Sadio Mane

[Scott_M]

1 hour ago, m0e said:

He's arguably won every final he's been the favourite in.

 

Plus, you'll be hard pushed to find any manager in world football who's made more finals than he has over the past 10 years.

 

Particularly if you take out the oil and gas clubs.

 

Real Madrid x 2, Chelsea x 2, Man City, Sevilla and Spurs. 

 

Chelsea were European Champions and Spurs title contenders in the years before. So, even the ones we've won, we weren't clear cut favourites. 

 

It feels harsh when Klopp has been here you see Villa, Palace, Watford & an absolutely out of it Spurs in domestic finals and then we get the European Champions twice (I expect to play the best of the best in a European Final).

 

I'd love to be at just won final and we're 4-0 up an hour so we can just sing like fuck and actually enjoy all of it. I'd obviously take a penalties win over not winning at every opportunity, we don't half make things hard on ourselves. 

[3 Stacks]

1 hour ago, m0e said:

He's arguably won every final he's been the favourite in.

 

Plus, you'll be hard pushed to find any manager in world football who's made more finals than he has over the past 10 years.

 

Particularly if you take out the oil and gas clubs.

I'm making a cynical argument to counter a similarly cynical argument from our favourite lassie Daisy, here.

[Barrington Womble]

5 hours ago, m0e said:

That's right. They would have only ever gone to one of City, PSG, Chelsea, Barca, Atletico, Bayern or United (who all spent mega money in the pandemic) or Real Madrid.

 

Let's refresh our memories on how badly Real got impacted by the pandemic:

 

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/soccer-transfers/story/4466008/real-madrid-bid-200m-for-kylian-mbappe-psg-fail-to-respond-sources

 

Totals across divisions did go down.

 

Totals across the big clubs (those that could buy Mane or Salah) did not.

 

That was the point I was making.

Real Madrid would have shit a brick had that offer been accepted. They offered it to quieten their fans with a bid they knew was never being accepted. It'd be like Everton entering the race to sign Mane. 

[Captain Howdy]

1 hour ago, m0e said:

He's arguably won every final he's been the favourite in.

 

Plus, you'll be hard pushed to find any manager in world football who's made more finals than he has over the past 10 years.

 

Particularly if you take out the oil and gas clubs.

He’s a genius I think. What he has achieved against blatant cheats is just phenomenal. Yes his final wins record could probably be better but it doesn’t detract at all from his genius. Best manager in the world and all things considered arguably the greatest manager we’ve ever had. One thing is for sure he’ll definitely win more finals.

[m0e]

1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

Real Madrid would have shit a brick had that offer been accepted. They offered it to quieten their fans with a bid they knew was never being accepted. It'd be like Everton entering the race to sign Mane. 

So, we've gone from ONLY City and PSG spending, to Chelsea don't count, to all the other money the other 6 clubs I mentioned spent was spread between a few players, meaning the total couldn't have been spent on one player (for some odd reason), to bids being made with no money in the bank.

 

And all this based on what exactly?

 

I'll help. Its called confirmation bias.

 

You're one of the sensible posters on here, but this is just getting silly now.

[m0e]

1 hour ago, 3 Stacks said:

I'm making a cynical argument to counter a similarly cynical argument from our favourite lassie Daisy, here.

Fair

[m0e]

2 hours ago, Scott_M said:

 

Real Madrid x 2, Chelsea x 2, Man City, Sevilla and Spurs. 

 

Chelsea were European Champions and Spurs title contenders in the years before. So, even the ones we've won, we weren't clear cut favourites. 

 

It feels harsh when Klopp has been here you see Villa, Palace, Watford & an absolutely out of it Spurs in domestic finals and then we get the European Champions twice (I expect to play the best of the best in a European Final).

 

I'd love to be at just won final and we're 4-0 up an hour so we can just sing like fuck and actually enjoy all of it. I'd obviously take a penalties win over not winning at every opportunity, we don't half make things hard on ourselves. 

Yup. You can even include his Dortmund finals too.

[Scott_M]

6 minutes ago, m0e said:

Yup. You can even include his Dortmund finals too.

Yep.

 

Paris does feel like the biggest missed opportunity, shit happens. 

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, m0e said:

So, we've gone from ONLY City and PSG spending, to Chelsea don't count, to all the other money the other 6 clubs I mentioned spent was spread between a few players, meaning the total couldn't have been spent on one player (for some odd reason), to bids being made with no money in the bank.

 

And all this based on what exactly?

 

I'll help. Its called confirmation bias.

 

You're one of the sensible posters on here, but this is just getting silly now.

I've said Madrid would have shit a brick had psg accepted the 200m bid for mbappe and this is your reply? It's like you're answering 4 posts back or something. 

[m0e]

1 hour ago, Barrington Womble said:

I've said Madrid would have shit a brick had psg accepted the 200m bid for mbappe and this is your reply? It's like you're answering 4 posts back or something. 

What's your point? Because I think mine was clear, supplemented by actual evidence.

[Barrington Womble]

9 minutes ago, m0e said:

What's your point? Because I think mine was clear, supplemented by actual evidence.

My point is outside of psg, I don't think there's a club that we would have sold to and could have afforded mane or Salah these last 2 summers and psg were happy getting Messi. I don't think for 1 minute when firmino, Salah and mane signed new 4 year deals within about a month of each other in 2019 that the club thought not one of them would have pushed for a move before now. Covid slowed demand and shortened their options (and possibly lessened a desire to move on). It's allowed mane to be able to choose Munich now because he's cheaper (and to some extent between the clubs feels like a tit for tat transfer with thiago) and allows Salah to go on a free and pick wherever the fuck he wants including an English club. Everyone on here would never have believed a scenario where at the end of those 4 years, Salah and mane would be out of the club for a combined 30m. In fact it could be all 3 of them, although I suspect firmino may go on milner style year by year deals. 

 

Klopp even mentioned himself when he signed his new contract how covid had slowed down the plans for the team and the extra 2 years was to help achieve them. 

[m0e]

12 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

My point is outside of psg, I don't think there's a club that we would have sold to and could have afforded mane or Salah these last 2 summers and psg were happy getting Messi. I don't think for 1 minute when firmino, Salah and mane signed new 4 year deals within about a month of each other in 2019 that the club thought not one of them would have pushed for a move before now. Covid slowed demand and shortened their options (and possibly lessened a desire to move on). It's allowed mane to be able to choose Munich now because he's cheaper (and to some extent between the clubs feels like a tit for tat transfer with thiago) and allows Salah to go on a free and pick wherever the fuck he wants including an English club. Everyone on here would never have believed a scenario where at the end of those 4 years, Salah and mane would be out of the club for a combined 30m. In fact it could be all 3 of them, although I suspect firmino may go on milner style year by year deals. 

 

Klopp even mentioned himself when he signed his new contract how covid had slowed down the plans for the team and the extra 2 years was to help achieve them. 

But there are only 2 clubs outside of PSG, who would fit your criteria anyway - one of whom spent 100s of millions going broke, and the other bid 200 million for a player who was in the last year of his contract and wanted to join them anyway.

 

As for the supposed strategy to sell one of those 3 for big money to help improve the squad, like the Coutinho deal, surely spending 65 million on Nunez after the shock of the pandemic, into a squad which has more than 2 players for each position, after buying a 30 year old on 200k a week during the height of the pandemic, puts that idea to bed.

[Kevin D]

On 17/06/2022 at 21:18, J-V said:

He's gone get over it.

[Daisy]

12 hours ago, m0e said:

He's arguably won every final he's been the favourite in.

 

Plus, you'll be hard pushed to find any manager in world football who's made more finals than he has over the past 10 years.

 

Particularly if you take out the oil and gas clubs.

We should be sitting on 8 European cups by now if he'd been backed properly. 

 

We had to start an injured midfielder against Madrid and lost. And we aren't doing anything about it. 

[3 Stacks]

2 hours ago, Daisy said:

We should be sitting on 8 European cups by now if he'd been backed properly. 

 

We had to start an injured midfielder against Madrid and lost. And we aren't doing anything about it. 

Klopp doesn't really help himself in that regard. 

 

If he'd let Milner go and didn't want Jones and Elliott to be part of the first team squad, there'd be plenty of room to buy a midfield player. And then he also wants Keita to be extended. He could create a need in midfield by doing simple stuff, but he doesn't. 

[VladimirIlyich]

21 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

Klopp doesn't really help himself in that regard. 

 

If he'd let Milner go and didn't want Jones and Elliott to be part of the first team squad, there'd be plenty of room to buy a midfield player. And then he also wants Keita to be extended. He could create a need in midfield by doing simple stuff, but he doesn't. 

Maybe because cant afford to pay 80 million for a midfielder and believes its better not to have all your eggs in one basket? Or at least he'd have to lose some squad numbers just for one player. 

[Saintslfc13]

2 hours ago, Daisy said:

We should be sitting on 8 European cups by now if he'd been backed properly. 

 

We had to start an injured midfielder against Madrid and lost. And we aren't doing anything about it. 

We'd be sitting on 8 European Cups right now if the players had executed better. 9 if you count the '07 team that should've dealt with that Milan side we'd beat with a weaker squad in '05. It's not all on the managers or the owners.

[Barrington Womble]

10 hours ago, m0e said:

But there are only 2 clubs outside of PSG, who would fit your criteria anyway - one of whom spent 100s of millions going broke, and the other bid 200 million for a player who was in the last year of his contract and wanted to join them anyway.

 

As for the supposed strategy to sell one of those 3 for big money to help improve the squad, like the Coutinho deal, surely spending 65 million on Nunez after the shock of the pandemic, into a squad which has more than 2 players for each position, after buying a 30 year old on 200k a week during the height of the pandemic, puts that idea to bed.

Actually before covid, Barcelona would have fitted the criteria. And Messi wouldn't have gone anywhere. And then perhaps PSG have a different point of view or he might have gone to barca. Obviously there's a really small group of clubs our players can go to to get their step up in salary. And half of them are in England, who we wouldn't choose to sell to in an ideal world. 

 

And as I've posted before, I don't believe that Madrid bid was serious. It was an Everton bid in the kenwright days. So we'll have to agree to disagree about that as I don't believe they were in the game for a 200m player at all. 

 

How about looking at it this way. It seems clear we plan pretty well. Do you think the club would have planned to get us to a point where our 3 main forwards at the club at 2019 when they signed new contracts, were all in their 30s by 2022, were all out of contract at 2023 and our intention was all 3 would still be here now? I don't believe that for a second. Their age alone would suggest somewhere along the way we'd need to refresh at least 1 or 2 of them..so if we thought they'd all still be here in 2022, I'm sure one of the 3 we'd have given a 5 year deal to to at least stagger the problem. So what I conclude about that is they thought one of the 3 would push for a move away during the 4 year period. 

[Carra_is_legend]

Weren't Madrid spending shit loads on their stadium too, as well as struggling during Covid? Not to the extent of Barca ofcourse but I remember reading that they will not be able to spend big on players due to combination of Covid + stadium improvements.

[VladimirIlyich]

Madrid will always have money despite the appearance to the contrary. Absolute fuckin crooks from whom everybody else, who is dodgy, has learned their trade.

[m0e]

8 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

How about looking at it this way. It seems clear we plan pretty well. Do you think the club would have planned to get us to a point where our 3 main forwards at the club at 2019 when they signed new contracts, were all in their 30s by 2022, were all out of contract at 2023 and our intention was all 3 would still be here now?

Our intention was to get the best years out of them, which we've done.

 

2 of them were offered new contracts. One wanted out and the other will leave on a free next season.

 

We could have easily put Bobby up for sale last summer, but Klopp loves him.

 

I don't think we give a flying fuck about transfer fees. What we don't want is to pay ridiculous salaries and be stuck with out of form players on those salaries.

 

High salaries and bad form makes it much harder to move players on too.

 

I think the tactic is to keep them until their contract is done, and bring in young players on much lower salaries.

 

We did it with Lallana and Origi.

 

We did it with Wijnladum, where we got a much better player, slightly younger, for a lesser salary that he wanted, which covers the 20 million fee over 3 years.

 

Diaz is effectively Mane's replacement, and he gets paid 130k less a week. That's nearly 7 million a year, and if you take that over the 3 years than Mane signed for Bayern, that's 20 mil added to the 30 mil we sold him for.

 

If Salah signs a 400k a week deal, the difference between his salary and Nunez over the next 6 years covers the Nunez transfer fee.

 

I've got no qualms about how you interpret it, but have seen no evidence to back that position.

[Carra_is_legend]

Not sure if it's true that Diaz gets 130k less than Mane. Thought Mane is on like 100k per week

[TheHowieLama]

6 minutes ago, Carra_is_legend said:

Not sure if it's true that Diaz gets 130k less than Mane. Thought Mane is on like 100k per week

Mane = 180k 

Diaz = 50k

Allegedly.

 

Diaz will also be disappointed to learn that Nunez will be making more than double.

[Carra_is_legend]

9 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Mane = 180k 

Diaz = 50k

Allegedly.

 

Diaz will also be disappointed to learn that Nunez will be making more than double.

Diaz will get a new deal next year. Mostly end of next year if he keeps up the form. 

[Barrington Womble]

3 hours ago, m0e said:

Our intention was to get the best years out of them, which we've done.

 

2 of them were offered new contracts. One wanted out and the other will leave on a free next season.

 

We could have easily put Bobby up for sale last summer, but Klopp loves him.

 

I don't think we give a flying fuck about transfer fees. What we don't want is to pay ridiculous salaries and be stuck with out of form players on those salaries.

 

High salaries and bad form makes it much harder to move players on too.

 

I think the tactic is to keep them until their contract is done, and bring in young players on much lower salaries.

 

We did it with Lallana and Origi.

 

We did it with Wijnladum, where we got a much better player, slightly younger, for a lesser salary that he wanted, which covers the 20 million fee over 3 years.

 

Diaz is effectively Mane's replacement, and he gets paid 130k less a week. That's nearly 7 million a year, and if you take that over the 3 years than Mane signed for Bayern, that's 20 mil added to the 30 mil we sold him for.

 

If Salah signs a 400k a week deal, the difference between his salary and Nunez over the next 6 years covers the Nunez transfer fee.

 

I've got no qualms about how you interpret it, but have seen no evidence to back that position.

I don't dispute keeping salaries down is an aim, but I also think careful squad management is too. I just don't think there was an expectation we'd still have all 3 here now. 

 

I would also agree we'd probably prefer to let someone like Salah run down his contract than put him on a massive salary. However where we absolutely disagree is to think they don't give a shit about fees. They don't give a shit when they're worth little going out and it would cost more to replace. But I feel absolutely certain we'd have preferred to take a coutinho style fee for Salah in 2021 then let him go for free in 2023. There just weren't offers for him, so we let it role. If there had been offers, he'd have been gone, like Torres, Suarez & coutinho before him.