KopTalk

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
wilkij1975 #542983 03/09/16 10:43 PM
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 691
A
Under 18 Player
Under 18 Player
A Offline
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 691
Originally Posted By wilkij1975
We still spent close on £70m. That was only surpased by the 'top 4' and Spurs (by £3m). Not a bad outlay for the fifth richest club in the country when only the top 4 and one other out spent you. All the players that left which led to the net spend argument were destined to leave regardless of what we spent as they were mainly all shitte.

You can read into it what you want but I'll go with the most sensible and logical one and that's that we spent good money and got rid of players we didn't need or want. No conspiracy just plain old facts and I would bet you good money that FSG will still be in charge next summer and for a fair few beyond that too, like it or not.


I understand the theory of what your saying wilk but to say the owners could be there for a few seasons might be near impossible to call. Lets just say we dont qualify for top 4, or even finish 6/7/8 this season. Fans will look at that and go ok we have a world class manager so why isnt this working. We've had a club legend manager us who left, we had a young manager who was let go and now we have a really top manager and its not working.

The fans are underestimated I think both on here and in every aspect of football. What I mean by that is that if FSG were thinking of selling and the fans were happy with things at the club, they could get top dollar. Whereas if there was protests and questions about the ownership, potential buyers will come in with low bids. When FSG's pocket is affected thats when they will "cash out".


I think people are misunderstanding when people like myself and others bring up the net spend because I 100% agree with everyone we sold. But for me personally although we arent in Europe I think the squad is small. By that I mean, theres very little competition in places. Some members of Liverpool team know they are guaranteed their spot in the starting 11. I wouldve liked to see us sell all the players we did, but also buy 1st team players in a lot more positions. Some of the past 11 players would then be moved to the bench or squad. Ill give you an example, We loan Markovic whos a winger, we move Lallana to the bench and play "Midtable Mane" smile. Id like to see this be applied to other positions like the CM and even AM positions to have more competition.

Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936
1st Team Squad
1st Team Squad
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936
I've got no problem shipping players out who haven't performed and using the money towards better acquisitions...minefield i know, but there's hope at least one or 2 that come in are better than the ones that have gone! However it was clear that with that tv money it was going to drive transfer values up for the forseeable future. For us to not address the squad deficiencies fully and when i state that, you only have to look at our recent history with that defence and the same old perpetrators...Mignolet & Moreno...then it is incompetent (which after 6 years is getting tedious under FSG) or just plain greed for the status quo!
We had an extra 10m or so from transfers and the 81m from the tv money, to not get a proper LB and DM and possibly another CB is pathetic! I don't believe for one moment that this is ALL Klopp's decision making...history with FSG has shown us that!
JWH said when he came to the club back in 2010 that we must be up their challenging within 5 years with Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal & Man City, it's been 6 years and we are no better off!
Defend FSG all you like...yes! lovely! we're great financially but we are [oops] poor where it matters to us as fans...
ON THE PITCH!

Last edited by Redneckscouser; 04/09/16 03:19 AM.
#542993 04/09/16 08:01 AM
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Originally Posted By sixtiesred
Originally Posted By wilkij1975
We still spent close on £70m. That was only surpased by the 'top 4' and Spurs (by £3m). Not a bad outlay for the fifth richest club in the country when only the top 4 and one other out spent you. All the players that left which led to the net spend argument were destined to leave regardless of what we spent as they were mainly all shitte.

You can read into it what you want but I'll go with the most sensible and logical one and that's that we spent good money and got rid of players we didn't need or want. No conspiracy just plain old facts and I would bet you good money that FSG will still be in charge next summer and for a fair few beyond that too, like it or not.


yes wilks thats true but lets be honest most fans would of expected us to be in an above net spend situation due to new manager, his first window , we dont have any TC players! we needed a lot of class players to come in realistically to be a serious contender but we balanced the books instead ? not a conspiracy just it looks that way especially if you have companies looking at a take over or a major share holding

what we have done is shored up a leaky ship probably ensuring we dont do any worse than last year maybe a bit of an improvement but not what you would of expected if you were serious about trying to win the title ! what do you think the objective was with the buys and sells we made then? whats your best guess as to what fsg wanted out of this window? to win the title or go close or impress a potential buyer that you dont have to spend big to stay in the money positions in the epl i mean we havnt even solved the two most irritating positions lb and dm so what was the main objective of this window
not having a go at ya or anything like that! i respect your opinion wilks! because it just dont feel right to me it seems this window was not for footballing improvement more how the business side looks
just in my opinion


My personal feeling is that this is all Klopps doing. He had a good clear out at Dortmund when he got there and was never a big spender.

I think he didn't want to flood the team with too many new faces as we have before as its easier to integrate a few than lots as we've seen in previous years.

The players in have for me improved our first 11 and had we got a LB, I don't think there's many who would've complained. But if the right deal wasn't there I'm glad he didn't just buy someone for the sake of it.

We also got more than most would've thought we would for the players we sold which is a good thing and has reduced the net spend.

wilkij1975 #542995 04/09/16 08:34 AM
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,849
T
Under 23 Player
Under 23 Player
T Offline
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,849
Originally Posted By wilkij1975
Originally Posted By sixtiesred
Originally Posted By wilkij1975
We still spent close on £70m. That was only surpased by the 'top 4' and Spurs (by £3m). Not a bad outlay for the fifth richest club in the country when only the top 4 and one other out spent you. All the players that left which led to the net spend argument were destined to leave regardless of what we spent as they were mainly all shitte.

You can read into it what you want but I'll go with the most sensible and logical one and that's that we spent good money and got rid of players we didn't need or want. No conspiracy just plain old facts and I would bet you good money that FSG will still be in charge next summer and for a fair few beyond that too, like it or not.


yes wilks thats true but lets be honest most fans would of expected us to be in an above net spend situation due to new manager, his first window , we dont have any TC players! we needed a lot of class players to come in realistically to be a serious contender but we balanced the books instead ? not a conspiracy just it looks that way especially if you have companies looking at a take over or a major share holding

what we have done is shored up a leaky ship probably ensuring we dont do any worse than last year maybe a bit of an improvement but not what you would of expected if you were serious about trying to win the title ! what do you think the objective was with the buys and sells we made then? whats your best guess as to what fsg wanted out of this window? to win the title or go close or impress a potential buyer that you dont have to spend big to stay in the money positions in the epl i mean we havnt even solved the two most irritating positions lb and dm so what was the main objective of this window
not having a go at ya or anything like that! i respect your opinion wilks! because it just dont feel right to me it seems this window was not for footballing improvement more how the business side looks
just in my opinion


My personal feeling is that this is all Klopps doing. He had a good clear out at Dortmund when he got there and was never a big spender.

I think he didn't want to flood the team with too many new faces as we have before as its easier to integrate a few than lots as we've seen in previous years.

The players in have for me improved our first 11 and had we got a LB, I don't think there's many who would've complained. But if the right deal wasn't there I'm glad he didn't just buy someone for the sake of it.

We also got more than most would've thought we would for the players we sold which is a good thing and has reduced the net spend.


I agree, though this could mean potential targets this year are missed for good. but unless klavan plays centre back and left back, instead we should of signed a left back perhaps.

My opinion differs I still think people would have complained as there wasn't any big names, unless we class mane as one, and areas like forward and DM haven't been addressed as there hasn't been enough action (player replacement) in that department people will feel, klopp has done it his way (final say of transfers-given responsibility) with the sharks.

yes that's also true but if we don't make top four, not buying for the sake of it could be costly even if long term more thought-through, klopp has put his trust in his team. and I doubt there isn't several left backs out there who could have made us more solid, coentrao for instance, it's not good enough to say we didn't come to the right deal.

Welsh_Wizard #543093 07/09/16 05:38 PM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Originally Posted By Welsh_Wizard
Just a matter of the 1 billion figure being reached.

tbh I can't see anyone paying that much.

I doubt FSG will be too bother even if that bid does not happen.

If they make 200million in TV money each season then why sell


200 million in TV money doesn't mean 200m profits, a huge share of this will go in the pockets of players, selling clubs and agents

Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
I see this has all gone quiet? No real surprise!

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,605
V
1st Team Squad
1st Team Squad
V Offline
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,605
No.

This kind of business often tend to be time consuming - unless the club is facing administration, which it did the last time a takeover was seriously mentioned.

It might have gone dead, but it might aswell be on its' way - slowly but steadily.

For me there is no immediate rush since the transfer window has shut. Nothing much to do until January 1:st anyway.

Hope all is settled and done long before then!

Last edited by van Gogh; 07/09/16 08:18 PM.
Page 6 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  KopTalk Team 

Link Copied to Clipboard
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
Advertisements
Liverpool FC Discussion