Up to now, considering the genuine restriction we have re-finance and non-CL status, I think the purchases have been pretty consistent with a 'project' - much more sensible than what was happening with KK at the helm, I would say. However, Suarez was/is pivotal to the plan in a way that no other player is. I think the team has been built around him and his direct style has been deliberately 'allowed for' despite its discrepancy with Rodgers more measured 'possession and attrition' approach. Such is Suarez's talent that he has had to be incorporated somehow - only the most dogmatic would have not tried to include such a colossal talent.
Which is why, if at all possible - even at the expense of considerable upheaval, the club must hold him to contract. The things some people are ranting about (biting, racism etc) with such zeal would provoke, a far milder reaction if he were to commit to LFC.
If we keep Suarez, it sends a positive message of intent. Letting him go is almost an admission that he's 'too good for us'. If I were Rodgers I'd be saying nothing at all in public. Privately, with the player, my stance would be - we understand your position, I'm even, perhaps, sympathetic but the fact is, I'm building a future that has to include you. We're not selling you - particularly to a rival, end of. You can like or lump it. Either you play for a glorious future or sit in the stands. Ultimately, football is about dreams - and is propped up by passionate fans that invest too much. Suarez needs to understand that he's arrived / contracted to LFC at a critical period in the club's enormous history. We're at a crossroads. If the wrong message is sent re-ambition, at this point, it could, I think, take 5% intensity off every player in a Liverpool shirt for three years.
