Jump to content

  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Would you like to see Adam Johnson at Liverpool?

WhiskeyJar

By WhiskeyJar,
in FF - Football Forum

 Share

Would you like to see Adam Johnson at Liverpool?  

132 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like to see Adam Johnson at Liverpool?

    • Yes, another pacey winger is what we need...
      90
    • No, we have other positions that need to be addressed
      29
    • Not sure
      15

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Kevin D Grand Master

Kevin D

Posted
Posted
He scored something like 9 in the league though which is a poor return and will never get us into the top 4

 

Not having a go at him at all,he is a fantastic player though I think he will struggle to ever get 20+ league goals we need

 

We had 50 more shots than utd last season and finished miles behind them.We desperately need goals

 

Any money available should be put towards a top striker and play Sterling or Suso instead Downing .

 

It was 11 in the league and I agree that's not enough. But there is a context and it needs to be understood within that. It was his first full season in the league, for most of the season he had unprecedented defamatory accusations hanging over him and he was playing with the least productive widemen any of us, with the exception of Hermes, have seen regularly play for the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Fenomeno Proficient

Il Fenomeno

Posted
Posted

No, but not because we need to sign players in other positions, more because I don't think he's the player we need in that position.

 

Need to sign players who have done the business over 2 or 3 years. Not ones who have had a purple patch over a couple of months or shown the odd glimpse of ability every 6 or 7 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FanchesterCity Mentor

FanchesterCity

Posted
Posted
Being outspent in transfer windows by Sunderland. Good fun this abiding by fair play rules lark.

 

On the plus side, they're blowing their money on over priced British players. We might just sneak above them in the league.

 

Perhaps they've just 'saved up' a little and are now embarking on their 3 year plan or something?

 

Liverpool have spent a pretty penny in the last 18 months, admittedly not astronomical, but still, it's a fair whack.

 

I believe it's 10 million with extras up to 15 million (sell on?, England appearances, trophies etc?)

 

I think you'd done well to avoid Johnson personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FanchesterCity Mentor

FanchesterCity

Posted
Posted
Roman abramovich backs the idea of these fair play rules. If that alone doesn't tell you how worthless platini's talk was, nothing will.

 

The whole idea of it should be applauded, but the practicality of it is totally flawed.

 

It's all well and good folks saying "spend what you earn" but erm... United are 600 million in debt. That 'debt' helps them run a huge stadium and market themselves globally in order to increase that revenue.

 

City are the same... some rich sugar daddy tosses money at it in order to increase revenues (which has worked) - although he's tossed more money at it than he's ever likely to get back.

 

Same with Chelsea.

 

Then of course, if you spend on 'football infrastructure' that's exempt (but profits from it are not)... so if City spend 400 million on a super academy, they might make 50 million quid back from it... but that will count as +50million on revenue (not -350million loss).

 

There's merit in most of the exemptions (i.e. spending on facilities is generally a good thing), and in theory, they don't want to stop the sugar daddies... they want to stop clubs with no money taking risks to try and get into CL etc.

 

And therein lies the problem. CL is the chief culprit in most of this, followed by Premier League. It encourages clubs to take silly risks because the rewards are so great if you win.

 

Sadly, we're now at a stage where if a club like United doesn't get in CL for any period of time, it's in deep shit... since all that debt is based on United continuing to grow and being at the top table. The top tier of clubs are loving it whilst they are at the top table, the moment they are in danger of losing that status, they're petrified.

 

It's all a shambles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...