|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
Clearly we have to be competitive but just throwing money at it is not the answer all the top clubs like utd and arsenal who operate in the real world have a wage structure. Liverpool s wage to turnover ratio was out f control and FSG had todo something about it especially those players sitting around on huge wages not even in the first team. Also spare a thought that increasingly rare beast the supporters who actually watch the team at anfield players wages are the reason it's £50 a game now so spare some thought for the long term future football. And careex we last won the league 23 years ago despite paying and wasting some hefty wage bills over those 23 years.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,163
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,163 |
me too! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,163
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,163 |
Clearly we have to be competitive but just throwing money at it is not the answer all the top clubs like utd and arsenal who operate in the real world have a wage structure. Liverpool s wage to turnover ratio was out f control and FSG had todo something about it especially those players sitting around on huge wages not even in the first team. Also spare a thought that increasingly rare beast the supporters who actually watch the team at anfield players wages are the reason it's £50 a game now so spare some thought for the long term future football. And careex we last won the league 23 years ago despite paying and wasting some hefty wage bills over those 23 years. Agreed. But we've finished outside of the top 4 for the last 4 years. Spending less money and missing out on top players won't get us back in, I can promise you that. We finished 2nd in 2009 and our wage bill and transfers are higher now. We've got a new record breaking kit deal and the new TV deal is much bigger than ever before. The commercial side of the business is doing enough to support additional spend but the money isn't forthcoming for some reason. We can't afford to trade blows with chelsea or manchester but we CAN afford to compete with spurs and arsenal. FSG are choosing not to. Not only that but they want to spend LESS money on the team to make us better!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,605
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,605 |
So you think small wages is the key to success? Good luck with that one! Our past failings have been down to crap players on big wages, not good players on big wages. You can't blame the wages.
Don't spurs and Arsenal have some kind of wage limit in place? Those are the 2 teams we need to be competing with. We should be able to match their salaries and there is no reason why the 3 of us shouldn't be battling it out for 4th place.
There's no point in tryin to compete with Chelsea, Utd or City as they will just rause the stakes and bankrupt us. If we aren't paying our players as much as spurs and arsenal then we aren't going to be anywhere near 4th place. I very much agree with those points CarheeX. Well put! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,824
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,824 |
We are not in the Champions League. The money increases on the commercial side are merely compensating for that lack of earnings in those figures... Its not as if Rodgers has spent a little bit of money. Sturridge, Borini and Allen combine to near £40m... With Coutinho and Ince, that is potentially near £55m this year alone. The money is set to increase NEXT year; businesses balance risk and reward. Risky business is not good for football, hence not spending it now. Not least because of the potential fall if we fail and have to try and remedy those mistakes as well. How much do you guys think we should overspend to get back in. You're living in dreamland. There are financial regulations too now you do realise?!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,824
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,824 |
As for the original post. The salary cap is fair; dependent on the max wage and exceptions obviously. I think big-name signings wouldn't be capped but obviously proof is only when it happens. I don't think the policy to sign young players is bad. I do so regular on my football manager teams, and I consider myself a good one. I do think it is bad if the team isn't competing. As of now we aren't so there is more risk in the strategy short-term.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
if we don't compete on all fronts including transfer cost and wages we don't compete on the pitch, theres no realistic option but to secure players of quality to match the big boys and we wont do it by cutting wages and transfer costs, that's a self defeating policy.
FSG's actions to date all have the hallmark of the corporate raider about them, ie getting the club into shape for a sell off, if they were serious about building the club back to the top they'd be going all out for that 4th place and quite clearly they're not going all out for that. They can hardly be foolish enough to think they can compete with Man U, City, Chelsea, and Arsenal bu buying mid to low table quality players and young 'potentials' that policy is already shown to be a failure.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,605
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,605 |
Not only that: The majority of the prospects have so far been of bad quality and over the top expensive.
Why on earth gamble for Allen and Borini for a total of about £ 16.3 M + £ 11.4 M = £ 27.7 M when they clearly weren't bought cheap and/or for the future?
Mindboggling really!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,163
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,163 |
Absolutely, You get what you pay for unless you've got top class scouts. But we haven't.
My big problem about this isn't that we are setting a vague salary limit, as I think that is a very good idea. My issue is that we are setting it way below what we can afford and way below the teams we should be competing with. As Annefield58 points out, FSGs policies reek of an exit strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
if we don't compete on all fronts including transfer cost and wages we don't compete on the pitch, theres no realistic option but to secure players of quality to match the big boys and we wont do it by cutting wages and transfer costs, that's a self defeating policy.
FSG's actions to date all have the hallmark of the corporate raider about them, ie getting the club into shape for a sell off, if they were serious about building the club back to the top they'd be going all out for that 4th place and quite clearly they're not going all out for that. They can hardly be foolish enough to think they can compete with Man U, City, Chelsea, and Arsenal bu buying mid to low table quality players and young 'potentials' that policy is already shown to be a failure. But then they wont get a high price when they sell. A club who can compete for Champions League is always going to be worth more than a bottom half team. I would say with such a policy they would be planning to stay much longer and manage in a sustainable manner. They are hoping that ffp rules will force other teams to cut their expenditure and that our youngsters will be able to get us to compete for honours in a a few years. Once that happens, then the value of the club will increase and they would make their huge margin selling. Looks good on paper, but, will it work? I am not convinced
|
|
|
|
|
