one of those 'if's with arsenals defense last half of the season.. and it backfired hugely.. sure going to a season with only 2 senior CBs was a risk, but it would have been ok IF they had stayed fit.. as it turns out they did not, and it cost us. - I just see the same happening with liverpool and sturridge.

    Yep, agree that the summer is the best time to do things, but not getting CL football is such a big risk, and we have seen you struggle to compete for the top players with CL football, let alone without.. the 25m you spoke about may not be worth a leage cup.. but if sturridge gets injured, then it is definetly worth a top4 finish, and not loosing stirling if you dont
    We bought Balotelli in the summer because of a lack of options. No idea who we were going to buy in January who would be adequate in the long term. Let's not forget Bony cost £25mil rising to £28mil + a huge contract and isn't even a like-for-like replacement for Sturridge in our style of play.

    We need someone pacey as we've seen Sterling play up front in Sturridge's absence lately. We just don't have enough funds to splash on a striker without a sale. Dont think anyone was coming in for Balotelli/Borini for good money.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    No doubt FSG look at Torres/Carroll saga but also Sturridge/Coutinho purchases.
    FSG have their heads screwed on - despite the Balotelli fiasco. We don't need another 2011, and they recognise that.

    January signings sometimes have an air of panic buy about them, so I'm glad we didn't do any business really. Mignolet has been commanding the last few matches, so bringing in a goalkeeper may have needlessly hampered his development, and there were no ready-made and easy-to-get alternatives.

    The thing we needed most was a 'keeper imo, I'm happy to wait until summer to truly strengthen.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think given Sturridge's injury history it's ridiculous to have not bought a striker.

    We have the same amount of shots per game as Arsenal and Chelsea, and yet trail them by 11, and 19 goals scored. Our build up play is slightly quicker (and shots on transition are statistically more likely to score), and we're only marginally shooting more from outside the box (it's 5-8% difference).

    So what is the issue? Quite ****ing clearly that we haven't had a finisher in the team.

    We're on a great run of form but only because we've played the ****e teams of the league - if we'd won less than 5/6 everyone would still be up in arms and our top four hopes would be completely gone. We can't afford to drop points and not bringing in a striker means that we're back to relying on Sturridge's dismal fitness history and a 20 year old who was our substitute RWB for half of last season.

    Not a gamble worth taking.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    We bought Balotelli in the summer because of a lack of options.
    This is utter rubbish btw, no matter what Rodgers says.

    There's 20+ 'great' strikers across Europe who were available last summer, probably 50+ who had better open play scoring records than Mario.

    Either he was forced upon Brendan or Brendan ego-tripped and thought he was the one who could unlock Mario's potential.

    Now I'm not saying we had a chance with the likes of Mandzukic or Griezzman (who I wanted all summer) but to suggest Balotelli was our only option when there was the likes of Bacca, Volland, Lacazette, Berardi, Balde Diao, whichever names you want to bring up. The truth is that you can actually play football manager in this instance and just say random names because the idea that not a single better player than Balotelli, who's scored something like 6 open play goals in two seasons, was available, is silly.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jam277)
    You missed a dud with Salah. He's a pretty terrible player in all honesty.
    Use him well, nurture him, and he'll score you goals with regularity.

    Had the potential to be on a similar level to Walcott. Never a top, top level talent but could have been a very effective PL performer.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KFC Buffet)
    This is utter rubbish btw, no matter what Rodgers says.

    There's 20+ 'great' strikers across Europe who were available last summer, probably 50+ who had better open play scoring records than Mario.

    Either he was forced upon Brendan or Brendan ego-tripped and thought he was the one who could unlock Mario's potential.

    Now I'm not saying we had a chance with the likes of Mandzukic or Griezzman (who I wanted all summer) but to suggest Balotelli was our only option when there was the likes of Bacca, Volland, Lacazette, Berardi, Balde Diao, whichever names you want to bring up. The truth is that you can actually play football manager in this instance and just say random names because the idea that not a single better player than Balotelli, who's scored something like 6 open play goals in two seasons, was available, is silly.
    I think it's fair to say we weren't going to get any of the top strikers who moved last summer.

    Let's go through your other options:

    Bacca - Seville signed him the summer before and he had a good season, scoring 1 in 2 games. A buy-out of 30mil euros is likely what we would have had to pay to buy him since Seville are one of the toughest negotiators (and he was widely regarded as one of the best signings of the season).

    Doesn't Volland mainly play on the right wing for Hoffenheim? I presume we were looking for a striker who could potentially lead the line. I'd agree he was affordable though.

    Lacazette - I do think we missed a trick with Lacazette. He had a strong season last year and now he's really pushed one. Easier said with hindsight since he might not have done as well this year and who knows if he would've gotten enough game time to prove himself at Liverpool. We should be kicking ourselves over this one. Maybe there was hesitate as he was playing in France?

    Berardi - I don't think Juventus would sell him since they see him as one for the future. Not like Juventus have money issues and he's developing on loan before they take him back to Juventus.

    Balde Diao has done nothing to justify a move yet. I don't think he's scored a league goal this season? He's only 19 and we opted to sign Origi in the summer.

    I imagine Rodgers wanted to continue with his 4-4-2 (diamond) considering how long we carried on playing it at the start of the season (despite it not working) which meant buying another striker to lead the line. Perhaps he saw a youngster as too much of a gamble and Balotelli looked like a calculated risk since he's played at the top level for some time, has had flashes of brilliance and already played in the premier league before?

    Personally I was very surprised we opted for Balotelli but I still think there weren't as many sensible/affordable/less risky transfers as you're making out.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KFC Buffet)
    I think given Sturridge's injury history it's ridiculous to have not bought a striker.

    We have the same amount of shots per game as Arsenal and Chelsea, and yet trail them by 11, and 19 goals scored. Our build up play is slightly quicker (and shots on transition are statistically more likely to score), and we're only marginally shooting more from outside the box (it's 5-8% difference).

    So what is the issue? Quite ****ing clearly that we haven't had a finisher in the team.

    We're on a great run of form but only because we've played the ****e teams of the league - if we'd won less than 5/6 everyone would still be up in arms and our top four hopes would be completely gone. We can't afford to drop points and not bringing in a striker means that we're back to relying on Sturridge's dismal fitness history and a 20 year old who was our substitute RWB for half of last season.

    Not a gamble worth taking.
    I think everyone accepts having another goalscorer would've been ideal but considering the market and the FFP rules, what was likely to happen?

    The club have worked very hard on Sturridge so perhaps they think he can last the 4 months of the season so long as we manage him?
    That's unfair on Sterling considering he's played the striker role for half of this season and has done relatively well. He's improving all the time. Obviously a very intelligent and versatile player so you can't just dismiss him for having played at RWB for some games.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by KFC Buffet)
    Either he was forced upon Brendan or Brendan ego-tripped and thought he was the one who could unlock Mario's potential.

    Now I'm not saying we had a chance with the likes of Mandzukic or Griezzman (who I wanted all summer) but to suggest Balotelli was our only option when there was the likes of Bacca, Volland, Lacazette, Berardi, Balde Diao, whichever names you want to bring up. The truth is that you can actually play football manager in this instance and just say random names because the idea that not a single better player than Balotelli, who's scored something like 6 open play goals in two seasons, was available, is silly.
    Your first sentence is what happened in my opinion.

    Throw in Bony, Remy to that list, too.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    I think it's fair to say we weren't going to get any of the top strikers who moved last summer.

    Let's go through your other options:

    Bacca - Seville signed him the summer before and he had a good season, scoring 1 in 2 games. A buy-out of 30mil euros is likely what we would have had to pay to buy him since Seville are one of the toughest negotiators (and he was widely regarded as one of the best signings of the season).

    Doesn't Volland mainly play on the right wing for Hoffenheim? I presume we were looking for a striker who could potentially lead the line. I'd agree he was affordable though.

    Lacazette - I do think we missed a trick with Lacazette. He had a strong season last year and now he's really pushed one. Easier said with hindsight since he might not have done as well this year and who knows if he would've gotten enough game time to prove himself at Liverpool. We should be kicking ourselves over this one. Maybe there was hesitate as he was playing in France?

    Berardi - I don't think Juventus would sell him since they see him as one for the future. Not like Juventus have money issues and he's developing on loan before they take him back to Juventus.

    Balde Diao has done nothing to justify a move yet. I don't think he's scored a league goal this season? He's only 19 and we opted to sign Origi in the summer.

    I imagine Rodgers wanted to continue with his 4-4-2 (diamond) considering how long we carried on playing it at the start of the season (despite it not working) which meant buying another striker to lead the line. Perhaps he saw a youngster as too much of a gamble and Balotelli looked like a calculated risk since he's played at the top level for some time, has had flashes of brilliance and already played in the premier league before?

    Personally I was very surprised we opted for Balotelli but I still think there weren't as many sensible/affordable/less risky transfers as you're making out.
    30m euros is 24-25m pounds? Which means it's hardly much more than Balo, and we basically had 50m to spend on a striker last summer.

    Wrt the options in general, I just threw out a few names. I'm not a European football expert and I don't know the names of every decent striker around. I could throw out a few more, like Jackson Martinez, Firmino, Adrian Ramos, Immobile, whoever.

    The point is that you said initially that 'there was a lack of options'.

    Which is a club-peddled line, and absolute bull****.

    Balotelli didn't a) fit our style, b) come with the required goals record, or c) come at a vast cut price, d) come with guaranteed scope for growth, e) have the required mentality.

    Now C, D and E are minor points, but the main things are that he didn't fit our style AT ALL, and he didn't come with a reasonable goalscoring record AT ALL.

    It is an awful, awful signing. I ****ged him off all summer before he came to us, once he was our player I guess we all dreamed that Brendan could get some of his potential out, but we all underestimated how ingrained in his ways Balotelli is and how he just does not fit our footballing philosophy or ethic in any way at all.

    AND THAT WOULD ALL BE FINE IF HE COULD SCORE GOALS OCCASIONALLY, but he can't. His finishing is absolutely atrocious statistically, it has been for most of his career, and it's been even worse than trend for us.

    Genuinely the worst signing we've made under Brendan and your suggestion that he was there because of a lack of options is just wrong. I don't know the truth, idk if Brendan's superiors or Brendan's ego signed him, the truth is that he's just wrong in every way.

    This has turned into a rant about what a **** signing he was but the point stands that there were better options if Brendan wanted an experienced striker and there were far more options if he would have been happy with youth as well.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mackay)
    Your first sentence is what happened in my opinion.

    Throw in Bony, Remy to that list, too.
    You can't include Remy in that list since we had agreed a fee but the medical team saw it as a risk too fair. I don't care what Chelsea do but he was ruled out as an option by the club.

    Bony was available for £19mil with that transfer fee. It's nuts that we thought £3mil more than Balotelli cost was too much.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    I think everyone accepts having another goalscorer would've been ideal but considering the market and the FFP rules, what was likely to happen?

    The club have worked very hard on Sturridge so perhaps they think he can last the 4 months of the season so long as we manage him?
    That's unfair on Sterling considering he's played the striker role for half of this season and has done relatively well. He's improving all the time. Obviously a very intelligent and versatile player so you can't just dismiss him for having played at RWB for some games.
    No-one knows how we stand wrt FFP because the accounts for this season aren't within our reach. Considering the market isn't really an issue for me, spending an extra 5m now instead of the summer is worth the 6 months acclimatisation and the boost in the race for top four. Easily worth it.

    The club worked hard on Sturridge when he got his initial injury for 6 weeks. And no doubt when he got the next one for a further two months. And no doubt after that as well. He can't be relied upon.

    I'm not suggesting Raheem isn't a serviceable striker, because he is. Anyone who knows me on these forums knows that I'm Raheem's biggest fan and wish I was one of his 14 baby mommas. He's a good enough 3/4th choice striker, but he doesn't have the composure in his finishing to lead us to top four. Statistically he was immense at finishing last year and he's doing pretty good this year too, but I think we all know that he doesn't have the technique/power, and the goalscorer's instinct, that someone like Daniel does. That's all I was saying. He'll score, but not enough for the super run of form that we need to get top four.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KFC Buffet)
    Use him well, nurture him, and he'll score you goals with regularity.

    Had the potential to be on a similar level to Walcott. Never a top, top level talent but could have been a very effective PL performer.
    Chelsea under Mourinho don't really do never top level talent and if we do they're usually out of the door in a couple seasons.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It irks me so much because if Balotelli had just scored 2/3 of the 5/6 sitters he's missed, we'd have 5+ more points right now and would be cruising to third place.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jam277)
    Chelsea under Mourinho don't really do never top level talent and if we do they're usually out of the door in a couple seasons.
    I think there's little doubt it was a silly signing by you lot and that there was more than a hint of 'let's **** Liverpool over' about it.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KFC Buffet)
    30m euros is 24-25m pounds? Which means it's hardly much more than Balo, and we basically had 50m to spend on a striker last summer.

    Wrt the options in general, I just threw out a few names. I'm not a European football expert and I don't know the names of every decent striker around. I could throw out a few more, like Jackson Martinez, Firmino, Adrian Ramos, Immobile, whoever.

    The point is that you said initially that 'there was a lack of options'.

    Which is a club-peddled line, and absolute bull****.

    Balotelli didn't a) fit our style, b) come with the required goals record, or c) come at a vast cut price, d) come with guaranteed scope for growth, e) have the required mentality.

    Now C, D and E are minor points, but the main things are that he didn't fit our style AT ALL, and he didn't come with a reasonable goalscoring record AT ALL.

    It is an awful, awful signing. I ****ged him off all summer before he came to us, once he was our player I guess we all dreamed that Brendan could get some of his potential out, but we all underestimated how ingrained in his ways Balotelli is and how he just does not fit our footballing philosophy or ethic in any way at all.

    AND THAT WOULD ALL BE FINE IF HE COULD SCORE GOALS OCCASIONALLY, but he can't. His finishing is absolutely atrocious statistically, it has been for most of his career, and it's been even worse than trend for us.

    Genuinely the worst signing we've made under Brendan and your suggestion that he was there because of a lack of options is just wrong. I don't know the truth, idk if Brendan's superiors or Brendan's ego signed him, the truth is that he's just wrong in every way.

    This has turned into a rant about what a **** signing he was but the point stands that there were better options if Brendan wanted an experienced striker and there were far more options if he would have been happy with youth as well.
    Balotelli cost £16mil so we would've needed another 50% to be able to buy Bacca, which is a lot of money. I presume Rodgers/the transfer committee decided to spend more money on squad depth rather than just one striker? We obviously had the funds initially since we offered £35mil for Sanchez. Not sure what happened after that.

    Completely agree that it was a misguided transfer and I'm not sure who made the final call or why it seems sensible at the time.

    Even then, I can still see why it happened considering the circumstances.
 
 
 
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
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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.