Jump to content
manwiththestick

Summer 2021 transfer thread.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

City are signing Grealish and probably Kane for north of £200m, but they've given a new contract to De Bruyne and Fernandinho and are reported to be preparing new deals for Sterling, Ederson and Stones. So tell me more about the difficult choice between extending contracts and signing new players.

It’s called have bottomless pits of oil money that we don’t have.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

People often look at what FSG do with the Red Sox and think it's indicative of what they do with Liverpool.

Are there no parallels? They've been successful with both teams. But financially? Despite obvious differences in the respective sports... 

 

I like baseball, but haven't paid enough attention in recent years to offer an informed opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Josef Svejk said:

Are there no parallels? They've been successful with both teams. But financially? Despite obvious differences in the respective sports... 

 

I like baseball, but haven't paid enough attention in recent years to offer an informed opinion. 

Well comparing baseball to football financially is a bit useless but when people bring up the Red Sox it's either to make the point that they spend more money with them than they do at Liverpool or to say that they're cheap in both sports which just isn't right. So the whole conversation makes no sense and people play both sides.

 

If you look at facts, the Red Sox have paid the luxury tax in 10 seasons since they've owned them, which is the 2nd most of any team. And then with us, we have one of the highest wage bills in the world. But obviously, those numbers are all fake and they're tight cunts, so there's no point.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 3 Stacks said:

Well comparing baseball to football financially is a bit useless but when people bring up the Red Sox it's either to make the point that they spend more money with them than they do at Liverpool or to say that they're cheap in both sports which just isn't right. So the whole conversation makes no sense and people play both sides.

 

If you look at facts, the Red Sox have paid the luxury tax in 10 seasons since they've owned them, which is the 2nd most of any team. And then with us, we have one of the highest wage bills in the world. But obviously, those numbers are all fake and they're tight cunts, so there's no point.

Haven't you been reading, mate? Wage bills don't count, that's fake news. We haven't paid out huge fees, ergo Liverpool are skint.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last 5 years net spend table.

 

1) Manchester United: £-457.6m

2) Manchester City: £-357.31m

3) Arsenal: £-291.33m

4) Aston Villa: £-247.86m

5) Everton: £-233.92m

6) Chelsea: £-209.15m

7) Wolves: £-196.87m

8) Tottenham: £-173.30m

9) Liverpool: £-164.71m

10) Brighton – £-159.70m

11) West Ham: £-132.28m

12) Leicester: £-114.36m

13) Leeds United: £-106.39m

14) Newcastle: £-98.97m

15) Crystal Palace: £-55.99m

16) Southampton: £-37.80m

17) Burnley: £-22.09m

18) Watford: £-14.10m

19) Brentford: £59.42m

20) Norwich: £66.17m

 

 

Our spend is calculated like this:

9) Liverpool: £-164.71m

21/22: £-16.65m

20/21: £-58.91m (3rd)

19/20: £28.08m (Champions)

18/19: £-126.79m (2nd)

17/18: £9.56m (4th)

 

I don't know whether it means we are really good at transfers or just tight arses...?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Last 5 years net spend table.

 

1) Manchester United: £-457.6m

2) Manchester City: £-357.31m

3) Arsenal: £-291.33m

4) Aston Villa: £-247.86m

5) Everton: £-233.92m

6) Chelsea: £-209.15m

7) Wolves: £-196.87m

8) Tottenham: £-173.30m

9) Liverpool: £-164.71m

10) Brighton – £-159.70m

11) West Ham: £-132.28m

12) Leicester: £-114.36m

13) Leeds United: £-106.39m

14) Newcastle: £-98.97m

15) Crystal Palace: £-55.99m

16) Southampton: £-37.80m

17) Burnley: £-22.09m

18) Watford: £-14.10m

19) Brentford: £59.42m

20) Norwich: £66.17m

 

I don't know whether it means we are really good at transfers or just tight arses...?

Excellent read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanches seems to be the perfect Gini replacement but his hamstrings are shot, aren't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Em City said:

Sanches seems to be the perfect Gini replacement but his hamstrings are shot, aren't they?

Sounds more like the perfect Naby replacement.

Share this post


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

Sounds more like the perfect Naby replacement.

 

Can't wait for him to pull off a Cruyff turn and live off it for 3 seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locatelli? Really? What is the hit rate on our previous Italian signings?

 

I wouldn't be fussed on Sanches either. Was absolute shite at Swansea, terrible injury record, and I thought he flattered to deceive a bit at the Euros.

 

The Saul link is just nonsense from Atletico, trying to get rid of his nine-year contract on £220k or whatever it was. I mean I guess the mancs might be in for him, but we are almost certainly not.

 

A clinical finisher who can play all across the front three and won't be going to the ACoN is the priority for me.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We aren't buying anyone of any consequence. These transfer threads for the last few windows have been nothing but pie in the sky. We're busy promoting and singing the praises of an 18 year old who played championship football last season. FSG are just banking serious wedge and not only is the club self-sustaining, we're sustaining the shareholder lifestyles. It's just been the same old, leak lots of fancy names and then sign a 17 year old from Torquay or something. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gave up on us making significant signings when we did fuck all in January when we were top of the league and needed a solid defender to see out the,season and defend our title. But they were happy for us to meekly surrender our title and its no surprise we are doing nothing else in this window. 

 

They just do the bare minimum to get by and if Klopp works his magic is a bonus. 

 

They even let players go on frees ffs who could have been sold and the money reinvested back into the team. 

 

We spend less than anyone despite having won pretty much everything over the past 3 years yet we cry poverty.  

 

David Moores might as well had not sold thr club. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Leyton388 said:

David Moores might as well had not sold thr club. 

Yeah. Let's ignore the trophies and the squad we've actually built, with some of the best players in the world in their positions, and pretend Moores would have been better.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Leyton388 said:

I gave up on us making significant signings when we did fuck all in January when we were top of the league and needed a solid defender to see out the,season and defend our title. But they were happy for us to meekly surrender our title and its no surprise we are doing nothing else in this window. 

 

They just do the bare minimum to get by and if Klopp works his magic is a bonus. 

 

They even let players go on frees ffs who could have been sold and the money reinvested back into the team. 

 

We spend less than anyone despite having won pretty much everything over the past 3 years yet we cry poverty.  

 

David Moores might as well had not sold thr club. 

If David Moores had any brains or vision he could have easily run the club financially the same as FSG. Or if Parry and the board at the time had the same.

 

Moores never put any of his own money in.

The problem was they were all small time and terrible decision makers. At least Moores was aware he was incapable, and took the difficult decision to sell the club. Unfortunately he demonstrated his unsuitability when deciding who to sell to.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

If David Moores had any brains or vision he could have easily run the club financially the same as FSG. Or if Parry and the board at the time had the same.

 

Moores never put any of his own money in.

The problem was they were all small time and terrible decision makers. At least Moores was aware he was incapable, and took the difficult decision to sell the club. Unfortunately he demonstrated his unsuitability when deciding who to sell to.

Plaything to a playboy. Ooh missus!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was listening to some podcast yesterday and this 17 foreign players in the squad thing was brought up. 
 

We currently have 17, so we need to sell one before we can bring another in. 
 

Makes sense to sell first otherwise we are either stuck paying a player who won’t play or we reduce their fee because other clubs know they won’t have a place in the squad. 
 

Shaq is an obvious candidate to leave. Origi doesn’t seem arsed to move on. Which would leave Minamino as an obvious choice to also move on. 

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

×