Why is it that when reading two opposing sides in a discussion, one where I am invariably less biased than Alex, you can't just address the points made? I don't even remotely like Liverpool. I find them cringeworthy on their best days. But instead of thinking "he's maybe got a point" or even pointing out why you disagree, you make up some nonsense about an alliance. For what reason exactly? Why would Arsenal and Liverpool fans care? Avoiding the points raised and talking of silly alliances in order to justify delusional beliefs is so...Liverpoolesque.
Brentan Rodgers
- Thread starter The Neviller
- Start date
- Status
Why is it that when reading two opposing sides in a discussion, one where I am invariably less biased than Alex, you can't just address the points made? I don't even remotely like Liverpool. I find them cringeworthy on their best days. But instead of thinking "he's maybe got a point" or even pointing out why you disagree, you make up some nonsense about an alliance. For what reason exactly? Why would Arsenal and Liverpool fans care? Avoiding the points raised and talking of silly alliances in order to justify delusional beliefs is so...Liverpoolesque.
Early days but I think Liverpool could have/should have gone for 1 big name like Falcao or Cavani instead of buying bunch of 20-23 year old up top. Yes they have added numbers but it is still very young and inexperienced squad. If they wanted numbers they have given more chances to couple of good prospects Suso (where is he these days?) and Ibe from academy. The one big name in team, who can drive fear among opposition is often important. Teams are going to be better prepared this time vs Liverpool than last season, which is often the case when a team has a special season and in such cases, having someone like Falcao would have helped them than Balotelli. Not sure if they follow a transfer fee/wage cap internally. Their model of buy good prospects early, develop them and if they don't succeed, sell at good/decent price is good business wise but in today's scenario where there are so many clubs around throwing big money at world class players, it is not easy to win trophies consistently just with good young prospects. Still a long way to go and if Rodgers can bring new signings to same wavelength as others, they can have a good season.
Spot on. That was my biggest problem with Lallana - while I don't rate him, I think he could become a good squad player, but we could have got either a better player for that price or a similar level squad player at a lower price.
Fabregas cost £27m, Lallana who I don't rate for a top club, cost £25m. Crazy isn't it.
Indeed. He'll get plenty of games to prove me wrong so hopefully I look stupid for questioning him, but from seeing him for Southampton/England he seems like one of those players who's style makes them look better than they are. Never seemed overly effective to me.
I've never been impressed with his decision making.
Down to the manager, tho. After Simeone leaves them they will crumble.
Wage capacity is Liverpool's problem. Till that grows they will find it hard to attract top players and hold on to any they develop/improve.
Nice to see others are picking up on it as well. His comment annoyed me for many reasons. Mainly because it is clearly catshite, but also because he's assuming everyone else is stupid. Ironically it's making HIM look stupid. Such a daft statement to make, especially after this summers spending. Balotelli with his "why always me?" attitude has joined the perfect club with their "why always us?" mentality.What's this bollocks about Liverpool's inability to pay high wages and thus not attract top players? If they hadn't spent £7 million each on Aspas and Alberto, £3 million on Assaidi, and £4.5 million on Lambert, I'm sure they'd have been able to scrape a decent wage offer together for a big name player or two. They've also just got Suarez off their books so that must have freed up a decent chunk of the wage budget.
Rodgers has squandered the budget he's been given by overpaying for squad players. Yes, they needed more depth, but he should have focused on improving the first XI, especially after Suarez's departure, rather than buying a load of players who aren't any better than what they already had.
Rodgers has squandered the budget he's been given by overpaying for squad players. Yes, they needed more depth, but he should have focused on improving the first XI, especially after Suarez's departure, rather than buying a load of players who aren't any better than what they already had.
Wasn't Suarez reportedly on £200k a week just before he left?
His pay rise wasn't supposed to trigger immediately so I'm not 100% sure if he ever got that while he was here but yeah he was set to earn around £200k a week soon.
What do you think they could have brought in? If we look at the big name players on the move this year I can't see why any of Falcao, Di María, Fábregas, Costa, Benatia or James Rodriguez would have moved to Liverpool. It's really easy to say they should've just replaced Suárez with Cavani in the same way Spurs should have just replaced Bale with someone like Reus but it's obviously not that simple.
Thank you. I mean it is fun and all to poke fun at a rival, but all I´m seeing in the Liverpool related threads is people criticising their transfer policy in general without naming actual alternatives.
On top of that they are compared to Atletico and Dortmund, which are simply unfair comparisions. Both are recent national champions and made big impacts on the International stage. They have also way bigger shots at qualifying for the CL and have more respected coaches in charge with the reputations to form world class players out of talents. This is not even taking the severe differences in the nationial talent pools and markets into account, which make players inside the Bundesliga and La Liga way more affordable. They are dozens of examples to support that.
Furthermore Atletico and Dortmund also normally don´t sign genuine world class players either. They develop the vast majority of them by themselves. The closest things to such transfers were Falcao in 2010 and Reus in 2012 and even in these cases I would argue, that they really made their last step towards the absolute elite there.
People argue that Liverpool should have the funds to finance super star tranfers and wages, which is something I don´t agree with. It would not be enough to simply match the supreme wages of the European elite, they would have to pay over the odds to attract them, similar to what City did and still does. And for that they don´t have the financial capacity.
Is it true that Lallana was Southampton's most substituted player last season?
only just noticed the new spelling change to the thread title.Just checked and he was subbed around 20 times so probably, yeah. Heard that's because he runs himself into the ground and doesn't quite have the stamina to last 90 minutes every week, but you'd need a Southampton fan to explain properly.
?
It has been the same since I remember this thread.
I'm sure it was Brenton before?
It's amazing how as soon as someone becomes part of the Liverpool setup they develop that victim mentality that allows them to speak such utter bull as if they truly believe it.
Ah I see. Pretty sure about the Brent part. Don't know if it was 'an' or 'on' afterwards.
Something like that. It's just pure rubbish that Liverpool can't sign players better than those that they've signed, particularly when you look at the fees involved.
It doesn't even necessarily have to be the biggest names, but they could certainly have been more ambitious with their spending than bringing in the players they did for the prices they did.
If you look at some of the transfers this window, with the exception of a couple of United's dealings, there's not really anything that Liverpool couldn't have afforded. Fabregas for £27 million, Remy for £10 million, Felipe Luis for £15 million, Fernando for £12 million, Sanchez for £35 million, Welbeck for £16 million, Debuchy for £12 million, Mangala for £32 million and Costa for £30 million are all pretty decent fees. Rodgers had a go at Spurs' spending last summer, but even then they picked up Eriksen for £11 million and Chadli for £7 million, and they got Vertonghen for £10 million the year before.
It's not just been a problem with Rodgers' spending, but Liverpool have had a poor transfer policy for a number of years now, starting at the end of Benitez's time at the club. The only difference is, is that Rodgers keeps moaning about it. Last season it was "if you spend £100 million you should be winning the league" and now he's spent £100 million it's "I've got a third of the budget of some teams," which is simply untrue. Liverpool had been guilty of overpaying for squad players and wasting money on shite for a number of years. It's all well and good going "but who would they buy instead" when there are plenty of players out there, some who moved for similar or lower fees, that would have improved their squad and would probably have been affordable had they not wasted money elsewhere.
Just so it's not a pure Rodgers' bashing, here's some of the transfers Liverpool have made over the last few years that I think have represented either pure bad business or overpaying:
Benitez - Aquliani for £17 million, Johnson for £17.5 million Keane for £20 million, Dossena for £7 million, and Babel for £12 million.
Hodgson - Wilson for £2 million, Poulsen for £4.5 million, and Konchesky for £3.5 million.
Dalglish - Carroll for £35 million, Adam for £7 million, Downing for £18.5 million, Coates for £5 million, and whilst he had a good season last season, given the time of the purchase and his initial contribution, Henderson for £16 million was pretty steep.
Rodgers - Borini for £10 million, Allen for £15 million, Assaidi for £3 million, Alberto for £7 million, Aspas for £7 million, Mignolet for £9 million, Sakho for £15 million, Ilori for £7 million, Lambert for £4.5 million, Lallana for £25 million, Markovic for £20 million, Lovren for £20 million, and Origi for £10 million.
There are more players picked up for 1 or 2 million here and there that haven't ever done anything. If they'd managed their finances better, Liverpool could be in a much better position than they are currently.
I was just saying the argument that "Liverpool can't attract top players" is perfectly fair. I'm not sure who you can point to in that list that suggests otherwise? They obviously couldn't get Sánchez, Fábregas, Mangala or Costa because the teams that were in for them could offer a lot more. Liverpool are not viable title contenders in the way City or Chelsea are so any time they compete against them in the market they're going to lose. The only way they could beat off their competition is if they offer them significantly more money as Sphaero says.
It's all well and good saying "well if they didn't buy so-and-so they could've offered that", but again I don't think that's how it works. They'd be breaking their wage structure in a big way by bringing these players in and that's likely to have a domino effect. When it comes to wages you have to look at it from a long-term point of view and until Liverpool have re-established themselves as a regular CL team I don't think they can afford to offer Fábregas £180k to make him even consider them as an option. Even then I'm not sure he would've considered them. That's something that is entirely outside of Rodgers' and Liverpool's control.
Yes there are good players available at good prices if you look around but Liverpool have found these players as well. They bought Sturridge, Suárez and Coutinho for ~£43m - less than Falcao is costing us. Yes you can point to them wasting money on players but how many teams can you point to that haven't? There's certainly a long list of signings that United made that haven't worked out or haven't been "value" signings. Yes the likes of Dortmund or Atlético have a terrific record in that sense in recent times but that's because they have a great infrastructure that they've built up through years of good work. Rodgers has come into a club that doesn't really have that. I'm not sure any club in England really has that to be honest, Arsenal are the closest thing to it but they're not at the same level.
I honestly don't get this criticism of Liverpool when we've shown just how difficult it is to bring in top players. You either pay a massive premium just to compete with PSG, City, Chelsea and co. as we did with Di María, or you accept that they simply have more to offer at this particular moment and pursue other options (as we did in the case of Fábregas/Herrera). Liverpool are in an even worse position than us in that sense because they have a manager that isn't particularly well known outside of England, they have a much smaller budget in terms of the whole package and they're even less of a sure thing when it comes to regular contention for titles in the long-term. There's nothing they can do about any of that. Rodgers knows this and knows he has a massive challenge on his hands to get in the CL again and he's just managing expectations by bringing up the argument about money.
Far, far too early to be judging our transfer business. Rodgers' comments were weird though.
Rubbish. Many here, including myself, have been highlighting Rodgers' poor transfer record with twelve months or more. This summer has just exacerbated the problem.
You cannot judge signings after 4 games (when not all of them have even played all four games).
You can when its Brendon's players. You can't when its LvG's.
Honestly Barney, its like the first time you've come onto Redcafe.
I think Liverpool have a lot further to go than some of their fans would care to believe. Yes they're playing attractive/exciting football but for every week they do that they have a bad week too. You've only got to look at the table tonight after 4 games. Every man and his dog agrees United have had a howler of a start, yet we're one place/one point behind Liverpool who's fans are convinced this is the return they've been waiting for since a quarter of a decade ago. I know it's like a broken record but looking at them this season already you just can't see them coming anywhere near last season for the reasons we've been over a hundred times before. Rodgers making excuses so early in the season isn't good is it?
We've played Spurs and City away already, whereas your fixtures so far read like a championship fixture list.
But Spurs are shit aren't they? Or are you now saying different? you've played bigger teams and fell flat. if you wanna repeat last season or hit top 4 you have to beat those "bigger" teams.
Why is Brenton now called Brentan ?
They're in the top 7 mini-league and no team in there is shit. City away we were always expected to lose (admittedly I thought we could get a result), it's at Anfield when I think we have to expect to win. We lost to City at the Etihad last season too and still finished second so that point doesn't really hold true.
Because his name is Brendan and not Brendon.
The fake tan.
60 minutes Adam
This myth was already proven to be false in the Lallana thread by a United supporter.
Which LVG signings. Shaw, Blind, Falcao, Rojo didn't played until today's match and Herrera and Di Maria only played one half. How in the world would you judge them.You can when its Brendon's players. You can't when its LvG's.
Honestly Barney, its like the first time you've come onto Redcafe.
And if you want to judge them after today's match you a free to do that
Which LVG signings. Shaw, Blind, Falcao, Rojo didn't played until today's match and Herrera and Di Maria only played one half. How in the world would you judge them.
And if you want to judge them after today's match you a free to do that
I think you missed the point. I'm not judging either set of players, nor is Barney.
Infact i didn't missed the point. You just wanted to be smart without thinking much.I think you missed the point. I'm not judging either set of players, nor is Barney.
- Status