Can Liverpool be considered part of the big 4 anymore?

ilovelamp2000

I'd be willing to take that bet with one of them if you want to just take one yourself Rarnes1.

But I'd be doing it only on the condition that the proceeds go to a charity.

Rosco1982

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I'd be willing to take that bet with one of them if you want to just take one yourself Rarnes1.

But I'd be doing it only on the condition that the proceeds go to a charity.

Fine by me.

everdead.ie

K-9 wrote: »

Problem with that is Liverpool had a serious injury crisis pre Xmas last season as well, defensively especially and were crap. Can't see them being that bad again, especially under Roy.

But everyone has injury problems pre Christmas last season there where tonnes of Teams with Injury crisis that's why there are squads

stumpypeeps

Judging by the number of posts in the Liverpool thread I'd say they're easily the biggest.

raven136

so if the only players liverpool lose are yossi and masch and gain Jovanovic and a Defour type player will the squad be significantly weaker?
Last season was awful and for lots of reasons but with a new manager i can see a turnaround and seriously doubt we will be 7th again.

Also find it funny that City are totally written off.Another season under the manager,better players bought again and still mainly Arsenal and United fans cant accept them as a real threat.Im very worried about a team that could be rid of players like Ireland etc and signing winners and workers like Toure,Dzeko etc

K-9

everdead.ie wrote: »

But everyone has injury problems pre Christmas last season there where tonnes of Teams with Injury crisis that's why there are squads

Which was kind of what I was pointing out to the poster.

CoalBucket

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Judging by the number of posts in the Liverpool thread I'd say they're easily the biggest.

And will the team whose posts recieve the most thanks win the league ?

Boskowski

raven136 wrote: »

City ... signing winners and workers like Toure, Dzeko etc

Have they signed Dzeko? I didn't think they had.

Juan Pablo

Ush1 wrote: »

So the general concensus is that Torres won't be leaving?

I would have thought he would be gone before the season starts but the bookies think otherwise with Betfair showing Fernando Torres' odds at 1.4 price to stay and a 2.52 listing to go before season kickoff. However I would imagine this is due to the fact that it is unlikely a club will be in for him while he's crocked. If fit before the transfer window shuts I can see bids coming in for him.

Kess73

I think the comment earlier in the thread of Liverpool still being part of the big four, and just not top four last season is spot on.


Another way to look at the so called big four would be on trophies/leagues won over the short to medium term.

Say we take the Benitez years. Would Liverpool be in the big four if trophies won were the measure of getting there?

Yep they would be, and would be third with the arguement over who comes fourth being between a number of clubs.


If we take the Houllier years, would Liverpool fall under the heading of big four based on silverware won? Again they would do so, and again in third place.

I do believe that winning something on a regular to semi regular basis is part of what makes a club part of the so called big four. Otherwise you could have a club finishing third or fourth year after year but winning nothing at all, and getting called part of the "big four"

If the likes of City or Spurs start adding semi regular silverware to their collections from this season onwards and the likes of Liverpool and Arsenal continue to not win silverware for a few more seasons, then a strong arguement could be made for City or Spurs or whatever club is winning as being a new member of the big four and whichever of the old members is winning nothing is out, even if they were coming 4th in the league whilst the other teams were winning silverware.

blueser

Boskowski wrote: »

Have they signed Dzeko? I didn't think they had.

We haven't. Wolfsburg are looking for a ridiculous fee for him, and apparently we aren't prepared to be held to ransom.

Barr

Liverpool has a huge history , hard not for them to make a comeback.

Smokin_Aces

Turtyturd wrote: »

They can probably lay as much claim to being part of it as Arsenal can. The season before last Arsenal struggled to hold their spot in the "big 4" when thye lost a major player through injury.
Once Fabregas joins Barcelona, Arsenal will find themselves struggling again.
--
Arsenal always cope with injuries to major players. In fact, that season you just referred, Fabregas was out for a lenghty spell and we went 17 or more (Not sure of the correct games) unbeaten, we'll be okay.

Boskowski

blueser wrote: »

We haven't. Wolfsburg are looking for a ridiculous fee for him, and apparently we aren't prepared to be held to ransom.

I thought so.
I don't think the ransom remark is quite justified. It's more like they don't want to sell. They seem to be having ambitions and they have Volkswagen backing them. They need Dzeko a lot more than they need - say - 15m. So they set the fee so high that everyone backs off and if someone wants to go for it anyway at least they get enough dosh for a serious quality replxcement.

timetogetfit

I have said it before and Ill say it again, Liverpools situation reminds me of that of Newcastle United

ROCKMAN

Big 4 ,Battle of Britain , Six Pointer and of course Biggest Game of the Season (so far )..For all the good they brought Sky really have some beauties to answer for....

Off the pitch
Liverpool FC is an institution and integral part of English ,European and World football and that will not change no matter what sky catchphrase we use. They will always be A Big Club in the eyes of football fans . It would take 3 or 4 trophyless and relegations filled decades to change this ,Which I cannot see happen even in my wildest dreams (pity:D)

On the pitch
I can see them struggle next season to keep pace with Chelsea and Utd but they will not be alone there,
Macherano leaving would be a massive lost , I think he has been fantastic player for ye and would not be easy to replace.
Gerrard on the other hand , take the over priced money been floated about ,think ye got the best years out of him anyway . Think your new Manager could /would spend it very wisely ,
As for Torres , him staying or going will decide the length of the slump IMO. Torres stays one season to bed new players around him and bounce back 2011/2012 , Without him I think it could take 2 or 3 season to get back . Torres getting injured could be a blessing (for once) ,think ye could have struggled to keep a fit Torres. But cannot see to many bids for a injured player no matter how good he is.

Other factors
New Owners and ground size ,Really need to be sorted ,but thats for brainer people than me to try sort.

slingerz

Maybe its just me but IF Liverpool got £30 million for Gerrard, £70 million for Torres and £35 million for Mascherano I'd have the three of them out the door in a heartbeat if I know all that money was to go towards transfers into the club.

ntlbell

slingerz wrote: »

Maybe its just me but IF Liverpool got £30 million for Gerrard, £70 million for Torres and £35 million for Mascherano I'd have the three of them out the door in a heartbeat if I know all that money was to go towards transfers into the club.

30 mil for a 30yr old off the back of a terrible season and world cup, with no chance of making any of the money back...

I don't think so.

slingerz

ntlbell wrote: »

30 mil for a 30yr old off the back of a terrible season and world cup, with no chance of making any of the money back...

I don't think so.

I suppose he'd be free would he?!

ntlbell

slingerz wrote: »

I suppose he'd be free would he?!

What's left on his contract?

SlickRic

slingerz wrote: »

I suppose he'd be free would he?!

30m would be mental for Gerrard, which is why i would take it if it was offered.

it's not realistically going to be though.

murpho999

I think saying that Liverpool are not one of the 'Big Four' because of one bad season with problems on and off the pitch, would be the equivalent of ruling Arsenal & Man Utd out of next season's title race because they didn't win it last season.

I think they need (hopefully doesn't happen) a few more poor seasons, where they are really not competing and they are replaced consistently by one club to be ruled out of the big 4.

Juan Pablo

slingerz wrote: »

Maybe its just me but IF Liverpool got £30 million for Gerrard, £70 million for Torres and £35 million for Mascherano I'd have the three of them out the door in a heartbeat if I know all that money was to go towards transfers into the club.

Think you are off in your valuations there tbh. With Torres we can compare his valuation to that of David Villa, a better player, and his move to Barca for €40m. £35m would be his value if he did move.

As for £30m for Gerrard, I don't buy the argument that becuse he's 30 he's go for an lot less. Perhaps £30m is a bit rich, but didn't Capello splash £22m on a 31 year old Batigol in 2000, who then went onto to score 20 goals and deliver Roma their first Scudetto in 17 years. Capello knew he wasn't going to get that £22m back, but the end justified the means. Arguably Gerrard fits this category if Real Madrid or AC or even Chelsea figured that he would be a key player in success then they would outlay the £18m-£20m plus whopper wage packet.

We just paid £20m for Yaya Toure. I think thats a fair valuation of what Mascherano is worth.

You could see Hodgson doing a lot with that £70m though, Liverpool need quality in depth and a war chest like that could deliver it. Provided he'd get the lot to spend obv.

Boskowski

slingerz wrote: »

Maybe its just me but IF Liverpool got £30 million for Gerrard, £70 million for Torres and £35 million for Mascherano I'd have the three of them out the door in a heartbeat if I know all that money was to go towards transfers into the club.

As to whether that money then would be available for new players I cannot comment on but but realistically you'd want to roughly half the three figures you have thrown out there.

JimsAlterEgo

Boskowski wrote: »

As to whether that money then would be available for new players I cannot comment on but but realistically you'd want to roughly half the three figures you have thrown out there.

what he said, especially if they want to go

stumpypeeps

CoalBucket wrote: »

And will the team whose posts recieve the most thanks win the league ?

Surely the club with the most supporters is the Biggest club?

ntlbell

murpho999 wrote: »

I think saying that Liverpool are not one of the 'Big Four' because of one bad season with problems on and off the pitch, would be the equivalent of ruling Arsenal & Man Utd out of next season's title race because they didn't win it last season.

I think they need (hopefully doesn't happen) a few more poor seasons, where they are really not competing and they are replaced consistently by one club to be ruled out of the big 4.

Of course they have to be considered one of them the "big four"

But it's going to be extremley difficult for them this year to get back into with the amount of money been invested by other teams.

Liverpool don't seem to have much funds to spend so it's going to be as you were, no money will be brought in from CL this year.

If they don't get back into the top 4 this year the money/investment issue could very well spiral and once they're out of it for two years it's going to be _really_ difficult to get back there as the current top 4/5 are going to continue with the investment, will have some expirience in CL will be able to attract better players etc etc

So yes, right now, they're one of the big 4 but the future is rather bleak.

slingerz

Boskowski wrote: »

As to whether that money then would be available for new players I cannot comment on but but realistically you'd want to roughly half the three figures you have thrown out there.

Torres for 35 million? Mascherano for 17?? Gerrard for 15??

They wont be leaving Merseyside at those prices anyway!!!

ntlbell

slingerz wrote: »

Torres for 35 million? Mascherano for 17?? Gerrard for 15??

They wont be leaving Merseyside at those prices anyway!!!

The problem is not really how much they're worth it's about who has what to pay for them, a player is only worth what someone is willing to pay.

Who has 70 mil to spend and needs torres?

Very few.

I think 12-15 mil is fair for gerrard, but who could you buy in with 12-15 mil?

Dark days.

The Muppet

ntlbell wrote: »

The problem is not really how much they're worth it's about who has what to pay for them, a player is only worth what someone is willing to pay.

Who has 70 mil to spend and needs torres?

Very few.

I think 12-15 mil is fair for gerrard, but who could you buy in with 12-15 mil?

Dark days.

Torres's injury record over the last few seasons has to work against him. A Fit Torres is worth a lot of Money but one that only plays half the games he should be only worth half that amount if that. There has to be a serious question marks about his hamstrings at this stage.

The Davestator

The Muppet wrote: »

Torres's injury record over the last few seasons has to work against him. A Fit Torres is worth a lot of Money but one that only plays half the games he should be only worth half that amount if that. There has to be a serious question marks about his hamstrings at this stage.

The next Michael Owen I reckon.

Pity, cos he's a quality player when fit.

stumpypeeps

The Davestator wrote: »

The next Michael Owen I reckon.

Pity, cos he's a quality player when fit.

Liverpool just signed Peter Brukner, one of the leading Sports Scientists in the world. Worked in Australia. I'm sure he'll be instrumental in improving Torres health, if he stays.

Its a well known fact that the quality of sports science in the Premiership at all the clubs is atrocious. 20 years behind the rest of the world.

Tusky

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Its a well known fact that the quality of sports science in the Premiership at all the clubs is atrocious. 20 years behind the rest of the world.

:rolleyes: sure it is.

slingerz

ntlbell wrote: »

The problem is not really how much they're worth it's about who has what to pay for them, a player is only worth what someone is willing to pay.

Who has 70 mil to spend and needs torres?

Very few.

I think 12-15 mil is fair for gerrard, but who could you buy in with 12-15 mil?

Dark days.

Get off the stage

stumpypeeps

Tusky wrote: »

:rolleyes: sure it is.

I've two friends working in sports science in England. Trust me it is. The rugby guys are years ahead.

I can give you a prime example. Had Rooney been treated properly, would he have been so poor over the last few months?

Pauleta

I would still consider them in "The Big Four". They dropped out of the top 4 last season but are still one of the biggest clubs in England. In Portugal you have the big 3 and Sporting and Benfica have dropped out of the top 3 a few times over the last few years. Same with the Netherlands in terms of Ajax, PSV and Feyonoord even though Feyenoord have been god awful for a few years.

Boskowski

The Muppet wrote: »

Torres's injury record over the last few seasons has to work against him. A Fit Torres is worth a lot of Money but one that only plays half the games he should be only worth half that amount if that. There has to be a serious question marks about his hamstrings at this stage.

Torres is fine. He is not Mr. Invincible like some players are, but he's no Robben either. The problem with him is he hasn't got enough support plus Liverpool depend on him too much, so they'd tend to rush him back after an injury/exhaustion rather than go easy on him. He's just stated that he didn't have a break for 3 years and that hamstring looks more like fatigue/overplayed than anything else.

stumpypeeps

Boskowski wrote: »

Torres is fine. He is not Mr. Invincible like some players are, but he's no Robben either. The problem with him is he hasn't got enough support plus Liverpool depend on him too much, so they'd tend to rush him back after an injury/exhaustion rather than go easy on him. He's just stated that he didn't have a break for 3 years and that hamstring looks more like fatigue/overplayed than anything else.

Thats typical of most clubs in England. Very poor treatment available for players.

stumpypeeps

Tusky wrote: »

:rolleyes: sure it is.

Footballers 'receive poor medical care'
The survey says some club physiotherapists are not qualified

Footballers are being treated by unqualified physiotherapists and inexperienced doctors who come under pressure from club managers to make them play while unfit, according to a survey.


Some clubs are investing huge amounts of money in players but failing to invest in proper medical care
Chartered Society of Physiotherapy
Some club doctors in the Premiership and the Nationwide League admitted that they lacked past experience of sports medicine, while physiotherapists sometimes did not have formal qualifications.

On occasion, they said they breached patient confidentiality by passing private information about footballers to their employers.

The survey, commissioned by the Professional Footballers Association (PFA) and carried out by the Centre for Research into Sport and Society at the University of Leicester, used evidence from 49 interviews and anonymous questionnaires completed by 58 doctors and physiotherapists.

It found that just three club doctors took up their posts after replying to advertisements, only one of which was in the medical press. The others were generally appointed on a network basis.

Just nine of the respondents had specific qualifications in physiotherapy.

'Not qualified to work in NHS'

The director of the Centre for Research into Sport and Society, Ivan Waddington, said: "All these football club players are being looked after by somebody who is not qualified to work in the NHS.

"Practice is no better in the Premiership than in the third division. There is more money but just as much bad practice."

Among the cases uncovered by the study was one of a top division player, who was attracting the attentions of three other major English clubs and two continental sides, being summoned to the physiotherapist's house where he was also met by the surgeon who had recently operated on him.

He was then told he had only a year left to his career and that his value on the transfer market was therefore negligible. The player went on to play for another 11 years.

In another case, a Premiership footballer played for several months on painkillers for an injured toe and was not told until the end of the season that the bone had been broken, though the club's medical staff were aware of this throughout.

'Timely reminder'

The chief executive of the PFA, Gordon Taylor, said: "It is a timely reminder that we need to carry on improving matters."

All physiotherapists in the Premiership must now be qualified and Mr Taylor called for this to be extended to the Nationwide League.

This plea was supported by the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, whose chief executive Phil Gray said: "Some clubs are investing huge amounts of money in players but failing to invest in proper medical care."

Mr Waddington demanded a series of measures to tighten controls on physiotherapists, including compulsory advertising for posts in appropriate journals and possession of qualifications in sports medicine.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/528729.stm

Boskowski

slingerz wrote: »

Get off the stage

Making a guess I'd say if he was sold now he'd command 20ish. Mascherano probably around the same.

Mr Alan

who'd command 20m if sold now?

Boskowski

Mr Alan wrote: »

who'd command 20m if sold now?

Gerrard. But before you give out to me hear this. This was a reply to someone who said 12-15 max, plus its not necessarily about his potential quality but moreso about potential buyers or lack thereof.

Only saying 'cos I have a feeling you gonna say 'you mad' or something.

Mr Alan

i probably agree, although would say more 25m. i thought you were talking about Torres and was thinking about opening a can of whoop ass

parker kent

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Surely the club with the most supporters is the Biggest club?

And boards.ie is the way that the clubs judge how many fans they have now? Bums on seats is the main method and then other stuff like jersey sales etc.

stumpypeeps

parker kent wrote: »

And boards.ie is the way that the clubs judge how many fans they have now? Bums on seats is the main method and then other stuff like jersey sales etc.

I was just making an observation. Obviously shirt sales is probably the best measurement. Which would make Liverpool second I'm guessing behind United. Miles ahead of the rest.

Bums on seats depends on the size of your stadium.

everdead.ie

Does anyone know where you could get that info (rank clubs by shirt sales)

Boskowski

Mr Alan wrote: »

i probably agree, although would say more 25m. i thought you were talking about Torres and was thinking about opening a can of whoop ass

Really? From what I hear on this thread Torres is finished I thought. Only fit for pay per play.

Juan Pablo

I can see the shirt sales being affected considering a good proportion of Liverpool fans will deny their little kids the new kit and opt for a protest one instead according to this

Juan Pablo

Juan Pablo wrote: »

I can see the shirt sales being affected considering a good proportion of Liverpool fans will deny their little kids the new kit and opt for a protest one instead according to this

That's like linking a thread in boards as fact !

doc_17

There's a big 4 and a rich 4. They aren't the same thing. So Liverpool are a big 4 club.