Daniel Agger

[xerxes]

The only clubs in this country who could remain competitive at the top level purely through their own self-generated income are us and Man United.

 

 

You make two claims, one of which I disagree with, one of which I support.

 

I do not accept that ;“The only clubs in this country who could remain competitive at the top level purely through their own self-generated income are us and Man United.”

 

Tottenham, Chelsea, Arsenal, Newcastle, Man City and Villa all have the capacity to do so also. West Ham may join them. Our current position in Europe’s top ten is based on historic performance and will continue to deteriorate unless we return to the CL. Sponsorship is not based on tradition and sentiment, but on success and television appearances. The Warrior deal was a punt by them, the reasons for Adidas dropping out are the more significant. It does not take long for children in Sierra Leone and Thailand to replace their Gerrard for Balotelli football shirts if the latter is winning things and the former is not.

 

If we do not return to the CL , over time ,our income will level out just in excess of Villa’s and we will be left with an average sized ground with below average hospitality facilities.

 

I think your view represents a complacency which has dogged our club for the past two decades and will be our undoing.

 

I wholly agree that without investment in excess of earned income we stand no chance of returning to the CL. Arsenal and Man u are coining an extra £60m a season at the gate, and £30m a season minimum from the CL. Our League Cup win brought £100,000 prize money.

 

Unless we crash the top four FFP will doom, not save us.

[TheHitman]

As I thought he only wants to go Barca if he goes. Now we have unsettled him cut price deal to Barca on the cards maybe!!.

 

‘There is one club who would make it very difficult for me to stay at Anfield. Barcelona would be great, because they are the best in the world. But I am feeling great where I am. I’m with a special club, and I feel I am influencing what happens on the pitch. I am happy to be a Liverpool player.’

 

Read more: Daniel Agger wants Barcelona move from Liverpool | Mail Online

[Kennys_spell]

I wasn't responding to it - most of which is, at best, subjective, baseless or just conjecture - I posted it long before your post. I posted it because they are my thoughts on the subject; just as they were when I shared them the week Kenny was sacked. I wanted to clarify my thoughts on the subject, as I still hold the same positions.

 

I could reply to your posts in the same 'constructive', 'genius' way you replied to mine, but what's the point? You talk about having constructive debate, but judging by your response to my post, you're not remotely interested in having one. You talk about context, but you ignore any context or reasoning remotely negative toward your own position. Your puerile checklist 'response' to my post is as vacuous as your arguments, but I can go through some of the 'context' you forget to mention on your end.

 

You want me to mention Lucas, but you don't mention whose job it was to sign players, including cover for Lucas. The money was there from the owners, who were there to 'sign the cheques'. They wanted to sign more players, said Kenny. You're just happy to absolve Kenny for that and blame the owners for the way things went on the pitch. It was failing of Kenny's, not the owners.

 

You'll bang on about Lucas being a reason for our demise in the league, using it as an excuse for failure, but you'll not mention how we progressed in the cups without his help. Nope, talk of finals is reserved as a defensive 'fact' about how we were going in the right direction. It seems like the only 'context' you're after is that which suits you. You've got a bad case of confirmatory bias.

 

You want me to mention the Suarez case, which I did, as reasoning for poor performance and ineptitude on the part of the owners, but you don't mention the fact that it was after he returned from being banned that we (not the player, but the team) fell off a cliff in terms of results. It's not as if we had a £35m striker to cover for him, is it? You can't get away with using their inaction as an excuse for poor performance, you're pissed they didn't back Kenny over it. You said so yourself. That’s fine, and it’s a perfectly acceptable position, but it’s neither the reason, nor an excuse for failure on the pitch.

 

You talk about giving the manager time, and that's the line every Liverpool fan likes to shout about; I've said it many times myself, but I never once called for Kenny to be sacked, certainly not for performances or results, as disgusting as they were, but I did stop believing in his footballing vision and his ability to sign players. I stopped believing in what he had planned for the future. That's a subjective call, and I still think it was probably the right decision, but we'll find out in the future. It was a judgement call. You disagree with it, fine, but nobody will know 'til the season is up.

 

But what really gets me is your dismissive tone toward the new manager. To you he's just 'an inexperienced manager'. That's all you want to say on the subject. Your love for context has let you down here. Your desire for constructive debate is nowhere to be seen. Why?

 

He is inexperienced at the top level of management, that's true, but it's not all that's to be said about him. What does experience count for, anyway? Our last two managers were incredibly well experienced and they under-performed badly.

 

There's more to him than that. He's one of the brightest young managers in the country, and he does have pedigree. Since he has been here he's been a credit to himself, I think. Whether he'll be a success, only time will tell for sure. However, he has a modern vision for the club. I’m not going to allow you to use the signing of Rodgers as something to criticise the owners with when I believe he’s got a really bright future with us, and especially not before he has been given a chance to fall flat on his face and prove how wrong the owners were to sack Kenny.

 

Yeah, you're all about the context, Coro, except you neglect to mention any that doesn't suit your myopic stance. You're a short-termist, that's why you're throwing your toys out of the pram. You want to talk about giving Kenny time to carry out his plans, but you’re ready to throw Rodgers to the wolves before the league season has started just to use his appointment as a weapon to hit the owners with. You’ll use anything, like ‘changing their minds’, as some sort of proof they’re idiots. No agenda, of course.

 

I don't and never have denied the loss of Lucas had an impact, or the ugly 'race row', or several other facts, had a limited impact. I just don't use them as some coverall for Dalglish’s failures, nor do I blame them solely on the owners. When a manager has spent 120+ million in 7 months, including almost £25m on midfielders, but there's still no adequate cover for Lucas, you need to look at why. It wasn't because of the owners. The mistake was Kenny's. You never even mention that Kenny might have had something to do with the performances on the pitch. You never mention what he said about the owners.

 

You want the team’s performances put into context, but you barely utter a word about the one man who has the biggest impact on the team. Kenny played the biggest part in his own sacking.

 

 

 

I bet you do, because you need nothing more than your own thoughtless self-approval. If it's in your head, it must be right. Your self-vindication doesn't impress me. As long as you're happy in your own little world, though, why actually listen to anything other than your own superfan bullshit?

 

 

 

Fucking hell, you hypocritical shithouse. You talk about context and oversimplification, yet your genius analysis is ‘owners didn’t provide support or leadership so the season fell apart’. What a cunt.

 

 

 

It’s funny, I don’t think I’ve ever seen you post more than a sentence or two on anything other than the ownership. You’re such a knowledgeable fan, you constantly claim, but all you talk about is one subject. It’s your entire raison d'être, you’ve only one string to your bow and it’s getting worn down. I’m just waiting for the ‘twang’.

 

You call yourself a 'genius on all things football', yet the depth of your knowledge goes as deep as surmising Rodgers as 'inexperienced', with no context at all applied. Just how shallow are you?

 

You repeat and repeat these 'Lucas, Suarez, FSG, Comolli' lines time and time again, like they have any real meaning. You type line after line without ever saying anything new or different. You've convinced yourself that they're fact and that other people can't see them. I can see them, they're not fact, and I've heard the arguments a hundred times. They're small time excuses for big issues. You are small time. You're a small-minded thinker who can't look beyond his own narrow set of horizons.

 

Look, at some point we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this point. It’s just going around and around and around.

 

 

 

 

You’ve gone off on a tangent about Agger, mate, but I was referring to those posts above me which were based off the ‘fact’ that ‘pubic ayre’ was leaking stuff to the press. Not a jot of that real at all. Still, I’ll reply to your points about Agger, it is the Agger thread, after all!

 

 

 

So is Rodgers’ quote saying, "I'm not forced to have to sell anyone, which is important.". Now, of course, those things he said are to be dismissed, but the other things listened to. Why?

 

 

 

I bloody hope so! If the price is right then the price is right, Brucie.

 

 

 

The club? Who do you mean? Agger, Rodgers, Gerrard have all spoken about it. I don’t recall the owners speaking about it. Who do you mean? Are you saying the owners are leaking information, if so what information, when and to whom?

 

 

 

You seem to have spectacularly missed the point I was making, Neil. Mine is that every player has his price, no matter how good he is. And I meant Ronaldo to Inter (for a world record fee). I made no comment on how they turned out. It’s true of those players, regardless of the club. Every player does have his price. It’s how Man City, then a much smaller proposition than now, got AC Milan to agree to sell Kaka to them. Okay, it didn’t happen in the end, but the club agreed to sell, because every player has their price. There's a million (ish) examples of this.

 

 

 

That’s a perfectly valid opinion, IMO. I don’t want us to sell Agger, but if the money is there to buy somebody like Godin as a replacement and another attacker, and have a good wide player like AJ come in, then it has to be looked at. It has to be, Neil. It could well be better for the club to sell than to hold. Is there no amount you’d sell for? 30m? 40m? 70m? 100m?

 

There's a risk the replacement could be worse than Agger. There's a possibility he could be better, and fitter, and younger. And the other positions we can spend out on can take us higher up the table. It has to be looked at, mate.

 

 

 

Would you sell Suarez for 100m? 250m? 1b? 100b? All the money in the world? No matter how much money, the principle is the same: If a club offers enough money, the player will be sold. The price can reach a level where it’s silly not to sell. The same will be true of those we go to in order to buy a replacement.

 

But look, Suarez is a different proposition to Agger. Selling him would require an astronomical fee; a fee which would allow us to go out and get Higuain and Llorente, something like that.

 

Agger, however good he might be, is a defender. Defenders can be replaced more easily, as they’re part of a unit. I’m not saying defenders aren’t important, they definitely are, especially ‘ball playing’ ones like Agger. It’s just that they’re not capricious or mercurial talents in the same way a Messi or a Suarez is. I don’t want to sell him, but when the money gets silly enough, then, well, it’d be silly not to. He can be replaced. Whether you want to take the chance or not, that’s a subjective call.

 

 

 

Well, I’ll tell you exactly what it means: It means that there’s a desire to keep the player, we’ve turned down big offers, but if they keep going there’s a limit to the amount of money we can turn down. Whether they reach that level, who knows?

 

 

 

Until what happened? What has happened, mate? City has offered massive money and we’ve turned it down. That’s all that has happened.

 

 

 

Same here, I’m happy so far. We need to do more in this window, and there’s a decent chance we will. If we don’t, the lack of investment will then need to be questioned.

 

 

 

That’s a big 'if' and there’s no real signal of that. I mean, there will definitely be a point at which money runs out – we finished 8th, and haven’t had CL income for a number of years – and if he wants even more players he’ll have to chose to sell somebody to raise the funds. I think, bar maybe a couple or three, that’s the same for every club.

 

 

 

Well, they’ve spent £26m so far, we’ll see what happens in the rest of the window.

 

HAHA Owned!!!!!!

 

His likely response - "Yeah but, pubic Ayre - Ayre Head - Owners gave no leadership"

 

and on and on into infinity..................

[xerxes]

As I thought he only wants to go Barca if he goes. Now we have unsettled him cut price deal to Barca on the cards maybe!!.

 

The only thing to think is that if he is offered a contract for longer than two years, and for more money than he is earning here, with the chance of honours, he will be off.

 

He is a pro footballer, that is the way it works.

 

The spin from all sides on this has been an art form.

[TheHitman]

The only thing to think is that if he is offered a contract for longer than two years, and for more money than he is earning here, with the chance of honours, he will be off.

 

He is a pro footballer, that is the way it works.

 

The spin from all sides on this has been an art form.

 

To be fair to Daniel normally when a player wants off there is talk about ambition, family reasons etc a while beforehand.. With Agger there has been none of this, so it is not pushing it too say the club by not offering him a contract extension and talking publicly about him have deliberately unsettled him.

 

We found out with Carroll you cant push a player to a club who doesn't want to go ie him to WestHam. Wouldn't be surprised to see Carroll & Agger go for far less than the reported amounts to Newcastle & Barca later in the window. I am hoping we will give Daniel an extension and give the new manager a solid platform to build on from the back.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Why would Agger go for less, when we've apparently already turned down offers?

[TheHitman]

If the player states he will only go to one club and Barca bid less, and we want to cash in, then where do you go from there?. Offer him an extension, but by then he has got fed up and states he will see out his contract at Liverpool.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

We tell them what we told City, and what we told Chelsea for Torres: thanks but that's not enough money, if you want the player you'll need to pay up.

[TheHitman]

Time will tell I guess, but it all depends how much the owners want to cash in on Agger & Carroll and how much Rodgers want to use the money elsewhere. If that is why they want to sell said players.

Edited August 15, 2012 by TheHitman

[Coro]

'Waaah waah waah what you say has no real meaning, it's just shit, myopic, you're a shithouse, you're a cunt, you want to absolve Kenny of all blame, you're a superfan, puerile, it's bullshit, what you say is wrong, what i say is right, waffle, wibble, i am very intelligent and i have 30 years footballing expertise'

 

 

 

Here we are again, Rain Man taking some of what i've said to him and aiming at back at me. I'll be your crutch. I'll be your Tom Cruise.

 

When did Kenny say they (FSG) wanted to sign more players? Last summer? The winter before? What does it matter?

 

Maybe we did look for cover for Lucas before the summer window closed last season but maybe there were no realistic options, maybe you cannot plan for such an injury, regardless there was no replacement signed in January. How do you explain that? We had money from the Meireles deal but no, nothing happening come January despite desperately needing a couple of signings to sure up what had become a decent defensive unit. Touching on DETAILS 'ere you're shouting out figures like 120 MILLION. That will really support your argument. 120 MILLION. I'll shout 50 million for Torres in response or 10 million for Babel or 12 million for Meireles. MEIRELES.

 

Was it not because the owners didn't see eye to eye with Dalglish over what was expected last season, was it because of his part in the handling of the Suarez case, was it because of Dalglish's lack of relationship with Ian Ayre, had they decided already that both Comolli and Dalglish would be replaced at the end of the season? Come on, why was there a freeze on transfer funds? Purely coincidence that we'd just witnessed the clusterfuck that was the Suarez case were both manager and player were hung out to dry? Yes, I'll keep repeating these things because you keep ignoring them or deviating or glossing over them. Ian Ayre said they'd made up their minds regarding Kenny before the cup final win or lose. That's fact. This was the 'backing' he had going into one of the biggest games we've had in years. Fact. My guess is that they had made their minds up a lot earlier than April. That's conjecture. Dalglish had earned his new contract, he had turned things around remarkably but even so maybe he had too much sway for the owners liking. Not one to rock the boat, looking to unite the club he was never going to complain about working with Comolli. The owners brought Comolli in on the recommendation of a baseball MD. How much did Comolli's presence impact on the job Kenny was trying to do? This doesn't factor in to your thinking, these questions don't suit your agenda so just breeze on by them because you dug yourself in months before wailing about his signings, questioning his decisions from the get go.

 

We were still in contention for a CL place in January, DETAILS, surely further investment would have given us a better chance of qualifying what with us without a recognised holding midfielder and Suarez banned? The owners have admitted to underestimating the job at hand but still that wasn't enough to keep Dalglish in a job. Facts. Strange facts. For a manager to succeed he needs backing all of the way not just some of the way. Maybe the manager knew the writing was on the wall, maybe the players could sense that everything wasn't rosy. A bit like in Rafa's last season, a lack cohesion off the field manifested itself on the pitch and we saw a real downturn in form. It's not as if Dalglish was working from rock solid foundations to begin with. The club had been torn by a civil war and massive debts. None of this factors in for you, no benefit of the doubt for the man you gush over and call a legend, oh your heartbreak. Yet Kenny played the biggest part in his sacking. You're some admirer. Your loyalty, your understanding really on show for all to see despite digging yourself in a trench wailing about his signings, questioning his decisions from the get go.

 

Yet now you have nothing but faith in this unproven manager. Where have I shown that I'm ready to throw Rodgers to the wolves? Go on, please link me to this comment I've made. Calling him inexperienced is pretty accurate is it not? It's not damning in anyway yet you reshape words because well, why? I want this link. Show me.

 

You want to compare league form to cup form. Let's look at who we played in the cup after Xmas. Brighton at home, Stoke at home and then Everton. Cardiff at Wembley after beating City on aggregate. Surely you can comprehend the subtle differences between maintaining league form and motivating players for a one off cup game? I mean, if not we'd be labouring over some pretty basic stuff. Especially considering your 3 decades of football expertise. Are you Roy Hodgson?

 

QPR away we were superb first half, should have been clean out of sight yet lost the game 3-2. We lost a couple of defenders that night if I remember correctly and it put paid to our gameplan. All without a recognised holding midfielder n all. Suarez couldn't hit a barn door in a lot of games. Wonder how much the racism farce effected him? A lot by the sounds of it. I'm pretty sure the whole thing impacted on team morale. I'm sure there were many concerns and questions being asked by the players. Then there's not having your captain fit and firing for the majority of the season coming off the back of a really bad injury. Then there's the case of Craig Bellamy who's recently revealed how he struggled in the 2nd half of last season mentally because of off the field factors. He'd been such a big influence in earlier games as well, what a shame. What about Enrique's dip in form after the loss of Lucas? No protection on the inside and his game went to pot. DETAILS, eh. Almost like a chain reaction suddenly these things become out of the managers control and then you're talking about damage limitation but that would be giving Dalglish far too much benefit of the doubt for your liking because you dug yourself in months before wailing about his signings, questioning his decisions from the get go. So much so after Carroll had won the game at Blackburn in the last minute your response was to litter the match thread with comments about him still being shit. Regarding Carroll it would be interesting to revisit Carragher's article on him from the Telegraph Euro 2012: Andy Carroll hits heights as an upwardly mobile striker for England, says Jamie Carragher - Telegraph There we are.

 

I believe FSG have suffered from a lack of a strategy. 'Changing their minds' is being far too kind to them given they know fuck all about the game of football and considering their continued employment of Ian Ayre as MD or the whole Suarez/racism farce. Don't you think? Or is that harsh on our new found saviours who deserve every bit of slack that can be cut?

 

The Suarez case is not an excuse for failure, to me it was indicative of the lack of leadership that has been eating away at the club for far too long and indicative just how far we have fallen as a club. When things are so bad off the field how can anyone expect things to work out on the field short term or long term? As far as i can tell FSG have done little to remedy this. No fundamental changes, no CEO, just replace the manager and give fans fresh hope that way. All so short termist. You seem to know something others don't or maybe you're just happier to gloss over it in such a perverse way because you dug yourself in months before wailing about Dalglish's signings, questioning his decisions from the get go, spitting your dummy et al.

 

You lost faith in Dalglish's vision because you weren't willing to factor in a hell of a lot of detail, you were happier to turn a blind eye. Now this fuels your need to get in the way of anyone with genuine concerns.

 

You lost faith despite the up turn in form of players like Lucas and Johnson and Skrtel under Kenny's management. If he could do that with those players why not with the players he'd gambled so much on in signing? No, you'd written most of them off immediately. The poor run of form was unprecedented but so was the situation Dalglish walked back into when he came back to help FSG out of a hole, putting a great deal on the line yet the likes of you couldn't afford him much time before tearing into his judgement and entrenching yourself to the point that now FSG seemingly can do no wrong (Seems like you've reserved all that blind faith for Brendan Rodgers) Intent at pointing at all the negatives, yes and of course there were plenty but then in such a transition they're to be expected. You'll exaggerate Kenny's failings and gloss over those of the owners and Ian Ayre all because you dug yourself in months before wailing about his signings, questioning his decisions from the get go. You spat your dummy and never got it back.

 

What has fuelled this turn around of yours? You're so hopeful, FSG get so much benefit of the doubt. What have they done to earn this? Can I have specifics? What has Rodgers done for you to seemingly proclaim him as absolutely the right man for the job? You may well be right on all fronts but right now you've not much to base all this on have you?

 

Do you have any concerns whatsoever? How are you managing to gloss over this current situation with Agger?

 

Small excuses for big issues? Whatever does this mean? Seems like more bluster to me. Please, do try to expand on this though.

 

From blind pessimism to blind faith.

 

Not to worry you've got Kenny's Spell on your side. Bodes well for you.

[xerxes]

To be fair to Daniel normally when a player wants off there is talk about ambition, family reasons etc a while beforehand.. With Agger there has been none of this, so it is not pushing it too say the club by not offering him a contract extension and talking publicly about him have deliberately unsettled him.

 

We found out with Carroll you cant push a player to a club who doesn't want to go ie him to WestHam. Wouldn't be surprised to see Carroll & Agger go for far less than the reported amounts to Newcastle & Barca later in the window. I am hoping we will give Daniel an extension and give the new manager a solid platform to build on from the back.

 

I am not suggesting that Agger wants to go – just that he would happily go for more money, a longer contract and CL football, as any pro footballer would. That isn’t knocking Agger, it is just being realistic.

 

When a player says he doesn’t want to leave, staged signing on bonuses, and ensuring he gets the remainder due because he didn’t ask for a transfer, tend to be a significant factor.

 

Unless we receive a huge offer, I think that he should be retained. There is no way that I would be looking to improve/extend the contract of a player who has been so injury prone. Eighteen months on you look at his injury record and then decide.

[Elysian Red]

18 months into the 2 remaining years on his contract and we've lost him. He needs at least a one year extension and some sort of wage rise if we want to hang on to him

[xerxes]

18 months into the 2 remaining years on his contract and we've lost him. He needs at least a one year extension and some sort of wage rise if we want to hang on to him

What makes you say that?

 

One club, has made a low offer, and that is it- the personal terms may have been unacceptable anyway.

 

Why extend the contract and improve the terms for a player who has been unavailable for half his time here and has a higher than average risk of serious injury?

 

A one years extension is neither here nor there.

[Elysian Red]

Because if we let it get down to 6 months then he'll be out of here. I rate him and want him to stay obviously

[Neil G]

All fair points - I guess I was just trying to get an idea of what you thought would be a reasonable amount for investment, as to how far you are then discouraged by their performance.

 

For my opinion I think FSG invested enough in the squad last summer to expect us to challenge very strongly for the Champions League places. Unfortunately it didn't happen and they obviously lost faith in Commoli and Kenny's decision making.

 

I also think that 25-30 million pre sales is a reasonable figure per season to expect to spend. It is not enough to challenge Man City or Chelsea, but should give us a good go at Arsenal, Spurs and even Man U.

 

As it stands they also haven't implemented the rumoured structure with the Man City guy (Dave Falllows?) as head of player recruitment, Segura and Rodgers on the football side. Perhaps when this is in place they will be better convinced to invest a bit more - we'll have to wait and see I guess. This summer we are still in a bit of a mess.

 

 

I don't know what a reasonable amount would be, because I don't know how much money the club is currently bringing in and paying in wages. As a guide though, I would be disappointed if they gave Rodgers a smaller net transfer budget than they gave Kenny. I've read between £35m and £45m for that figure.

 

I'm sure they did think that last summer's spending would get us into the CL, and that amount should have done. It shows the risks of a board that lacks football knowledge simply handing over money to a manager and letting him spend it however he wants. I have no problem with a clued-up board vetoing signings that they deem poor value, or at the very least giving the manager clear guidelines on what types of signings they expect re age, track record, potential resale value and so on. Before anyone starts with the Agger comparisons, this isn't the same as forcing a manager to sell players he wants to keep – it's an acceptable form of intervention in certain circumstances. Passing on signings because you think they're overpriced doesn't disrupt the squad or send out the same signal re lack of ambition as selling your best players does.

 

Rather than the amount of money spent, I'd prefer to use the strength of the squad as a yardstick. If Rodgers is able to sign players who'll improve the side in the areas where we're lacking, and bring our squad up to a similar strength to those of Arsenal and Spurs, I'll be happy. I'd say this means another central midfielder and three attacking players, of which at least one needs to be a consistent goalscorer and at least one needs to have pace. If some of those are on loan that's fine, as long as Rodgers gets the money next summer to either sign them permanently or sign effective replacements. That's in addition to what he'd have been given next summer if he'd signed them permanently this summer, if you follow me.

[Neil G]

Neil, what do you think the club is worth/valued?

 

 

I've no idea. Why do you ask?

[xerxes]

Because if we let it get down to 6 months then he'll be out of here. I rate him and want him to stay obviously

 

His past injury record is poor.

 

With six months to go we take a view. Extending the contract of an injury prone player under contract is high risk.

 

If all is well with six months to go we make him a good offer, if he has been, or is, crocked we breathe a sigh of relief.

[Neil G]

You’ve gone off on a tangent about Agger, mate, but I was referring to those posts above me which were based off the ‘fact’ that ‘pubic ayre’ was leaking stuff to the press. Not a jot of that real at all. Still, I’ll reply to your points about Agger, it is the Agger thread, after all!

 

 

Sorry, you've lost me with this bit. I thought you said my post (#990) wasn't based on anything real. Anyway:

 

 

So is Rodgers’ quote saying, "I'm not forced to have to sell anyone, which is important.". Now, of course, those things he said are to be dismissed, but the other things listened to. Why?

 

 

What's not said is just as important. If for example Rodgers wants to permanently sign two forward players but can only afford it if he sells Agger, then he's not being forced to sell anyone. But that situation would be still unacceptable.

 

 

The club? Who do you mean? Agger, Rodgers, Gerrard have all spoken about it. I don’t recall the owners speaking about it. Who do you mean? Are you saying the owners are leaking information, if so what information, when and to whom?

 

 

I was talking about transfer dealings in general, not just the Agger business. Rodgers has been very forthcoming to the press about Carroll, Dempsey and Allen (weeks before he signed) as well as Agger. There was no need to say anything about any of these players, but he's been very open and Ayre and Chang are presumably ok with it, so it appears to be a club policy, or maybe lack of. There has certainly been no edict to keep everything behind closed doors.

 

Rodgers has attempted to justify his / the club's position over their potential willingness to sell Agger, so presumably he, or Ayre or FSG or someone senior at the club, cares what the fans and players think of it all. Agger stalling on a new contract would be a perfectly legitimate reason to be prepared to sell him, one that most fans including me would accept. So if that had happened, I would expect that at the very least it would have been leaked to Barrett, Bascombe et al.

 

 

You seem to have spectacularly missed the point I was making, Neil. Mine is that every player has his price, no matter how good he is. And I meant Ronaldo to Inter (for a world record fee). I made no comment on how they turned out. It’s true of those players, regardless of the club. Every player does have his price. It’s how Man City, then a much smaller proposition than now, got AC Milan to agree to sell Kaka to them. Okay, it didn’t happen in the end, but the club agreed to sell, because every player has their price. There's a million (ish) examples of this.

 

 

I get your point, I just don't agree with it as it doesn't give the whole picture. My point is that just because "every player has his price", it's not always the right decision to sell at that price. Figo is a case in point. You made no comment on how those transfers turned out, but how transfers turn out is absolutely key to assessing whether it was the right decision to sell.

 

 

That’s a perfectly valid opinion, IMO. I don’t want us to sell Agger, but if the money is there to buy somebody like Godin as a replacement and another attacker, and have a good wide player like AJ come in, then it has to be looked at. It has to be, Neil. It could well be better for the club to sell than to hold. Is there no amount you’d sell for? 30m? 40m? 70m? 100m?

 

 

I'd consider selling for an amount that's so far beyond the player's value as to be ridiculous. For Agger I'd probably start this at £40m. Nobody is going to offer that though – the only time this happens is when a club gets a big windfall from a sale and is desperate to sign someone else quickly, e.g. Torres / Carroll. Man City and Barca aren't desperate like that.

 

Besides, it's not just about how much you get from the sale, it's about how much the replacement will cost. I said in my previous post, if selling clubs know you have a massive pile of cash from a sale they'll take the piss over the price of a replacement, especially if the window is soon to close.

 

 

There's a risk the replacement could be worse than Agger. There's a possibility he could be better, and fitter, and younger. And the other positions we can spend out on can take us higher up the table. It has to be looked at, mate.

 

 

See my previous reply to you – central defence is the only part of the team that we know works at the moment, and we'll be making enough changes to other areas of the team as it is. It's not a risk worth taking at this time in our position.

 

 

Would you sell Suarez for 100m? 250m? 1b? 100b? All the money in the world? No matter how much money, the principle is the same: If a club offers enough money, the player will be sold. The price can reach a level where it’s silly not to sell. The same will be true of those we go to in order to buy a replacement.

 

But look, Suarez is a different proposition to Agger. Selling him would require an astronomical fee; a fee which would allow us to go out and get Higuain and Llorente, something like that.

 

 

See above re selling teams taking the piss. If we sold Suarez for £100m, the bidding for Higuain and Llorente would start at £80m each. It's not speculation, it's what happens – see Torres / Carroll.

 

 

Agger, however good he might be, is a defender. Defenders can be replaced more easily, as they’re part of a unit. I’m not saying defenders aren’t important, they definitely are, especially ‘ball playing’ ones like Agger. It’s just that they’re not capricious or mercurial talents in the same way a Messi or a Suarez is. I don’t want to sell him, but when the money gets silly enough, then, well, it’d be silly not to. He can be replaced. Whether you want to take the chance or not, that’s a subjective call.

 

 

Again: established partnership with Skrtel, one of the best in the league, and the only part of the team that we know works.

 

 

Well, I’ll tell you exactly what it means: It means that there’s a desire to keep the player, we’ve turned down big offers, but if they keep going there’s a limit to the amount of money we can turn down. Whether they reach that level, who knows?

 

 

It was the word "hope" I had a problem with, as the word implies that the situation isn’t entirely in our own hands. It is.

 

 

Until what happened? What has happened, mate? City has offered massive money and we’ve turned it down. That’s all that has happened.

 

 

Until we made it clear we'd be prepared to sell one of our best players to a rival team that we're hoping to catch up with in the not too distant future. It's indicative of a mindset that I am deeply unhappy with.

 

 

That’s a big 'if' and there’s no real signal of that. I mean, there will definitely be a point at which money runs out – we finished 8th, and haven’t had CL income for a number of years – and if he wants even more players he’ll have to chose to sell somebody to raise the funds. I think, bar maybe a couple or three, that’s the same for every club.

 

 

You talk about money running out as if there isn't any more to spend. There is – FSG have got money. Get Rodgers the players he needs to get us into the CL, and the additional revenue will cover the additional transfer costs and wages. Speculate to accumulate, invest to recoup.

 

The logic that says we shouldn't invest until we've cut our outgoings sufficiently is the same faulty logic being used by the government. They won't countenance the idea that deficit spending can pay for itself by bringing in additional revenue.

 

Say we chose not to sign Walcott because we couldn't shift Cole or Adam, and we missed out on CL qualification by a few points. That so-called prudence would suddenly look pretty shortsighted.

 

 

Well, they’ve spent £26m so far, we’ll see what happens in the rest of the window.

 

 

I agree, the buying side of the equation is looking as though it could turn out pretty well.

[Tony Moanero]

With 6 months to go he would probably sign a pre-contract with another club and we would get fuck all for him.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I actually pissed myself laughing at that stuff. If you hadn't made half of it up, I'd have said you couldn't make it up. But you did.

 

No money in the winter window because of Suarez situation. Conspiracy theory crackpot. .

 

My biggest mistake was ever taking you seriously.

[Neil G]

You make two claims, one of which I disagree with, one of which I support.

 

I do not accept that ;“The only clubs in this country who could remain competitive at the top level purely through their own self-generated income are us and Man United.”

 

Tottenham, Chelsea, Arsenal, Newcastle, Man City and Villa all have the capacity to do so also. West Ham may join them. Our current position in Europe’s top ten is based on historic performance and will continue to deteriorate unless we return to the CL. Sponsorship is not based on tradition and sentiment, but on success and television appearances. The Warrior deal was a punt by them, the reasons for Adidas dropping out are the more significant. It does not take long for children in Sierra Leone and Thailand to replace their Gerrard for Balotelli football shirts if the latter is winning things and the former is not.

 

If we do not return to the CL , over time ,our income will level out just in excess of Villa’s and we will be left with an average sized ground with below average hospitality facilities.

 

I think your view represents a complacency which has dogged our club for the past two decades and will be our undoing.

 

I wholly agree that without investment in excess of earned income we stand no chance of returning to the CL. Arsenal and Man u are coining an extra £60m a season at the gate, and £30m a season minimum from the CL. Our League Cup win brought £100,000 prize money.

 

Unless we crash the top four FFP will doom, not save us.

 

 

I guess I didn't make myself clear. By "remain competitive at the top level" I meant regularly challenge for the title, and by "purely through their own self-generated income" I meant assuming that the club was established in the Champions League and was bringing in the income that goes with that. If FSG can get us to that point, they won't need to keep forking out hundreds of millions the way Abramovich and Mansour have done and continue to do.

 

Where has all that extra revenue that you say Arsenal are earning been going? Wenger should have a warchest as big as Mancini's by now if those figures are accurate.

[Baltar]

Barca robbed us last time when they signed Mascherano for a paltry sum, I'll be damned if we let them take Agger on the cheap too. If we are setting City a fee of £30M then the same should apply to Barcelona.

If we can keep hold of Agger then great, but I think he would jump at the chance to move to Barca so if they are genuinely interested we should tell them to offer us a decent fee otherwise piss off. Barca are total cunts when it comes to pursuing players they want to sign and we should get things wrapped up quickly and on our terms before this turns into a circus like it did with Macherano (and Fabregas).

 

First post btw, hi everybody.

[Nightcat]

During our terrible last season in the league we conceded 40 goals. According to that figure we had the third best defence in the league behind only City and Man Utd. Better defence than Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea. If only our midfield and strikers had done a better job....

 

So why mess up with our best department? Why sell our best defender? People need to understand that if our defenders had performed as bad as the rest of the squad we'd be battling relegation.

 

Additionally, the fact that one of the only two teams with a better defence, the champions, City, has made an offer for Agger, shows how good he is.

[silverlining]

Barca robbed us last time when they signed Mascherano for a paltry sum, I'll be damned if we let them take Agger on the cheap too. If we are setting City a fee of £30M then the same should apply to Barcelona.

If we can keep hold of Agger then great, but I think he would jump at the chance to move to Barca so if they are genuinely interested we should tell them to offer us a decent fee otherwise piss off. Barca are total cunts when it comes to pursuing players they want to sign and we should get things wrapped up quickly and on our terms before this turns into a circus like it did with Macherano (and Fabregas).

 

First post btw, hi everybody.

 

Hi Baltar. Your name backwards is "Ratlab".

 

Did you know that? Ratlab. It's better than Baltar, actually.

Unless that is actually your name

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Hi Baltar. Your name backwards is "Ratlab".

 

Did you know that? Ratlab. It's better than Baltar, actually.

Unless that is actually your name

 

I'd imagine it's Gaius Baltar from Battlestar Galactica.

 

Neil: I'm replying to your post.