KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Is Rodgers in control?

Just a few questions for you Vish... Feel free to not respond, I'm just interested to know.

1. What do you make of Arsenal's bid for Suarez. Do you think there is real intent to try and sign him? Most outlets have reported that the club would only sell him for £55m, and the papers claim Arsenal would entice him with £150k wages. You either believe that or not I guess...

2. Why do you think "the longer it takes, the harder it gets"? Surely there is always a limit to how good a team is/can be? Or do you believe that teams today are always better than those that have passed, i.e. believing that a teams strength is always cumulative if better players are bought?!

3. You did reason that there are supplementary ways in which FSG can make money. What I would say, is how much credit do you give FSG when they have done this to Boston Red Sox: http://www.forbes.com/teams/boston-red-sox/
http://www.forbes.com/mlb-valuations/list/

The report says the club is now worth over 3x the value they bought the team at. Are rated now as the 3rd highest value team in MLB. They have built revenues exceptionally over the course of the last 10 years, and are even maintaining a high level on player salaries to ensure they stay there. Just wondering whether you feel that seeing that change might give you food for thought on just how big FSGs intentions might be...

What a stupid question. Well who else to blame? It would hardly Mabel the tea ladies fault would it?

I am not feeling forced to respond and here they are:

1. Yes, I think that Arsenal has a real intent and understand that competing for top trophies is not possible without top players which Suarez is. Top players are expensive and just buying Suarez will show ambition to win the EPL/CL that will help to both attract other players and keep those who might feel that they will not win much by staying at Arsenal (as it has been with RVP, Fabregas Nasri etc in the past). It will be like a statement of intent that they are going to target big things and they are walking the talk.

2. I think that the longer it takes the harder it gets because we get in a vicious circle (as we are now) as opposed to a virtuous one. Why? When you are in the CL you have more revenues and exposure worldwide and therefore can afford to buy better players which in turn helps you to achieve higher targets (higher revenues again), sell more merchandise (people are always proud to be associated with success) and attract bigger sponsors, more money again to buy better players and so on (virtuous circle). When you are not in the CL, your revenues are lower, you cannot afford to buy better players, your RELATIVE brand value drops and it becomes more and more difficult to compete, you get in the vicious circle. To get in the virtuous circle you need a step change (jump) that usually comes with investment to bridge the gap. The problem with organic growth is that most teams will have it anyway so it very difficult to close the gap on those who are already above you. What makes it even more complex in the EPL is that there is a huge difference between 4th and 5th in terms of revenue generation potential because of CL qualification.

3. I give FSG a lot of credit for what they have done at Red Sox, they have been very successful at improving the value of their asset (a primary goal for any investor), which is, I am sure their intention with LFC. I admit that I don't know what they did exactly there but, think that that they used the well documented Moneyball approach. I feel they are trying to do the same with us and from what I have seen so far, will not get us where I would like LFC to be (competing for the EPL and CL in the next couple of years). I have one real example to look at, which is Arsenal who you would agree hasn't won much since they started that philosophy (because of their new stadium), in fact they seem to be changing it now (point 1 above). For us it will be even more difficult as the EPL has changed with 4 rich teams now. So either FFP changes the football business environment, if FSG wants the value of LFC to increase as Red Sox, they will have no option but to invest (stadium and players) and then work on self sustainment, else, their long term will end up being very long term, and we will all be dead. This is how I see things.

Does anybody here know how many so called RICH teams there are in the MLB? Did the moneyball approach work there?

Well, from the lack of an answer on the topić it would appear you dont know either. I am not afraid to admit i dont know something. Just like I am about to become probably one of very few posters to say the following "I WAS WRONG". I was wrong when i said Suarez would stay, i strongly believe he is going, to Madrid might I add, not arsenal. But i could be wrong about that too.

no shame in admitting to being wrong, the shame is in not being man enough to admit to your mistakes.

I really can't believe that you think Arsenal will near treble their previous most expensive transfer ever, and break their wage budget, for a player now. It is like everyone has forgotten how Arsene Wenger works in the market. I may well be forced to eat my words, but I don't see Suarez leaving for Arsenal, and I don't see Arsene putting enough money to make us sell. I don't see him doing anything other than trying to disrupt us in our pursuit of catching them, by unsettling our key man.

I understand your points about revenue, and branding, and investment. I do agree that being in the CL makes it much easier to stay in the CL. But in the last four seasons, 1 team has always fallen out of that top four. And the teams that have filled that spot, have on average spent just £26.75M, and brought in £30M. Yes, on average, these teams make a profit and still make the top 4. I am not saying "lets stick to those principles" but it does suggest that spending lots of money is not necessarily the reason behind them making 4th!

Why would their approach not work for us? You're taking their approach as being their entire 3 year period, when they have completely altered the make-up of the manager, transfer dealings and everything close to the training field this season.

Either way, I am glad you brought Arsenal up, because I want to prove you wrong, definitively, in your comparison of us and them. And guess what, I can do that, because Arsenal's NET SPEND in the last 9 years (which for the record includes the year they last won the title) has been... £1.75M... That is less than £200k a year. How is that comparable to us?! We have a NET SPEND, under FSG of £71M. On average, given that they have only been at the club for 2.5 season, that is a NET SPEND of £14.2M per transfer window. £28.4M A SEASON. In that same period the club have spent £185.65M, which for the record, doesn't include this seasons values. Before this window, the club had spent £55M less than Arsenal have in 9 seasons, over 2 and a half. Over those 9 Seasons, Arsenal have spent just shy of £240M, and we have spent just over £185M in 2 and a half. How is that comparison viable?!

No no, you are always right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTJSt4wP2ME&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Interesting posts from both you and Vish, JJ. Obviously i understand Vish' concern and points but i tend to agree with you JJ. Good post.

To answer prolific's question about rich teams in the MLB, the Dodgers and of course the Yankees are probably the two richest teams right now, and the Red Sox would probably be considered a rich team, third behind those two, at least in terms of spending.

The league is very different though. It's more even, in terms of who could win the title, and there are far many more contenders.

It's not about me thinking or not about Arsenal's seriousness in buying Suarez, they have made a bid that apparently matches the release clause and it is even reported than Suarez will be allowed to talk to them. They could be bluffing, but then, how do we know unless we call their bluff, the proff is that they have made a 40m+1 bid.

When I was refering to Arsenal's philosophy, it was not to compare transfer spent, but more of a philosophy of not buying expensive players but rather players with potential as it seems we are trying now. As you said, our net spent in the last 9 years has been higher that theirs but we used to at least match their performance until 3-4 years back. In the last 9 years we still won more trophies than them. Excluding FSG's ownership, we have been more successful than them since they started to repay their stadium. I agree that we haven't been as stingy as them in terms of transfers, but then, just qualifying for the CL is not the benchmark I want to follow, even if it can be very profitable (Arsenal has been able to self finance a new stadium).

It looks like there are at least 4 teams above us that can afford to spend more than us (City, Chelsea, United and now Arsenal). The first step would be to get in that top 4 and regularly. With our philosophy of a net spend of 25m (generated by a self sustained LFC), who do you then think we are going to knock off?