Liverpool Signings and General Rumours Thread

el rabitos

PHB wrote:

I think that's been Benetiz's problem. He didn't want to try get the best out of Houlliers players, and instead of using Houlliers riftraft, he has brought in his own.
Now finally he thinks he has a squad he can work with, but in reality, it's not much better than it was after his first, bar a few notable exceptions.

he didnt want to try? i distinctly remember him hauling that particular squad to the champions league final, my memory might be a little sketchy aswell, but i think that squad won the thing aswell. i'd say he got just about the best out of that squad that he was going to get.

PHB wrote:

His actions in the transfer market have ensured that Liverpool can only start to consider competing for the league now. IMO, he should have brought in top players using Houlliers squad, rather than making it entirely his squad, and then bringing in top players.

That would be my major critcism of him.

The best example of it was say this summer.
Benetiz signed Pennant and Bellamy.
He couldn't afford Alves.

He had the choice between keeping Cisse and buying Alves
or buying Pennant and Bellamy.

i would say his actions in the transfer market have ensured that liverpool could continue to win silverware and still compete for champions league football. houllier left him a hell of alot of dead wood, and not your average dead wood, but well paid dead wood and the hardest dead wood to sell.

in overhauling his whole playing squad and keeping the team competative, benitez has worked a minor miracle.

he has earned the right to be given a significant amount of transfer funds imo. he's shown he can work with very little. he should have at least earned a measure of trust from those above him at this stage.

and if he is not backed in a way that allows him to compete for the best players i think he'd be well within his right to walk, he has little else to prove, imo he's done his bit and now its time for the people above him to back him and do some proper work

The Muppet

el rabitos wrote:

compare that to what utd and chelsea have been spending and you'll see how much "support" he's had.

benitez has had to put alot more time in at the office and has had to do alot more work with the money he's been given than fergie, wenger and mourinho.

competes favourably? far from it.

Have you read the tranfer budget thread? Only Mourinho has had more financial backing from his board than Benitze.

Wont it ? He has a net spend of 44m over the last 3 years. His biggest transfer was 10.5m and during that time he has got them to the champions league final twice, won it once, won the FA Cup, finished 5th, 3rd & 3rd and on a record amount of points for the club. Also in this time he has completely transformed the squad itself. Look how much of the fist team has been brought in under Rafa.

Reina, Arbeloa, Agger, Aurelio, Sissoko, Mascherano, Alonso, Pennant, Garcia, Kuyt, Crouch...

He has actaual spend of around £100 million in the last three years and his First team was still way off the pace last season, they were effectivly out of the running for the premiership in Novemeber.

Reports in this mornings papers say that the yanks have blocked his attemps to sign new players, Why do you think they would be doing that?
[EMAIL="It@s"]It's[/EMAIL] pretty obvious to me.

You (and others) have said as much before but so far you've not indicated how the money could have been better spent.

I'm just saying as I see it. Invested the £100 million in better players would be a good start, What's the youth policy at Anfield like thes days, any Owen's Gerrards or Carraghers coming through? I believe Benitz has largely ignored that aspect of the club.

houllier left him a hell of alot of dead wood, and not your average dead wood, but well paid dead wood and the hardest dead wood to sell.

Thats not true. Houlier finished second in the league and the team that won the champions league in 95 consisted largely of Houlier players.

el rabitos

The Muppet wrote:

Have you read the tranfer budget thread? Only Mourinho has had more financial backing from his board than Benitze.

i think that thread is a waste of bandwitdh. the margin for error in every figure entered is astronomical.

The Muppet wrote:

He has actaual spend of around £100 million in the last three years and his First team was still way off the pace last season, they were effectivly out of the running for the premiership in Novemeber.

no, he's actually got a net spend of like 44 million or something. he hasnt simply been given 100 million. i dont know why you persist in bringing up that figure when its clear that he's had to sell in order to buy.

The Muppet wrote:

Reports in this mornings papers say that the yanks have blocked his attemps to sign new players, Why do you think they would be doing that?
[EMAIL="It@s"]It's[/EMAIL] pretty obvious to me.

reports in the papers say alot of things. reports said he'd have 200 million to spend at one stage.

The Muppet wrote:

Invested the £100 million in better players would be a good start, What's the youth policy at Anfield like thes days, any Owen's Gerrards or Carraghers coming through? I believe Benitz has largely ignored that aspect of the club.

again with the 100 million...

when the well dries up the well dries up. benitez picking players that are not up to par would simply be at the detriment to the current first team. if players we're good enough, i doubt he'd simply ignore them.

i dont think fergie or mourinho are in a position to be bragging about their youth players at the moment either.

Peyton Manning

el rabitos wrote:

i dont think fergie or mourinho are in a position to be bragging about their youth players at the moment either.

Evans, Wellbeck, Cathcart are three hotter prospects than anything Liverpool have to offer.

PiE

The Muppet wrote:

Have you read the tranfer budget thread? Only Mourinho has had more financial backing from his board than Benitze.

???

From some of your own handiwork, net spend/average spend:

Rafa:    £62,470,000	£20,823,333
Fergie:  £95,370,000	£31,790,000

And yes, net spend is all that any new owners are going to care about.

If it emerges that the new owners are reneging on their promise to back Benitez 100% and cause him to walk, the anti-Glazer protests of a few years back will look pretty hospitable in comparison.

Something tells me there'd be a lot fewer posts from several people in this thread if this years CL final had gone to Liverpool.

el rabitos

Archimedes wrote:

Evans, Wellbeck, Cathcart are three hotter prospects than anything Liverpool have to offer.

because your an authorithy on youth prospects? havent liverpools "prospects" won the youth cup the last 2 years in a row? i still dont rate any of them as potential first team stars. i havent been talking up any of liverpools youth prospects. theres only 1 club in the top 4 that can brag about giving youth a try and we know who that is

Peyton Manning

.....and look where thats got them this season.

The Muppet

el rabitos wrote:

i think that thread is a waste of bandwitdh. the margin for error in every figure entered is astronomical.


again with the 100 million...

.

I think the transfer budget thread shows the reality of the situation regarding transfers and rubbishes the myth that Benitz has not recieved substantial financial backing from his board.

The £100 million again is because it is correct, that is the figure he has spent on players.

From some of your own handiwork, net spend/average spend:

Rafa:    £62,470,000    £20,823,333

Fergie:  £95,370,000    £31,790,000

I don't know what those random figures are about, you would have to explain what they represent .

Here are the figures from the spreadsheet. They represent the totals uo to the end of 06/07 season. We can add this summers signings when all clubs have completed their business. That will be the best way to get a fair reflection of the situation.

                     net            average per year
Benitez		£54,620,000	£18,206,667
Fergie		£49,870,000	£16,623,333

el rabitos

The Muppet wrote:

I think the transfer budget thread shows the reality of the situation regarding transfers and rubbishes the myth that Benitz has not recieved substantial financial backing from his board.

The £100 million again is because it is correct, that is the figure he has spent on players.

ok, then answer me this...

what are the sources for the information on the thread?

take this expample.

player x joins spurs for 3 million, if he plays 20 games, the fee goes up to 4 million, if he scores 10 goals the fee goes up to 4.5 million, if spurs qualify for europe the fee goes up to 5 million

now when player x has joined spurs everywhere is reporting that he has signed for 3 million, when in reality the fee was actually 5million.

when you have exact figures from reliable sources, come back to me with your "facts" about what benitez or anyone has spent, because if your basing clubs spending on whats coming out of the figures in that thread then your off with the fairys or little miss piggy or something.

The Muppet

el rabitos wrote:

ok, then answer me this...

what are the sources for the information on the thread?

take this expample.

player x joins spurs for 3 million, if he plays 20 games, the fee goes up to 4 million, if he scores 10 goals the fee goes up to 4.5 million, if spurs qualify for europe the fee goes up to 5 million

now when player x has joined spurs everywhere is reporting that he has signed for 3 million, when in reality the fee was actually 5million.

when you have exact figures from reliable sources, come back to me with your "facts" about what benitez or anyone has spent, because if your basing clubs spending on whats coming out of the figures in that thread then your off with the fairys or little miss piggy or something.

Those figures are Pepe leFrits, I,m sure he will give you the source if you ask him.

I just added the figures from 2002 to 1992 and my source for arsenal spurs and newcastle and chelsea was www.soccerbase.com .

My source for the liverpool figures was http://www.lfchistory.net/transfers.asp which you can see is a dedicated :iverpool fan site, I doubt they messed with the figures.

My source for Man United was http://soccerlens.com/manchester-united-transfers-history-2003-2006/485/ who appeard to me to be pretty accurate.

If you have better or more reliable sources or have found inaccuracies in the figures post them.

el rabitos

The Muppet wrote:

Those figures are Pepe leFrits, I,m sure he will give you the source if you ask him.

I just added the figures from 2002 to 1992 and my source for arsenal spurs and newcastle and chelsea was www.soccerbase.com .

My source for the liverpool figures was http://www.lfchistory.net/transfers.asp which you can see is a dedicated :iverpool fan site, I doubt they messed with the figures.

My source for Man United was http://soccerlens.com/manchester-united-transfers-history-2003-2006/485/ who appeard to me to be pretty accurate.

If you have better or more reliable sources or have found inaccuracies in the figures post them.

theres no such thing as a better or reliable source! the only reliable source for every single transfer is the club itself.

you'd need an exact breakdown of every single deal. the additional fee's based on the players performances. transfers are rarely as straight forward as "we'll give you 5 million for him" - "ok, deal done".

if you havent got the information directly from the club or the agent that negotiated the deal then your really just pulling numbers out of your backside.

i'll admit the idea of being able to compile a list of every teams transfer activities is interesting, but theres no way of getting the information necessary to form the list.

Chucky the tree

The Muppet wrote:

I'm just saying as I see it. Invested the £100 million in better players would be a good start, What's the youth policy at Anfield like thes days, any Owen's Gerrards or Carraghers coming through? I believe Benitz has largely ignored that aspect of the club.

LOL.


what do you base that little gem on?

mike65

Last time I looked rafa had basicly overhauled the whole youth system and has bought in about 235 players aged 16-19

Now what do folk think about something that suddenly seems half-plausible? Namely Michael Owen returning for 9 million, it seems Newcastle are becoming half-resigned to loosing him to someone else but who? Spurs, Man City, Villa all 'modest' clubs in recent history but all of whom have money to spend might be very tempted esp when Darren Bent will cost 12-14 mill. I think I'd have him back for 9.

Mike.

el rabitos

i'd welcome him back at 9 million, wouldnt expect 50 games a season out of him, but i dont think that would be required of him from benitez anyway.

worth the risk i'd say

PHB

if you havent got the information directly from the club or the agent that negotiated the deal then your really just pulling numbers out of your backside.

Do you think you can know the price of any transfer at all? Ever? If you have any problem with specific transfers, please do post, that way the spreadsheet will be more accurate.

Aside from that, I still think overhaulling the squad was the wrong way to go. After 3 years in charge, the squad is now his, but is it a huge improvement? You only have to look at the amount Benetiz wants to spend to answer that question. There's no doubt that Bellamy is probably better than Cisse, but is he that much better?

Ask yourself this question, if three years ago, rafa said, look I'm going to spend X amount (net spend is between 44-48 million), and after three years, we'll have this squad, but need to spend another 60-70 million to bring in three or four world class players. Would you accept that? Or would you just say, look, sign five or six world class players now, and use the squad you currently have.

In terms of the youth system, I was under the impression that Benetiz was very disappointed with the guy who used to be in charge, and has personally taken control of it just recently?

The Muppet

Chucky the tree wrote:

LOL.


what do you base that little gem on?

I base it on the lack of players breaking into the first team from the youth's, articles I have read and comments from fan's like el rabitos.

havent liverpools "prospects" won the youth cup the last 2 years in a row? i still dont rate any of them as potential first team stars.

Enlighten me on the youth players that are likely to make it into your first team.

el rabitos

PHB wrote:

Do you think you can know the price of any transfer at all? Ever? If you have any problem with specific transfers, please do post, that way the spreadsheet will be more accurate.

of course i think its possible to know the price of a transfer - when both sides involved in the transfer make the breakdown of the transfer details available.

now correct me if i'm wrong, but neither you or anyone that helped to compile the data in your spreadsheet are privy to the particulars of each of, or even any of the transfers made by the clubs involved in that list?

...leading me, and i'd presume anyone with a measure of common sence to come to the conclusion that the spreadsheet is a load of you know what

el rabitos

The Muppet wrote:

Enlighten me on the youth players that are likely to make it into your first team.

ME wrote:

i still dont rate any of them as potential first team stars.

consider yourself enlightened

i dont think any one player in the liverpool youth set up really stands out right now. there are a few prospects, but nobody i'd place a finger on and say, "yeh, he's going to be a star".

The Muppet

el rabitos wrote:

of course i think its possible to know the price of a transfer - when both sides involved in the transfer make the breakdown of the transfer details available.

now correct me if i'm wrong, but neither you or anyone that helped to compile the data in your spreadsheet are privy to the particulars of each of, or even any of the transfers made by the clubs involved in that list?

...leading me, and i'd presume anyone with a measure of common sence to come to the conclusion that the spreadsheet is a load of you know what

You appeared to be keen on the idea when PHB first suggested it, I suggest your change of opinion is because of the trend it displayed. Most people will see it for what it is and interesting exercise utilizing the details available to us.

Manchester United having being a public company had to declare all their dealings to the market so the information on them is likely to be very accuarate.

Details of most transfers usually surface , No one's caliming all the figures are 100% accurate but it is highly unlikely they are that far out to alter the findings.

el rabitos

The Muppet wrote:

I suggest you may think that because of the trend it displays. Most people will see it for what it is and interesting exercise utilizing the details available to us.

Manchester United having being a public company had to declare all their dealings to the market so the information on them is likely to be very accuarate.

Details of most transfers usually surface , No one's caliming all the figures are 100% accurate but it is highly unlikely they are that far out to alter the findings.

yeah, goin mad i am

Zapp Brannigan

I think Adam Hammil and Jack Hobbs are 2 players who, if given the chance, could be very good indeed.

el rabitos

The Muppet wrote:

You appeared to be keen on the idea when PHB first suggested it

i did?

Slurms wrote:

I think Adam Hammil and Jack Hobbs are 2 players who, if given the chance, could be very good indeed.

looks like rafa's faith in hammil will be shown in the coming couple of months. he seemed to have a decent run up in scotland, be intertested to see if he'll be given a shot in the first team or shipped out on loan again.

i think hobbs would have a bit of a task on his hands trying to push agger or carra for their spot. maybe a loan would do him more good than another season in the reserves

Chucky the tree

The Muppet wrote:

I base it on the lack of players breaking into the first team from the youth's, articles I have read and comments from fan's like el rabitos.


Enlighten me on the youth players that are likely to make it into your first team.

How is that Rafa's fault? He has been there 3 odd years, do you seriously think that enough time for someone too develop good youngsters?

Would you say Fergie has largely ignored the youth policy lately due too United not having any youth players coming through the ranks in a long time?

zing

PHB wrote:

I think that's been Benetiz's problem. He didn't want to try get the best out of Houlliers players, and instead of using Houlliers riftraft, he has brought in his own.

It's so so easy to say that so let's look at it a bit.

In 2004 he sold 2 main players that I can think of - Danny Murphy and Michael Owen. Murphy from what I've read wasn't happy with the changes Benitez was introducing and wanted first team guarantees, etc.. and was causing a bit of unrest withing the 'clique' and got understandably off loaded. Hardly a major issue given that Xabi was replacing him. Owen - well we all know what happened there. Rafa didn't want to sell him but Owen the club little or no choice. Oh - and he let Babel go as his contract was up.

In Jan 2005 Henchoz was released (pissed off at lack of games iirc so put in a transfer request) & he brought in a player he knew and trusted to replace him - Pellegrino - which as we all know didn't work out as he was out the door again six months later.

Summer of 2005 saw Baros (probably for not being able to follow a single command in a game and being oblivious to the other 10 people in red on the pitch), Diouf (for so so so many reasons), Nunez ('nuff said but not part of Houlier's squad) & Diarra (never actually got to play a competitive game for the club) being sold. Along with likes of Biscan & Smicer being released.

Jan 2006 saw Josemi go with Kromkamp going in to replace him.

Forward to Summber 2006 and we saw Nando (clearly hadn't worked out but again not part of the Houlier era), Traore (someone was stupid enough to give us 2m for him), Kromkamp (again not part of the Houlier era) with Cheyrou & Hamann being released as their contracts were up.

And finally Jan 07 saw Kirkland & Warnock being sold & Diao finally being put out of his & our misery.

Various loans of Houlier players along the way to see if they could cut it or just get them off the wage bill for a few months. Various other fringe or no hope players released along the way too.

Now of those Houlier players who were sold how many would you have kept ? Or to ask that question another way how many would you have let their contracts run down further and not cash in on them when you could ?

And how many of those out of contract would you have given new contracts to ?

Personally from all of those I'd like to have seen Owen kept (but only if he hadn't been such a tit) and the Kaizer given another year (but I know he wouldn't have gotten the games so was better of leaving). Of the rest I'm glad we got a few quid when where we could and just gotten the rest off the wages bill.

His actions in the transfer market have ensured that Liverpool can only start to consider competing for the league now. IMO, he should have brought in top players using Houlliers squad, rather than making it entirely his squad, and then bringing in top players.

Again apart from those in the current squad who else would you have kept ?

That would be my major critcism of him.

The best example of it was say this summer.
Benetiz signed Pennant and Bellamy.
He couldn't afford Alves.

He had the choice between keeping Cisse and buying Alves
or buying Pennant and Bellamy.

But if you recall Cisse had just broken his leg and there was no guarantee he when he would be back. The plan was to sell him and that money would have gone towards Alves or some other player further up Rafa's wish list.

IMO, one very good player and one average player is better than two good players. Benetiz did not agreed. He should have worked with what Houllier left him, rather than attempt to replace the old team.

You like to keep saying that don't you.

You've also got to bear in mind Rafa spent two years being told investment was imminent and that a nice big fat cheque book would be waiting for him. So he's worked with whatever funds he was given - and yes he has been given a fair bit to spend. He's tried to introduce a lot more depth to the squad along with width and versatility on the pitch - he's not one to pick 4-4-2 week in week out as we all know - his teams are picked after lots of assessment of the opposing teams.

PiE

The Muppet wrote:

I don't know what those random figures are about, you would have to explain what they represent.

Oh sorry, you're right. They were only taken from the latest Excel sheet posted in that transfer thread.

Here are the figures from the spreadsheet. They represent the totals uo to the end of 06/07 season. We can add this summers signings when all clubs have completed their business. That will be the best way to get a fair reflection of the situation.

Ah I see, we're picking and choosing "stats" to further our points again. Silly me.

Also: good post zing.

zing

The Muppet wrote:

Reports in this mornings papers say that the yanks have blocked his attemps to sign new players, Why do you think they would be doing that?
[EMAIL="It@s"]It's[/EMAIL] pretty obvious to me.

Ask yourself this ? If that were true do you think he'd still be there ? Seriously ? He's had no shortage of offers since he arrived so why would he stay if he didn't have the backing of Gillet/Hicks ?

What's the youth policy at Anfield like thes days, any Owen's Gerrards or Carraghers coming through? I believe Benitz has largely ignored that aspect of the club.

Ignored isn't right. There's been alot of internal politics there - he wasn't happy with various things and wanted more involvement but Heighway ruled the roost there so was telling him to fo and keep his nose out. Bear in mind that Rafa started out coaching the youth and 'B' team at Real. There's a few hopefuls at the academy who could work out but from what I can see a lot of the promising youth team are players that Rafa himself has brought in.

Thats not true. Houlier finished second in the league and the team that won the champions league in 95 consisted largely of Houlier players.

We won it in '95 as well ? Cool..

As for finishing second in '02 I often wonder if Thomo had been left in charge for that whole season would we have won it. Oh well...

Stky10

mike65 wrote:

Now what do folk think about something that suddenly seems half-plausible? Namely Michael Owen returning for 9 million

Personally I wouldn't touch him. He's now nothing like the player he was when he left. He's like Ronaldo (the brazilian one) in a lot of ways. The wear and tear of injuries have meant that he doesn't have the pace of old, so he's bulked up and changed his game so as to be able to hold off defenders more, and get more involved in normal play. Now it worked for Ronaldo as he still managed to keep up his scoring ratio, but there are no guarantees that it will work with Owen. He's really heading into a season of unknowns.

Also, its probably too much of a injury risk.

That said, it might happen because from the owners perspective it might be a very good marketing move and pay for itself by shirt sales, publicity etc...

Stky10

el rabitos wrote:

looks like rafa's faith in hammil will be shown in the coming couple of months. he seemed to have a decent run up in scotland, be intertested to see if he'll be given a shot in the first team or shipped out on loan again.

i think hobbs would have a bit of a task on his hands trying to push agger or carra for their spot. maybe a loan would do him more good than another season in the reserves

I'd say Hammill might get a chance if we can't sign any decent wingers this summer. Thats unlikely though, so I'd imagine it will be another loan deal. Hopefully to a premiership club like Carson got this year, so we can see if he's good enough for that level or not. He's proved he's good enough for Scotland, now he needs to step up another level.

As for Hobbs, he's probably a bit too green to be risked. So yeah a year on loan with a good championship or scottish team should do him the world of good.

There are other players in the reserves that need to be sent out on loan as well (Antwi, Roque, Anderson, Threlfall, Guthrie,Lindfield, Darby, Brouwer). And not to the likes of Accrington Stanley like Antwi and Martin were sent last year. They should be championship clubs. If they're not good enough to get a regular game at that level, then they're just not good enough. The youth system is clogged with all the new players we've brought in. The older ones need now to sink or swim, and they're not going to learn how playing in the reserves.

The Muppet

PiE wrote:

Oh sorry, you're right. They were only taken from the latest Excel sheet posted in that transfer thread..


Ah I see, we're picking and choosing "stats" to further our points again. Silly me.

But they are not my figures . United have not signed anyone this summer. I think you are the one picking and choosing stats, including players that have not even signed yet..

Dont be at yourself

But they are not my figures . United have not signed anyone this summer. I think you are the one picking and choosing stats, including players that have not even signed yet..

Somebody better tell David Gill then, because he's been going around saying Man Utd have signed a couple of lads from Portugal and some canadian guy!

The Muppet

NekkidBibleMan wrote:

Somebody better tell David Gill then, because he's been going around saying Man Utd have signed a couple of lads from Portugal and some canadian guy!

United have agreed to sign the 3 of them the deals have not yet been finalised.

zing

mike65 wrote:

Now what do folk think about something that suddenly seems half-plausible? Namely Michael Owen returning for 9 million, it seems Newcastle are becoming half-resigned to loosing him to someone else but who? Spurs, Man City, Villa all 'modest' clubs in recent history but all of whom have money to spend might be very tempted esp when Darren Bent will cost 12-14 mill. I think I'd have him back for 9.

Mike.

I'm a bit undecided on Owen - probably 60:40 against it though. Has a great eye for goal but I don't think he'll ever be the same as he was (and I'd love him to prove me wrong on that regardless of what team he plays for). Couple that with him messing the club about twice in the last 3 years and that he seems to be more about playing for England than he is about playing for a club.

zing

Slurms wrote:

I think Adam Hammil and Jack Hobbs are 2 players who, if given the chance, could be very good indeed.

Out of the current youth crop at the academy from what I've read & seen of him Astrit Ajdarevic stands out as having the potential to go on to great things but he's still only in his first year there. Spearing also has great potential but not as a center half - a bit too much of a short arse for that.

Of those at Melwood (i.e. academy graduates) not mentioned already the likes of Anderson, Peltier, Linfield & Guthrie all have the potential to make the first team. Whether or not they take their chances both in training and on the pitch is really up to them.

PHB

Now of those Houlier players who were sold how many would you have kept ?
Or to ask that question another way how many would you have let their contracts run down further and not cash in on them when you could ?

And how many of those out of contract would you have given new contracts to ?

Well, if Rafa had used them, they would have signed a new contract. So if Rafa wanted them, that wouldn't happen.
So the issue is how many of them would I have kept.

Here's my answer,

Cisse has been all but sold. How much better is he than Baros?
Pongolle was sold, but how much better is Pennant than Pongolle?

But if you recall Cisse had just broken his leg and there was no guarantee he when he would be back. The plan was to sell him and that money would have gone towards Alves or some other player further up Rafa's wish list.

How can you sell a player with a broken leg? How was that the plan? The plan was to loan him out in the hopes of selling him in the future, i.e. this season. Cisse was not used because Rafa thought he wasn't good enough. While Bellamy is probably better than Cisse, he's not that much better, and if I had the choice between Cisse and Alves or Bellamy and Pennant, I'd take the former every time.

If you are building for the future, there are two types of players you sign.
Young talented players - e.g. Ronaldo, Alonso, Walcott
Players who will be an almost instant success (barring adjustment time) - e.g. Zidane etc.

You do not sign players who will replace the dross in the squad. It's a waste of time imo.

Ultimately, the question must be, how much better has the Liverpool squad gotten in three years? The answer, not a huge amount. Some of the youth talented players have come to the front (Alonso being the most notable, although his form last season wasn't great, but he's young and will be a top player in the future), but all of his other signings, have been a waste of space, and lots of them are going to be sold on (e.g. Bellamy), or already have been (e.g. Morientes)

I think Rafa is a tactical genius, but I think he has taken the completely wrong approach in the transfer market. He has spent three years replacing the squad, making them marginally better overall. This is three years he could have spent buying top youth talent or top players. Because of this, he has pretty much guaranteed that Liverpool would not compete in the league. Only now, after this three year process, will he start doing what's needed to take a step up, bringing in top talent and top youth talent only
The squad is now clearly his, but most of it isn't a massive improvement in comparison to when he first took over.
He could have spent the money a lot better, by buying up top players or top young talents, rather than journey-men [Garcia 6 million, Josemi 2 million, Bellamy 6 million, Pennant 6 million]
Ultimately, look at all those players, it would add up to 20 million. If you had the choice between

Garcia-Bellamy-Pennant
or
Pongolle-Cisse-Alves/Joaoquin/whatever top player Rafa could have gotten for 20 million

Which would you pick?

Chucky the tree

PHB wrote:

Well, if Rafa had used them, they would have signed a new contract. So if Rafa wanted them, that wouldn't happen.
So the issue is how many of them would I have kept.

Here's my answer,

Cisse has been all but sold. How much better is he than Baros?
Pongolle was sold, but how much better is Pennant than Pongolle?



How can you sell a player with a broken leg? How was that the plan? The plan was to loan him out in the hopes of selling him in the future, i.e. this season. Cisse was not used because Rafa thought he wasn't good enough. While Bellamy is probably better than Cisse, he's not that much better, and if I had the choice between Cisse and Alves or Bellamy and Pennant, I'd take the former every time.

If you are building for the future, there are two types of players you sign.
Young talented players - e.g. Ronaldo, Alonso, Walcott
Players who will be an almost instant success (barring adjustment time) - e.g. Zidane etc.

Since when is 25 young and what has Walcott done to be considered a top youngster?

Dr Galen

more rumours this morning about a lack of cash for Rafa. Could this be true?

I doubt tho that he'd be sticking around if it was.

HashSlinging

any linkage?

zing

PHB wrote:

Well, if Rafa had used them, they would have signed a new contract. So if Rafa wanted them, that wouldn't happen.

They were used - the likes of Biscan, Smicer & Hamann were anyway. But were any of them worth a new contract ?

So the issue is how many of them would I have kept.

Here's my answer,

Cisse has been all but sold. How much better is he than Baros?

What point are you trying to make here ? Cisse wasn't one of Rafa's purchases.

Pongolle was sold, but how much better is Pennant than Pongolle?

Same question here. Pennant is a winger while Pongolle is a striker so it's hardly a direct comparison. Pongolle certainly has some quality and flare to his game but he's too lightweight for the premiership. If you're suggest using Pongolle as a winger then Pennant is the better option.

How can you sell a player with a broken leg? How was that the plan? The plan was to loan him out in the hopes of selling him in the future, i.e. this season. Cisse was not used because Rafa thought he wasn't good enough. While Bellamy is probably better than Cisse, he's not that much better, and if I had the choice between Cisse and Alves or Bellamy and Pennant, I'd take the former every time.

I said the plan was to sell him and that the money would have gone on players like Alves - i.e. the plan had been to sell him and use the money. Then the useless ...... went and broke his leg which was a major blow to Rafa's transfer plans for last summer. So that choice you refer to wasn't there. Sure it was there up until he broke his leg but it disappeared then as we suddenly needed another striker as there were no guarantees as to when Cisse would be back.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/5061174.stm

If you are building for the future, there are two types of players you sign.
Young talented players - e.g. Ronaldo, Alonso, Walcott
Players who will be an almost instant success (barring adjustment time) - e.g. Zidane etc.

You do not sign players who will replace the dross in the squad. It's a waste of time imo.

But it's not that simple though is it. You can't just bring in a 'superstar' or two every year and hope & prey they stay fit all season - you have to have an entire squad of players you have faith in. Rafa clearly didn't have much faith in those he inherited.

Yes I would have hoped for more players of higher quality but he has tried to bring them in - e.g. Nando, Gonzalez & Simao in 2005. The Simao deal fell apart at the last minute but no one can argue that it wasn't worth taking a chance on a player like Nando. Gonzalez didn't arrive for another year but most expected him to be a hit and certainly last more than one season. Alves was clearly a target for 2006 but that largely went out the window with Cisse breaking his leg. However had Simao arrived the year before then would Alves have even been a target or would the money from the sale of Cisse have been spent on another area of the pitch (e.g. a quality striker).

Do you think he'd have made the specific purchases he has made if he's been able to land Simao in 2005 or if Nando & Gonzalez had worked out. If Cisse hadn't broken his leg last summer would we still be chasing a decent right winger ? Heck go back to Rafa's first year - if Owen hadn't buggered off would we still be chasing a decent striker ? But none of those things happened the way he wanted them to and every year seems to be like groundhog day as a result in that we're short decent wingers & decent strikers.

Now I'm not blaming all the clubs problems on Owen leaving or Cisse breaking his leg or anything stupid like that - I'm just using them as examples of events that have significantly affected his transfer plans. Those things happened as they happened and there's no point dwelling on it.

So my point is that it's not as simple as saying he shouldn't have bought X & Y - he should have bought Z instead. He has tried to buy Z more than once but it's just not always worked out according to plan. I do wonder whether you'd be saying that he should have used more of Houliers players had he gotten the likes of Simao & Alves when he tried to.

Ultimately, the question must be, how much better has the Liverpool squad gotten in three years? The answer, not a huge amount. Some of the youth talented players have come to the front (Alonso being the most notable, although his form last season wasn't great, but he's young and will be a top player in the future), but all of his other signings, have been a waste of space, and lots of them are going to be sold on (e.g. Bellamy), or already have been (e.g. Morientes)

Man for man I do think the current squad is better. There's certainly more depth & versatility to it. But that's personal opinion.

I think Rafa is a tactical genius, but I think he has taken the completely wrong approach in the transfer market. He has spent three years replacing the squad, making them marginally better overall. This is three years he could have spent buying top youth talent or top players. Because of this, he has pretty much guaranteed that Liverpool would not compete in the league. Only now, after this three year process, will he start doing what's needed to take a step up, bringing in top talent and top youth talent only
The squad is now clearly his, but most of it isn't a massive improvement in comparison to when he first took over.
He could have spent the money a lot better, by buying up top players or top young talents, rather than journey-men [Garcia 6 million, Josemi 2 million, Bellamy 6 million, Pennant 6 million]

I wouldn't consider Garcia to be a journey man. He's someone who'll try something different and if it doesn't come off he's slated but when it does he's considered something of a genius. And as I mentioned Bellamy & Pennant were not first choice.

Ultimately, look at all those players, it would add up to 20 million. If you had the choice between

Garcia-Bellamy-Pennant
or
Pongolle-Cisse-Alves/Joaoquin/whatever top player Rafa could have gotten for 20 million

Which would you pick?

You're trying to back up your argument about him not using Houlier's old squad with two players (Cisse & Pongolle) who are still technically at the club ? (the deal for Pongolle has been all agreed but afaik not signed, sealed & rubber stamped yet). That choice was never there but my answer would have to be neither - I'd keep Garcia but readily replace all of Bellamy, Pennant, Cisse & Pongolle (even though I do rate him I just don't think he'd make it in the prem) with players of a higher quality - e.g. Alves/Simao/etc.. which funnily enough is what Rafa has tried to do. But this isn't an ideal world is it..

btw - you still haven't really said which of Houlier's players you'd have kept.

PHB

Sure it was there up until he broke his leg but it disappeared then as we suddenly needed another striker as there were no guarantees as to when Cisse would be back.

Fair enough, I can see how whatever plan he had got complicated.

btw - you still haven't really said which of Houlier's players you'd have kept.

Sorry I thought I had, Cisse, Pongolle, Baros, Diouf would come to mind first.
Why? Because in terms of Rafa's replacements for these, Bellamy, Kuyt, Crouch, and Pennant (very roughly I accept), I don't think there has been a huge step up. Rafa didn't even try to work with the players that Houllier brought in imo, he just went about replacing the whole squad. And of course the squad is better, I'm not disputing that, but is it 40 million net spend better? I don't think so.
When Houllier joined, Liverpool had a pretty good defence and a pretty good central midfield. They were lacking up front and on the wings, and their keeper was irratic.
Now, Liverpool have a pretty good defence and a very good central midfield. They are lacking up front, and their keeper, while still making some mistakes, is pretty consistant.

That progress has taken four years, and I think the reason it has is because Rafa hasn't tried to work with the system.

You're trying to back up your argument about him not using Houlier's old squad with two players (Cisse & Pongolle) who are still technically at the club ?

Well like, Pongolle is sold, and Cisse is about to be. The point is clear that Rafa does not rate either.

I wouldn't consider Garcia to be a journey man. He's someone who'll try something different and if it doesn't come off he's slated but when it does he's considered something of a genius. And as I mentioned Bellamy & Pennant were not first choice.

Yeh, fair enough, I like Garcia, but he's utterly inconsistant. Bellamy and Pennant weren't first choice, but he still bought them. He bought them, and they are (even if we exclude Garcia) journeymen.

I'd keep Garcia but readily replace all of Bellamy, Pennant, Cisse & Pongolle (even though I do rate him I just don't think he'd make it in the prem) with players of a higher quality - e.g. Alves/Simao/etc.. which funnily enough is what Rafa has tried to do. But this isn't an ideal world is it..

But you can't do that. You can't just go, ok, hmm, let's replace every player I have with much much better players. Why? Cause much better plays cost more money than better players.
Rafa has tried to replace good players with players who are better, but not significantly so. This is why the squad hasn't developed that much. Instead of say using Houlliers past players, and buying one top class players, he has sold all of Houlliers players, and brought in replacements, which while better, are not significantly so.

Garcia-Bellamy-Pennant
or
Pongolle-Cisse-Alves/Joaoquin/whatever top player Rafa could have gotten for 20 million

I think that question highlights the exact point I'm trying to make. Rafa clearly chose option one. If you don't like it cause Pongolle or Cisse aren't sold yet, try this one.

Initial Squad : Diof - Baros - Smicer
You have 20 million to spend. Which do you do?

Option 1 : Garcia-Bellamy-Pennant

Option 2 : Diouf-Baros-Alves/Joaoquin/whatever top player Rafa could have gotten for 20 million

Rafa choose option one, and the squad got better, but not by much.

Drag00n79

The Liverpool rumour machine this morning seems to have moved away from Eto'o onto Torres. Strange one this if the stories regarding Rafa's lack of a transfer budget were true. Torres' buy-out clause is around £24m apparently.
Story link

spockety

I think links to tribalfootball.com should be banned!

Has anyone got any record of a single time when any of their transfer rumours turned out to be correct?

Dont be at yourself

Apparently Balague was on SSN yesterday linking Man Yoo and Liverpool with Torres, with Liverpool favourites at the moment. I didn't see it myself though.

~Rebel~

PHB wrote:

Fair enough, I can see how whatever plan he had got complicated.



Sorry I thought I had, Cisse, Pongolle, Baros, Diouf would come to mind first.
Why? Because in terms of Rafa's replacements for these, Bellamy, Kuyt, Crouch, and Pennant (very roughly I accept), I don't think there has been a huge step up.

Cisse was given 2 years of chances, then he forced himself to be replaced by breaking his leg and guaranteeing he would be out till at least christmas. Baros i somewhat agree with, in that he was limited but decent enough. but at the same time decent money was on offer (more then what bellamy cost us) so can understand the sale. Diouf would have been very hard to keep. If someone is having a detrimental effect on the squad they should leave. Think Collymore, but not as talented. Took a massive loss on him though, sold him for so much less then he was worth. Pongolle i would have liked to see get a proper chance, especially seeing how he's thrived in Spain. But on the other hand he did have his loan spell at Blackburn and was showing there he didnt have the best handle on the Prem. Would have liked him to stay, maybe instead of bringing in Voronin, but from a money point of view, selling him and bringing Voronin for free is better. my major problem with pongolle is that he was sold so cheaply given his league goals/games ratio in spain. Ridiculously cheap.

Theres always a lot of ways to look at these things, cant just list 2 sets of names and say either/or.

PHB

Theres always a lot of ways to look at these things, cant just list 2 sets of names and say either/or.

Yeh fair enough, the choice isn't that simple. And it's not like there is a complete pattern in every regard. But the general point is that Rafa instead of working with Houlliers squad, completely replaced it, and that's why Liverpool still need huge investment (at least three key players) to make the step up.

Dont be at yourself

Houllier's squad had stagnated, was full of deadwood, and with limited funds available and players like Diao earning a huge amount for playing in the reserves, Rafa needed to replace the squad. We may as well have kept Houllier if you're suggesting we stuck with the same group of players who were showing no real signs of challenging for the title.

PHB

We may as well have kept Houllier if you're suggesting we stuck with the same group of players who were showing no real signs of challenging for the title.

I'm not, there was lots of deadwood, and it had to be gotten rid of. But he hasn't really made a huge attempt to use the squad at all. The examples of Baros etc. show this. Sure Bellamy is better, but he's not much better. Because of this tactic, it means Liverpool can only really start to challenge now, after a summers of investment.

Dont be at yourself

Baros was proven to be ineffective at Liverpool, he wasn't going ot move the team forward, and he was sold. I have absolutely no problem with that, and I doubt many people do. It's been a similar story with everyone Rafa has cleared out, save for Micky Owen, and we all know the reasons why he left.

Bellamy was signed on the back of an impressive season and to fulfill a role up front that we were lacking. He didn't work out as intended, but you cannot fault Rafa's intent.

You seem to think that Rafa sold off Houllier's players and replaced them with similar players of a similar standard. This did not happen. Rafa sold off players who were not going to bring the club forward, and did his best given the resources to bring in players that would. Some of these signings worked, some of them didn't, but nobody was signed simply to replace Houllier's players for the hell of it.

Our strongest team under Houllier was something like this:

---

Dudek
Finnan-Hyppia-Henchoz-Riise
Diouf-Gerrard-Hamann-Kewell

---

Owen-Baros

And then we had the likes of Biscan, Smicer and Murphy as back-up. The squad we have now has moved on leaps in bounds from then - in terms of talent and ability, youth, depth and versatility.

It says something about our squad when we can leave players like Xabi Alonso on the bench in a Champions League semi-final.

PHB

It says something about our squad when we can leave players like Xabi Alonso on the bench in a Champions League semi-final.

It does, but it also says something about your squad that you couldn't win the CL nor put in a challenge in the league. The reason for this is because there is a ****load of dead weight in the squad.

I have absolutely no problem with that, and I doubt many people do.

Selling Baros is fine, but replacing him with Bellamy isn't a step forwards, it's a waste of time. Nobody here thought Bellamy was going to set the world alight, they thought he was a decent enough signing for a cheap price, which he was. I'd hardly call that taking a huge step forwards.

Rather than take steps forward, Rafa has taken a lot of steps sideways, especially up front and on the wings. The money he has spent, has improved the quality of the central midfield immensely, no doubting that. Alonso, Sissoko, Mascherano and now possibly Lucas all give huge huge depth to Rafa's squad there. The problem has been with other areas. Rather than taking steps forwad, Benetiz has taken steps sideways.

IMO, there are two ways to interpt this. Either Rafa's eye for talent does not extend to the attacking ways of the game, and his signings in this area are ones he thought were good, but in reality, didn't work out.
Or, Rafa actively pursued a policy of changing the squad entirely to his.

Either way, I think whichever one of these you accept, it casts doubt on his ability to built a team, and it certainly was not the way to go about making Liverpool a team that can challenge for the league.

sweetie

In fairness though, nobody could have predicted such a poor season from Bellamy who had played some great football for Blackburn, Celtic and Newcastle in recent years. Conversely, I was surprised when United bought Saha who was just a decent striker at mid-table fulham at the time. Whilst he has had some injury problems he has scored a decent amount of goals for them. Goes to show that some players can step up to the next level and others can't and there's no magic formula to work it out.

Mr Alan

exactly.

i think the most important thing was for Rafa to commence the building of his own team while also keeping Liverpool in a stable position in the league.

In addition to doing this, using his tactical genius he has arguably turned Liverpool into one of the most competitive teams in the CL and the European stage in general (2 finals in 3 years makes this undeniable).

Now the investment for the club has arrived and he can make the purchases he wants to put the finishing touches on his league winning side.

In the last three years he has already got the spine of the team in place. Reina - Carra/Agger - Gerrard/Alonso/Mascherano/Sissoko - Kuyt. People like Bellamy will be out and a higher calibre of player will be brought in.

Basically, i'd view it as the last three years was him making the team as competitive as possible while waiting for the large sums of money needed to move Liverpool to the next level to come in.

edit: oh yea, in Rafa we trust