MichaelThomas

But they didn't spend 100m. They had 50m from Torres. Am I also right in thinking we were paying 20m to 30m interest on debt from the GH regime? Any debt payments would have been released for transfers. I'm not denying they have spent money. But I am unsure how much of it has gone above and beyond buying the club and addressing the debt. They have got the club generating more cash off the pitch too, which can be used.

50 mil of that spending came courtesy of abramovich.

Remains to be seen if we'll sign anyone else for reasonably big money. Personally, I can only see it happening if we sell Agger or Carroll. The real change is in terms of the wage bill, as younger players do not command as much as senior pros. For Sahin, is there a loan fee? What is it?

This year's CL win will have helped them too. City will be picking up a lot of new support too.

Javier Hernandez?

When was that?

In theory being the key word. Sahin has never played in the PL and has hardly any football under his belt for a year, while Lucas is just coming back from a serious injury, so to expect him to perform at his highest level instantly is something which may not happen.

That's the key point. Newcastle did amazingly well unearthing some bargains, although Ba was a risk given his injury record, Ben Arfa had disciplinary issues and Bayern looked at Cisse and didn't make a move in the end, but it's the exception. Unearthing these players and getting them ahead of clubs who are seen as bigger, CL, more prospect of trophies etc, is difficult. Would Reina have signed if we hadn't just won the CL and looked on the up?

Hummels doesn't want to leave Dortmund. As for Subotic, who knows? They won't pay 27M anyway.

His agent said he wants to stay but he's been made no new contract offer. I think Rodgers want to raise a big chunk and without selling Luis he's the best way to do it, and quickly, as he knows there is interest.

Why would they leave a club in the CL for one cutting costs and looking unlikely to return to it?

Of course it's good news, but his contract wasn't running out so it hasn't strengthened our negotiating position on a sale, perhaps just made Luis feel a bit happier and appreciated. Worth remembering that contracts do not mean people are staying long term, otherwise this guy would still be here - Fernando Torres signs new Liverpool deal - Telegraph

Aquilani has not behaved badly at all. He's been shunted out and left in limbo for the last three summers because we've been trying to flog him to everyone. Has he ever refused to train? Has he ever gone AWOL? Has he ever refused to play? So what if he wants the money he is entitled to on his contract. He doesn't love the club and neither do 95% of our players. How is it any different than Jovanovic who got a payoff? Or Voronin? I didn't see either of them scampering to the door. If you seriously think there are more than a couple of players at the club who aren't here for the money you're even more deluded than I already think you are.

Yeah, I'm with you on this one, let's get these lazy, money-grabbing foreigners out of the door. British all the way. We need heart and desire and someone who can run all day.

Spot on. We're even subsidising his wages with Fiorentina for the next two years as well. We're not heading for oblivion, but it's very Leeds-esque. FSG know they can't count on CL football for the next few years, so are trimming accordingly.

Technically he is light-years better than Spearing. I guess you don't understand it because you never watched him in Serie A, especially at Roma. He would have played enough games for Milan to buy him, but they were careful near the end and just had him as a sub - a sub appearance counted as 0.5 appearances towards our agreement. We got done. Milan are cutting costs like mad. It's obvious they would take the free Montolivo than pay for Aquilani. I think the only reason they want to shift him on is his wages. You can't seriously believe BR would rather turn to Spearing or Adam than Aquilani.

Were we not in the CL? Do more teams ultimately win the league from having finished second the previous season, or eighth?

Winning the FA Cup is better than finishing second?

An Italian international at the time. Someone rated as one of the best midfielders in Serie A - why wouldn't he be on a fair chunk? There are far more baffling candidates for being bought, like Diouf, or most of last summer's buys. And on the 100k per week, where has this been confirmed? Or is it more someone's signing on fee being added to wages to inflate them, as was the case with Jovanovic.

I don't have any beef with Rodgers and I hope he does brilliantly. It's a great opportunity for him and I don't blame him for grasping it. It would have been easy to say we couldn't attract anyone of note after Houllier, but we got the guy who had won La Liga twice in the last three years. If there's a failure to attract then it's obviously down to the owners for not presenting the vision and backing for the best to want the job. My choice? I'd have looked abroad, largely because I don't rate British managers and they tend to buy British dross. Looking beyond Villas-Boas, who I agree with you isn't all that, Van Gaal wouldn't have been a bad choice. He wants things his way, but a strong manager is not a bad thing. Luciano Spalletti, Marcelo Bielsa, Vanderlei Luxemburgo are all possibilities I'd have considered. Even Lille's Rudi Garcia would be worth looking at. Hopefully though Rodgers proves to be the right choice. But I fear he's been appointed based on press hype from his season at Swansea and because he is young, which FSG see as the holy grail when it comes to appointments.

Listen Scat Master, you can dig up crap all night to prove that somewhere, sometime, a club took a gamble. You specified Ferguson and Benitez and put them in the same bracket as Rodgers now - it's hard to be more clueless. Mancini did very nicely as Lazio, his second club job after Fiorentina. Then got Inter at a fortuitous time, given the Calciopoli scandal. He also had a rather nice playing career behind him, which had given him a reputation. I must have missed Rodgers lifting league titles and European Cups. Wenger may have been something of a gamble at Monaco, but not in Japan, considering what he did in France. I don't know if you're suggesting that Monaco are the same stature club as us though? Don't really care about Moyes and Redknapp, since they've won near enough nothing between them. I would point out though that Redknapp has bags of experience, something Rodgers lacks. At 39, Redknapp was in charge of Bournemouth. Lastly, you can throw Mourinho in all you like. Managing in the Portuguese league isn't like managing here and he's one in a million. Rodgers may be brilliant. He may be crap. He was a gamble that didn't need taking at a crucial time in the club's history.

Sorry, did I just read this correctly? Didn't bother to read the rest of your post as this pretty much tells me you know zero. Ferguson's "purple patch" at Aberdeen lasted eight years. It included toppling the Old Firm and beating Real Madrid in a European final. Rafa's "purple patch" was three seasons at Valencia, toppling Barcelona and Real Madrid, twice, and winning the UEFA Cup (when it was a bit better than now). Rodgers most definitely fits into the category of managers you've just dismissed. A year earlier and we'd have been appointing Coyle, another forward thinking manager feted for changing Bolton's style of play.

Doubt he will go. He loves Villa more than O'Neill