Quantcast
Summer 2019 Transfer Thread - Page 287 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Anubis

Summer 2019 Transfer Thread

Recommended Posts

I'm sure Klopp does have a budget and I don't see anything bad in that... the Main Stand and Kirkby have to be paid for and, I trust, a new Anny Rd stand sometime within the next few years

I am surprised we didn't make any significant signings, though, as the squad looks thin to me. 

I don't think the owners take anything out of the Club unlike the Glazers although happy to be proved wrong... if they did/do I'd be worried.

Don't really buy the whole not interested in winning things angle; apart from anything else winning stuff is the best way to increase the value of the asset 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheHowieLama said:

We lost last season Baz - so we need a miracle AND 150 mil - what kind of fool would listen to that?

So I think that's the business decision we've made. Where are we likely to finish if we don't spend? 2nd. Where are we likely to finish if we spent 150m? 2nd. How does spending 150m improve our chances? maybe it does by 5%. Let's bank the cash then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scrump said:

£150m to improve the starting team, not the squad - according to Klopp

Do you not think adding players to the squad who are not such a drop off from our 1st XI increases our chances of winning the league? We have a fine 1st XI, as we showed in that 1sr half last night, a few changes and we look wobbly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Barry Wom said:

So I think that's the business decision we've made. Where are we likely to finish if we don't spend? 2nd. Where are we likely to finish if we spent 150m? 2nd. How does spending 150m improve our chances? maybe it does by 5%. Let's bank the cash then.

Agreed, and of course that is not a knee jerk decision-- but...

 

#reactiveisthenewactive

#twotrophiesinthreemonths

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have liked to have seen a fourth first choice attacker brought in for £40-80K that could rotate with the current front three. 

 

Klopp's approach of bringing players that can clearly improve the first team has been shown to work though - the improvement in our team from a few years back is unbelievable and wouldn't behave happened if we'd clogged the squad with more marginal improvements - so I'm happy to give him the benefit of the doubt (FWIW).

 

And there's a massive gap between saying it would have been good to bring in an extra forward and some of the negative comments in here about it being a dereliction of duty not to which will cost us the league.

 

We all have different views and I can understand why some people think that way, but I don't think it works for you (plural) any more than the rest of us. Takes all sorts I guess....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lifetime fan said:

 

People had different opinions and were debating them. 

 

You came in and started acting the cunt. 

 

It obvious who needs to take some advice. 

I made one comment, you waded in calling me a dickhead. With respect, fuck yourself. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ZonkoVille77 said:

The club exists to earn money. As much as anyone wishes that wasn't true it unfortunately is. FSG are happy if we happen to win a couple of trophies along the way but ultimately they are only in it for the money. I wouldn't think they'd even hide from that fact.

 

Modern football is shit and we're just wed to it through our collective passion and we can never escape. Winning a few things makes it more palatable. 

I don't think anyone, not the most rabid FSG fan out there, would disagree with this sentiment.

 

My question is why does anyone think that the two don't go together? Which do you think makes FSG more money over the long-term, money invested in the club, leading to us winning trophies, or money taken out of the club, leading to them having fatter bank accounts?

 

Because Hicks & Gillett thought it was the latter, and then after they'd stolen as much as they could they were proven wrong when they sold the club for roughly the same that they'd paid for it.

 

FSG, on the other hand, recognise that the way to make the most money possible from Liverpool is to win trophies. There's a reason we're now worth 1.5 billion (latest estimates), a seven-fold improvement on their investment. It's not because they've taken money out of the club! It's because they've expanded the Main Stand, invested in the playing squad, brought in a top manager, and we're winning trophies again.

 

So yes, the club exists to make money. And the best way to make money, in the long-term, is to win trophies. Therefore it is ludicrous to suggest that FSG don't care about winning trophies. And yes, this summer is a bit of a mystery as to why we didn't spend anything, but they've certainly earned the benefit of the doubt over the past 10 years and if Jurgen isn't bothered, well, then neither am I.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scrump said:

I'd have liked to have seen a fourth first choice attacker brought in for £40-80K that could rotate with the current front three. 

 

Klopp's approach of bringing players that can clearly improve the first team has been shown to work though - the improvement in our team from a few years back is unbelievable and wouldn't behave happened if we'd clogged the squad with more marginal improvements - so I'm happy to give him the benefit of the doubt (FWIW).

 

And there's a massive gap between saying it would have been good to bring in an extra forward and some of the negative comments in here about it being a dereliction of duty not to which will cost us the league.

 

We all have different views and I can understand why some people think that way, but I don't think it works for you (plural) any more than the rest of us. Takes all sorts I guess....

So I think the policy of buying for the 1st team , which if you don't sell automatically increases the quality of the squad is a good one. But that is much easier to do when you inherit a team that Stoke put 6 past. Klopp said one of his issue when 1st at the club was the drop off from first XI. He fixed that by buying for the first team. I would argue he was improving the 1st team and diminishing the gap between 1st and 2nd string by doing that. In fact now the midfield we can almost pick any of them, they're of a similar level. Our target then was to stop being a 5-8th club we'd become under fsg (which started under the other cunts), but become a top 4 club. We became a top 4 team, so clearly it gets harder to solely improve that 1st XI. 

 

All of our front 3 have improved under klopp, but I feel if we shot at someone at their level when they joined, we'd make a massive improvement and increase our chances. We're likely to play 60 matches this season, we've 3 starting births for forwards, so that's 45 starts each, it's not like we'd be asking someone to do nothing. I personally don't want to see either Chamberlain, origi, Brewster or Shaq start a great deal of games in that front 3. In fact I'd prefer never to see Shaq and Chamberlain in them at all as I don't think it works. I understand why we haven't bought... See my exchange with Howie, but my argument to that is that is a business 1st, sport 2nd decision. I even understand that, I just hate reading on here it is some type of footballing long term solution super genius we're better than everyone else decision, when it's not. It is just a straight forward financial risk/reward decision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, moof said:

I made one comment, you waded in calling me a dickhead. With respect, fuck yourself. 

Honestly I think it was a case of mistaken identity, mate. Barry was thrashing around arguing with all and sundry, you made one comment and I think lifey got confused about who had said what. Reading it back I'm pretty sure he was actually reacting to the long argument that was happening before your post, rather than you personally.

 

Admittedly he did call you a dickhead which was well out of line, given your post, but I don't think he actually meant you.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSG have won 4 World Series and one Champions League title in about 15 years of owning major sports teams. To argue they're only concerned with the financial side and whatever success on the pitch/diamond is secondary, isn't planned or is some kind of accident is completely deluded. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ne Moe Imya said:

 

Admittedly he did call you a dickhead which was well out of line, given your post, but I don't think he actually meant you.

Pretty sure he meant you Moofoh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ne Moe Imya said:

Honestly I think it was a case of mistaken identity, mate. Barry was thrashing around arguing with all and sundry, you made one comment and I think lifey got confused about who had said what. Reading it back I'm pretty sure he was actually reacting to the long argument that was happening before your post, rather than you personally.

 

Admittedly he did call you a dickhead which was well out of line, given your post, but I don't think he actually meant you.

Appreciate that, mate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Barry Wom said:

I'm not saying we didn't want or rate alisson. Just getting a goalie was not important to us. When no money was there, the echo had spent months preparing for a no karius replacement, which is effectively club propaganda. 

 

 

I massively disagree on that, a decent goalie is something we have been crying out for the club to get for years. It was a massive hinderance. 

 

And I personally wouldn’t use The Echo as a barometer of anything. Total click bait shite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 3 Stacks said:

FSG have won 4 World Series and one Champions League title in about 15 years of owning major sports teams. To argue they're only concerned with the financial side and whatever success on the pitch/diamond is secondary, isn't planned or is some kind of accident is completely deluded. 

I'm not sure lumping in their baseball stuff with us tells a particularly truthful story.

 

I'm not an FSG hater by any means, but I think it would be accurate to say that the on field success of their baseball team is considerably more important to them than ours. Perfectly understandable really. It's their sport. Whenever they talk about football it seems like it's been put through google translate about seven times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

I'm not sure lumping in their baseball stuff with us tells a particularly truthful story.

 

I'm not an FSG hater by any means, but I think it would be accurate to say that the on field success of their baseball team is considerably more important to them than ours. Perfectly understandable really. It's their sport. Whenever they talk about football it seems like it's been put through google translate about seven times.

Nah, I don’t agree with that really.

John Henry owned Tampa Bay before he swapped them out and bought the Red Sox.

It’s not like he’s a lifelong fan of the team or anything.  They’re in it for the investment with a dabble of feeling good about winning stuff in both sports.

Obviously the fans are unimportant in both scenarios other than as a means of revenue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Skidfingers McGonical said:

 

I massively disagree on that, a decent goalie is something we have been crying out for the club to get for years. It was a massive hinderance. 

 

And I personally wouldn’t use The Echo as a barometer of anything. Total click bait shite. 

so i would agree that we were crying out for a goalie - i would say from when reina lost his focus during the end of the H&G era. however, i just don't think it was a big priority to the club.

 

the echo i don't think is click bait at all. It's LFC propaganda. If the club ran some of those stories themselves, everyone would laugh, but because it comes from the echo, somehow it is seen as just journalism. if the club has news they perceive the fans don't want to hear, they drip it out through the echo, who dress it up as good news. take for example the article last week about JWH being so desperate to win the league, he's given jurgen the direction not to compete with in domestic cups so to keep the players in condition for the league. so the real story there is we are not buying players in this window. however the headline and article is about JWH being desperate to win the league.  they prepare us for bad news all the way along the line. the echo is completely pathetic, but i think it is very far from click bait. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×