January 2022 Transfer Thread

[Lee909]

The only way signing Bellingham and Saka to replace Salah makes sense is if your signing Haaland or Mbappe aswell. 

 

We need Bellingham with Salah and Saka as a replacement takes us back  to justvtrying to make top 4. Get in say Haaland and I could get it  youth injection, goals guaranteed etc

 

But if they're not paying Salah what he wants then Haaland deffo not getting the money his agent wants. And they'd want to move him on after 3 years anyway for more money

[Harry Squatter]

Bowen will be Salahs replacement. There's already been a few articles about it the last few months.

 

Like Moshiri's testing the water articles about Rafa. 

[Bobby Hundreds]

Yup Bowen is the one we will get. These players like Bellingham, Haaland mbappe are totally out of our financial league. People are buying the autotrader looking at Ferraris with Punto money.

[Harry Squatter]

14 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Yup Bowen is the one we will get. These players like Bellingham, Haaland mbappe are totally out of our financial league. People are buying the autotrader looking at Ferraris with Punto money.

The cunts will never put a penny in. They do everything as cheap as possible. Sick to fucking death of the tight fisted pricks and their shit Echo articles about saving millions and outside investment that makes absolutely to fucking difference to our already non existent transfer budget. 

 

Pissing away Klopps time here the fucking frauds. 

[TheDrowningMan]

45 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Yup Bowen is the one we will get. These players like Bellingham, Haaland mbappe are totally out of our financial league. People are buying the autotrader looking at Ferraris with Punto money.

Yeah, but think about the players we could hypothetically afford when Van Dijk and Alisson also leave over the next couple of years following the downscaling of ambition!

[Babb'sBurstNad]

1 hour ago, 3 Stacks said:

Well, yeah, it's hindsight, but we saw pretty quickly that we didn't need Coutinho. A lot of it was sad supporters not being happy we had sold our best player again, but the positive change after came pretty quick. Maybe with a tactical shift and a class replacement, the same will be said of Salah, who can say? That's a little hard to believe, though. We're talking about one of the most productive attacking players in the world. If he goes, you very likely have to replace the numbers.

 

Say we didn't do that and went in a different direction, I'd be interested in knowing what kind of tactical shift you think we could make in the event of a Salah sale that would keep us competitive. I would agree that the area of improvement would be midfield,  I just don’t think you can bet on an 18 year old to transform that area like van Dijk and Alisson did with the defense, following the Coutinho sale.

 

In my opinion, if you replace Salah, you either have to go with the best attacking replacement you can find, say the Haaland route. I would say that's unlikely. The "get more attacking options route" where we buy two around 50m forwards. Say Jonathan David and Nkunku. Attackers of our usual profile where we could replace Salah’s numbers by just having more good attackers, more depth, more rotation, fresh legs, etc... Or the other route where like with Van Dijk, you simply buy the best available player on the market at any position and you strengthen somewhere else, change the shape, etc... Not sure who that would be. Maybe it is a midfielder, but that player is not Bellingham yet, it would have to be a world class player.

 

 

Again, fair points.

 

As to what tactical shift I think we could make, I wonder if we'd tweak the formation, and place a greater emphasis on AMs than forwards. When Lewandowski left Dortmund, they brought in three midfielders alongside Immobile.

 

I agree if you go down that route then it makes sense to go for the best right now, but prime age world class midfielders are scarce. So, I could see why Klopp might want someone like Bellingham - if he sees him as a generational talent - much like we were after Mbappe at Monaco. 

 

Your plan of two forwards makes sense. But, we'd only likely be fielding one at a time, which inevitably will mean adding depth to the expense of the starting XI. And any player slotting into Salah's role will be a massive downgrade.

 

Either way, it'll be a huge challenge for both Klopp and FSG if he leaves.

[Boss]

FSG could've bankrolled £100m for the last two seasons, and we'd probably still be the dominant force in the league.

 

All the issues were obvious. We can't have three defenders when two of them are as injury prone as Matip and Gomez, so we should've brought in a centre back that summer. We were heavily linked with Bremer and Upmecano. Either of them would've been fine. The following summer, the midfield was full of sicknotes. We were linked with Bissouma and Pellegrini. Both would've been fine. We knew Mane and Salah were going to the AFCON. We were heavily linked with Danjuma and Bowen. Both would've been fine.

 

That could've allowed us to get rid of Ox, Keita, Phillips, Origi, and all the players in the squad the manager doesn't rate. FSG understand the price of everything but the value of nothing. They would've made more money in the long run by seeding us a bit of money in the short term.

[3 Stacks]

12 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

Again, fair points.

 

As to what tactical shift I think we could make, I wonder if we'd tweak the formation, and place a greater emphasis on AMs than forwards. When Lewandowski left Dortmund, they brought in three midfielders alongside Immobile.

 

I agree if you go down that route then it makes sense to go for the best right now, but prime age world class midfielders are scarce. So, I could see why Klopp might want someone like Bellingham - if he sees him as a generational talent - much like we were after Mbappe at Monaco. 

 

Your plan of two forwards makes sense. But, we'd only likely be fielding one at a time, which inevitably will mean adding depth to the expense of the starting XI. And any player slotting into Salah's role will be a massive downgrade.

 

Either way, it'll be a huge challenge for both Klopp and FSG if he leaves.

The question of what we do tactically for the rest of Klopp's reign is the most interesting question, in my opinion. There's already been a shift to more daring attacking play and attacking midfield setups this season. I agree that there's a chance of a further change of tactics if we had to replace Salah. Maybe more attacking midfielders, as you say. Maybe a real central striker. I don't want Salah to go, but it would be interesting to see a more different direction.

 

The advantage I think we would gain with two forwards for Salah is we'd become more like City where we could rotate more, have more possibilities. But of course we'd have to get it right with both players.

[dockers_strike]

3 minutes ago, Boss said:

FSG could've bankrolled £100m for the last two seasons, and we'd probably still be the dominant force in the league.

 

All the issues were obvious. We can't have three defenders when two of them are as injury prone as Matip and Gomez, so we should've brought in a centre back that summer. We were heavily linked with Bremer and Upmecano. Either of them would've been fine. The following summer, the midfield was full of sicknotes. We were linked with Bissouma and Pellegrini. Both would've been fine. We knew Mane and Salah were going to the AFCON. We were heavily linked with Danjuma and Bowen. Both would've been fine.

 

That could've allowed us to get rid of Ox, Keita, Phillips, Origi, and all the players in the squad the manager doesn't rate. They understand the price of everything but the value of nothing. They would've made more money in the long run by seeding us a bit of money in the short term.

Over a £40m loss for the season before last and a probable loss of over £100m for last season. Even if they had 'bankrolled' the club, that money has to be paid back. Unless you want to subscribe to the city or chelsea finance model that is.

[Boss]

1 minute ago, dockers_strike said:

Over a £40m loss for the season before last and a probable loss of over £100m for last season. Even if they had 'bankrolled' the club, that money has to be paid back. Unless you want to subscribe to the city or chelsea finance model that is.

 

Well, good luck paying that back when Salah and Klopp leave and we're finishing 8th. 

[TheDrowningMan]

5 minutes ago, Boss said:

 

Well, good luck paying that back when Salah and Klopp leave and we're finishing 8th. 

I can see us nosediving before Klopp leaves if Salah goes and isn’t replaced by a couple of truly world class players. Morale will be in the toilet worse than it was when we failed to sign a CB last January.

 

Still, I suppose that scenario does provide a convenient scapegoat for results going south…

[Moo]

52 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Even if they had 'bankrolled' the club, that money has to be paid back.

Are you agreeing that they could possibly have loaned us some of the Red Bird investment at low or zero interest while the rules were relaxed for Covid losses?

I'd prefer "given" rather than "loaned" seeing as though the value was so high in no small part due to LFC, but beggars can't be choosers.

[Scott_M]

Feels an odd transfer.

 

[TheHowieLama]

15 minutes ago, Moo said:

Are you agreeing that they could possibly have loaned us some of the Red Bird investment at low or zero interest while the rules were relaxed for Covid losses?

I'd prefer "given" rather than "loaned" seeing as though the value was so high in no small part due to LFC, but beggars can't be choosers.

Huh?

[3 Stacks]

18 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Feels an odd transfer.

 

It's actually pretty smart. He'll score a couple goals, might help save them from relegation, meanwhile, they weaken Burnley, a direct competitor. If they save themselves, they'll then just upgrade on Wood.

[Scott_M]

3 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

It's actually pretty smart. He'll score a couple goals, might help save them from relegation, meanwhile, they weaken Burnley, a direct competitor. If they save themselves, they'll then just upgrade on Wood.

Hmmmm. That bit is true, but I don’t think he’s as good as what Newcastle already have. 

[John102]

7 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Hmmmm. That bit is true, but I don’t think he’s as good as what Newcastle already have. 

I think the point is he is better than what Burnley have, or potentially will have to replace him. So that's (potentially) them and Norwich out the way

 

Surprised how many 1 in 10 strikers Burnley have.

[J-V]

43 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Feels an odd transfer.

 

£20million for that junk.

[Lee909]

Can't Burnley and Newcastle both fuck off down to the championship 

[Moo]

55 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Huh?

Huh?

[TheHowieLama]

2 minutes ago, Moo said:

Huh?

There is no such thing as "giving" - it is kind of against the rules.

[liverpoolsno9]

27 minutes ago, Lee909 said:

Can't Burnley and Newcastle both fuck off down to the championship 

No. We need them to stay up to put the blueshite in the shit. 

[Barrington Womble]

2 hours ago, Boss said:

FSG could've bankrolled £100m for the last two seasons, and we'd probably still be the dominant force in the league.

 

All the issues were obvious. We can't have three defenders when two of them are as injury prone as Matip and Gomez, so we should've brought in a centre back that summer. We were heavily linked with Bremer and Upmecano. Either of them would've been fine. The following summer, the midfield was full of sicknotes. We were linked with Bissouma and Pellegrini. Both would've been fine. We knew Mane and Salah were going to the AFCON. We were heavily linked with Danjuma and Bowen. Both would've been fine.

 

That could've allowed us to get rid of Ox, Keita, Phillips, Origi, and all the players in the squad the manager doesn't rate. FSG understand the price of everything but the value of nothing. They would've made more money in the long run by seeding us a bit of money in the short term.

To be fair, they were trying to sell Phillips and origi, but we didn't have any buyers. Neither of them play for Liverpool now because of failures to sign anyone. 

2 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

Over a £40m loss for the season before last and a probable loss of over £100m for last season. Even if they had 'bankrolled' the club, that money has to be paid back. Unless you want to subscribe to the city or chelsea finance model that is.

Do you only go back and count the years we lose money? What about the years we make it? 

1 hour ago, 3 Stacks said:

It's actually pretty smart. He'll score a couple goals, might help save them from relegation, meanwhile, they weaken Burnley, a direct competitor. If they save themselves, they'll then just upgrade on Wood.

Until burnely spend their fee on divock and Jesse lingard, revolutionise how they play and pull away and relegate Everton and Newcastle. 

 

Shit did I just say that last bit out loud? 

[Strontium]

1 hour ago, John102 said:

Surprised how many 1 in 10 strikers Burnley have.

 

Wood's strike rate for Burnley over four and a half seasons in the Premier League is better than 1 in 3.

[Scott_M]

Wood has scored 3 this season.