Go fuck yourselves FSG

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

As much as I think we desperately need to increase our capacity to compete with the elite long term, I think it`s a fallacy to say the reason the likes of Arsenal and Utd are consistently ahead of us is because of their stadium capacity.

 

We spend as much on transfers as Utd and certainly more than Arsenal but always lag b ehind them simply because they generally spend their money a lot better than we do.

 

Misspending certainly has hindered us in the endeavour to close the gap. Fortunately, we've very much improved the way we select and recruit players.

 

If it just down to the size of a teams stadium then why have Arsenal remained potless At 60,000 Emirates but managed to win 3 titles with the same manager at 38,000 Highbury.

 

 

If we're going to actually close the gap, we need to take a far more holistic approach. From increasing revenue streams to give the manager more money to spend - which is where the stadium and CL come in - to bringing in a far more modern way of recruiting the right players, to decrease the chances of paying loads of money for shit players. It's all part of it.

 

The main difference, though, is that those teams were building on good teams. We've had to get rid of a hell of a load of shit, overpaid players and start again. That takes time. The owners have been here 33 months, the manager has been here 12. From the position we were in, both on and off the pitch, it's not a shock that it's taking time to get right.

[Guest San Don]

As much as I think we desperately need to increase our capacity to compete with the elite long term, I think it`s a fallacy to say the reason the likes of Arsenal and Utd are consistently ahead of us is because of their stadium capacity.

 

We spend as much on transfers as Utd and certainly more than Arsenal but always lag b ehind them simply because they generally spend their money a lot better than we do.

 

If it just down to the size of a teams stadium then why have Arsenal remained potless At 60,000 Emirates but managed to win 3 titles with the same manager at 38,000 Highbury.

 

I agree.

 

If Im not mistaken, I think we've regularly outspent both manchester united and arsenal more often than not on transfers since about 1996. manchester in particular have tended to make a single headline signing, the player who'll make a difference while we tended to go for quantity over quality.

 

While I consider we need a stadium capable of holding 60k, manchester will still outstrip us on stadium income alone as their gaffe holds 79k. Even arse will still have more stadium derived income because they can charge more per seat than us plus, have corporate boxes all around the ground.

 

Any new or redeveloped stadium we have will narrow the difference between other club's income and ours but, it wont eradicate it.

[derykw]

Misspending certainly has hindered us in the endeavour to close the gap. Fortunately, we've very much improved the way we select and recruit players.

 

 

 

 

If we're going to actually close the gap, we need to take a far more holistic approach. From increasing revenue streams to give the manager more money to spend - which is where the stadium and CL come in - to bringing in a far more modern way of recruiting the right players, to decrease the chances of paying loads of money for shit players. It's all part of it.

 

The main difference, though, is that those teams were building on good teams. We've had to get rid of a hell of a load of shit, overpaid players and start again. That takes time. The owners have been here 33 months, the manager has been here 12. From the position we were in, both on and off the pitch, it's not a shock that it's taking time to get right.

 

I think you misunderstand where Im coming from.

 

I agree with everything you say in general. I like Rodgers and believe he could be great for us given time and i like the new sense of direction the club seems to have, which is long overdue IMO. Things aren`t perfect but I think we`re trying to get there.

 

I was talking more historically. We`ve always had the money to compete but always fucked it up at crucial stage. Souness spent fortunes but was a disaster . Houllier spent loads and did well and won cups but ultimately fucked it up in the transfer market with the infamous trio of 2002.

Rafa generally did really well, got us to the brink of the title and then fucked it up with the likes of Keane and Dossena and Aquilani, not to mention his `free` transfers, the likes of Degen £40k a week for 3yrs and never finished 90 minutes once. And the woeful Jovanovich £3m signing on fee and £60k a week. And the less said about Comolli/Kennys dealings the better.

[The Woolster]

I agree we've got a good squad, but you're looking at us in isolation there. What if Arsenal have just as much to spend as we do if we sell Suarez, and actually spend it? For the first time in years they aren't facing losing any of their key players, and Gazidis and Wenger have both been making noises about there being lots of money available to spend. They can't carry on forever rolling that line out without actually doing it. And unlike us they have CL football to attract players of the calibre of Higuain.

 

And if they still don't splash the cash, then we need to take advantage of that and push the boat out this season to get top four, because we don't know when we'll next have that chance.

 

This type of things gets said by fans of all teams every summer "the other teams will be spending big and they'll get better". But its not about spending money for money's sake (not saying you are saying that), its about spending the right money.

 

If we look at the traditional big 4, we've all spent money over the last 3 or so seasons (even Arsenal, their net spend is low because they sold 3 players for £84m, but they've spent over £100m in 2 seasons I think), and as far as I am concerned, we are all worse teams than we were in say 2009. The 2 teams that have improved are City who have spent an obscene amount of money, and Spurs, who have spent the right money (until recently, think they seem to have abandoned that now).

 

Lets say we do spend all the Suarez money, as well as all the money I beleive is available, there are 5 other very competitive teams we are up against, what happens if we don't get top 4, do we spend big again the next season? We'll probably be back to paying Champions league wages without being in the Champions League, which is something we are only just breaking free from. The top of the league is much more competitive now, and it would be sensible to keep our powder dry, especially as we will need to invest a significant amount into the refurbishment.

 

Besides, I'm not as confident as you are that our net transfer budget will be as high as you've suggested.

 

I am not saying that our net transfer budget will be that high, for one I think that FSG may have a similar view that I do about funding the stadium, and I think they will be able to hide behind the fact that we have had significant 'losses' the last 2 seasons to explain a similar transfer spend to previous seasons if they wanted to. That also means that other clubs don't think we have cash burning a hole in our pocket when it comes to transfer discussions.

 

But those losses are not really losses, which I explain here Wooly Jumpers For Goalposts: Liverpool's Annual Accouts: Will the Reds stay in the red?, and you'll see how I come to my guestimate of what we can afford to spend.

 

I think we should be spending about £40-50m net this season (including winter transfer window), and if we sell Suarez, then another £20m on top. What may well happen though is we sell Suarez, spend £60m net and FSG get away with saying we reinvested all of the Suarez money, and we'll be in the same position anyway.

[Bogman]

I agree.

 

If Im not mistaken, I think we've regularly outspent both manchester united and arsenal more often than not on transfers since about 1996. manchester in particular have tended to make a single headline signing, the player who'll make a difference while we tended to go for quantity over quality.

 

While I consider we need a stadium capable of holding 60k, manchester will still outstrip us on stadium income alone as their gaffe holds 79k. Even arse will still have more stadium derived income because they can charge more per seat than us plus, have corporate boxes all around the ground.

 

Any new or redeveloped stadium we have will narrow the difference between other club's income and ours but, it wont eradicate it.

 

 

 

That bit, right there. We are where we are due to trillions of reasons, but that bit hurt us the most. We were there, we were top of the tree, we only needed one or two top bracket signings and we'd have been made for along time. We had the manager, the team, but the wrong owners. We imploded, and we've fallen along way.

I can't blame the new owners for what they're doing, I blame everything that went on from 2005 until FSG came in.

We're reaping the seeds we sowed.

[The Woolster]

We haven’t qualified for the CL for four successive seasons. We haven’t even qualified for the EL by leagues position for two seasons. Last season we were 12 points of the CL spot. We may lose our top goal scorer who helped us into a modest seventh position. It is very difficult to argue that we are not “very far off top 4 strength as it stands” as you claim.

 

The problem is, and will continue to be, that the gulf in playing, and financial, terms between us and the top four is considerable, and widens each season that we fail to make progress on and off the pitch. We can’t outspend them in fees and wages, can Brendan and Ayre out-think them?

 

The 3 previous seasons to last are irrelevant as far as I am concerned, different managers, different teams, different systems. Last season is relevant, and for the vast majority of the season we were not far off top 4 form, from 1st October onwards we were only 5 points off CL spot. In my opinion, our squad going into this season as it stands is much better than it was going into last.

 

We may lose our top scorer, but we'll have money for replacements, and we may well have a more balanced and efficient team. Arsenal only scored 2 goals less last season without van Persie.

 

I am confident going into this season that we can put a real good challenge in for 4th, we might not make it, but we'll be there or there abouts.

[John McClane]

That bit, right there. We are where we are due to trillions of reasons, but that bit hurt us the most. We were there, we were top of the tree, we only needed one or two top bracket signings and we'd have been made for along time. We had the manager, the team, but the wrong owners. We imploded, and we've fallen along way.

I can't blame the new owners for what they're doing, I blame everything that went on from 2005 until FSG came in.

We're reaping the seeds we sowed.

 

but we continue to do the same with £9m, £8m, £7.5m signings, we are a hit and hope club, but if we bought a world class or recognised player they would make a difference immediately.

 

Last summer, united bought RVP for £23m, and that delivered the title.

[Bogman]

but we continue to do the same with £9m, £8m, £7.5m signings, we are a hit and hope club, but if we bought a world class or recognised player they would make a difference immediately.

 

Last summer, united bought RVP for £23m, and that delivered the title.

 

As said before, without CL football, that's easier said than done.

It's a vicious circle. We need CL football, but to get that we need to chuck money around, but on the right targets. We chucked money about, but at the wrong targets. We're now being cautious.

 

The point being, we were there, we were in the right moment, but in the wrong place.

It's feckin annoying seeing where we were to where we are now. Soul destroying, to be honest, but unless we get an owner who is prepared to spunk shite loads of money all over the place, then we are going to continue meandering on our merry way, hoping that these middle of the road signings hit gold.

 

The biggest problem I have at the moment, is that I've no chuffin idea what our transfer strategy is. What are we doing?

[Guest San Don]

but we continue to do the same with £9m, £8m, £7.5m signings, we are a hit and hope club, but if we bought a world class or recognised player they would make a difference immediately.

 

Last summer, united bought RVP for £23m, and that delivered the title.

 

Correct. I think the policy of buying quantity over quality has been shown to be a failure for the last 10 15 years if not longer. In our pomp, we tended to only make one headline signing most seasons. That's what manchester have and are doing.

 

Problem is, we've fallen so far behind and because one window turned out not so good (I still cant get my head around no one especially the owners didnt say 'too much!' for some of those transfers), the owners lost confidence.

 

It will take either another massive one off spree which would put us in conflict with FFP or, several windows of buying quality.

 

The problem is, without CL, you wont attract those 'quality' players to the club but, without those quality players, you'll find it very hard getting into the CL now. Ourselves, arse, spurs and the season's surprise club will all be fighting for the 4th spot which even then, only gives you a tough CL qualifier.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

[xerxes]

Correct. I think the policy of buying quantity over quality has been shown to be a failure for the last 10 15 years if not longer. In our pomp, we tended to only make one headline signing most seasons. That's what manchester have and are doing.

 

Problem is, we've fallen so far behind and because one window turned out not so good (I still cant get my head around no one especially the owners didnt say 'too much!' for some of those transfers), the owners lost confidence.

 

It will take either another massive one off spree which would put us in conflict with FFP or, several windows of buying quality.

 

The problem is, without CL, you wont attract those 'quality' players to the club but, without those quality players, you'll find it very hard getting into the CL now. Ourselves, arse, spurs and the season's surprise club will all be fighting for the 4th spot which even then, only gives you a tough CL qualifier.

 

We are now in territory familiar to fans of Newcastle, Spurs, Everton and Villa at various times during the PL era.

 

The pool of players who will improve a 5th-8th placed side is very small. The most likely will be snapped up by the Top Four. That leaves the possible, the cast offs, the gambles, all of whom will want to be paid CL wages, even though we are not in the CL- and therefore the incentive to perform is reduced. If you follow that route ( as Villa and Newcastle did) and don’t crack it, you are carrying an unsustainable wage bill and have to off load rapidly destroying all that you have built.

 

Of course we could get lucky, or Ian Ayre could be the smartest CEO in the league and Rodgers the shrewdest manager, but both scenarios are hardly what you would base a business plan on. On topic, FSG are doing what they are good at, risk averse, conservative investment. Sport has a habit of being unpredictable and maybe the misfortunes of other will give us opportunity, I hope so.

[Guest San Don]

We are now in territory familiar to fans of Newcastle, Spurs, Everton and Villa at various times during the PL era.

 

The pool of players who will improve a 5th-8th placed side is very small. The most likely will be snapped up by the Top Four. That leaves the possible, the cast offs, the gambles, all of whom will want to be paid CL wages, even though we are not in the CL- and therefore the incentive to perform is reduced. If you follow that route ( as Villa and Newcastle did) and don’t crack it, you are carrying an unsustainable wage bill and have to off load rapidly destroying all that you have built.

 

Of course we could get lucky, or Ian Ayre could be the smartest CEO in the league and Rodgers the shrewdest manager, but both scenarios are hardly what you would base a business plan on. On topic, FSG are doing what they are good at, risk averse, conservative investment. Sport has a habit of being unpredictable and maybe the misfortunes of other will give us opportunity, I hope so.

 

I think you'll find all the players we've signed recently might want CL wages but didnt get anything like. Toure who was on a massive wedge at city took a 50% cut. He's the only player who could be said to be on a 'CL' wage.

[Garrincha]

The clubs policy on wages is absolutely spot on, you arrive on low wages that are incentivised based on your performances, then if you hit performance targets you get a pay rise, if you don't your wages stay the same. Absolutely spot on and it encourages players to play better and hit performance targets because they make more money in doing so. It only allows the top performing players to receive the top wages, so it's directly proportional to your worth to the club.

[xerxes]

I think you'll find all the players we've signed recently might want CL wages but didnt get anything like. Toure who was on a massive wedge at city took a 50% cut. He's the only player who could be said to be on a 'CL' wage.

 

I agree that we have been more prudent with our wages of late. But we haven't been buying "oven ready" CL calibre players. Toure is a City cast off , he wasn't even in their CL squad last season,whose job is to help to get us into the EL, and maybe mount a CL challenge. ( A good buy though nonethless in my view- what do you think?)

 

I don't know the terms he was signed on, but would be surprised if he was on less than £90k a week plus a hefty signing on fee in the millions.

[PaulMcC]

The clubs policy on wages is absolutely spot on, you arrive on low wages that are incentivised based on your performances, then if you hit performance targets you get a pay rise, if you don't your wages stay the same. Absolutely spot on and it encourages players to play better and hit performance targets because they make more money in doing so. It only allows the top performing players to receive the top wages, so it's directly proportional to your worth to the club.

 

What about players who played brilliant at another club? Do we never go for them as they'll want, and deserve, big wages?

[JesseRawlins]

The clubs policy on wages is absolutely spot on, you arrive on low wages that are incentivised based on your performances, then if you hit performance targets you get a pay rise, if you don't your wages stay the same. Absolutely spot on and it encourages players to play better and hit performance targets because they make more money in doing so. It only allows the top performing players to receive the top wages, so it's directly proportional to your worth to the club.

 

But why choose that when you can get higher wages elsewhere no matter how you perform.I'm afraid this system only works if everybody does it.

[The Acolyte]

 

I tried downloading that image.

Would love to use it for a work presentation but that address no longer works!

:(

[Major Tom]

I tried downloading that image.

Would love to use it for a work presentation but that address no longer works!

:(

 

Whack the phrase into into google, mate. It's available from a few places.

[TheHitman]

 

Sounds like a Conservative slogan the above image. Let's hope the best players don't get on their bikes and seek work elsewhere

[dennis tooth]

 

If we're going to actually close the gap, we need to take a far more holistic approach. From increasing revenue streams to give the manager more money to spend - which is where the stadium and CL come in - to bringing in a far more modern way of recruiting the right players, to decrease the chances of paying loads of money for shit players. It's all part of it.

.

 

Except in reality a new stadium will impact on our 'money to spend' for the next ten years as it has Arsenal who just lost out on Julio Cesar who was a free transfer and havent even put a bid in for Higuan, players the calibre they could do with but lose out on every summer while selling their best players but dont let me intrude on your disproven fantasy.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Except in reality a new stadium will impact on our 'money to spend' for the next ten years

 

Posts like this are the reason I don't bother replying to most your nonsense. It clearly shows why a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

[PaulMcC]

How is lowering the wage bill ambitious, NV?

[xerxes]

Except in reality a new stadium will impact on our 'money to spend' for the next ten years as it has Arsenal who just lost out on Julio Cesar who was a free transfer and havent even put a bid in for Higuan, players the calibre they could do with but lose out on every summer while selling their best players but dont let me intrude on your disproven fantasy.

 

Your inability to read a balance sheet always offers a laugh:P

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

How is lowering the wage bill ambitious, NV?

 

Firstly, I don't see much wage bill lowering. I see getting rid of dead wood, but also paying more for renewed contracts for other players. Secondly, spending too much on shit players is actually a large part of the reason why we're out of the top four. Third, and most importantly, it enables us more money to spend on transfers whilst we're out of the CL.

 

What's unambitious about spending record amounts on players, including breaking our record for signings more than once?

[Coro]

Firstly, I don't see much wage bill lowering. I see getting rid of dead wood, but also paying more for renewed contracts for other players. Secondly, spending too much on shit players is actually a large part of the reason why we're out of the top four. Third, and most importantly, it enables us more money to spend on transfers whilst we're out of the CL.

 

What's unambitious about spending record amounts on players, including breaking our record for signings more than once?

 

Tom Hicks and George Gillett are the reason we're no longer in the top 4.

 

By the way, are you praising the signing of Carroll?

 

It's grim how you overlook the sale of Torres in order to heap more praise on American businessmen.