Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 12/13

sweetie

Laika1986 wrote: »

If it is 15 million for Allen then even though it is expensive it'l be good to sign a player that knows his job and his role in the team. We could pay a lot more for a more flashy midfielder but the chances of him adapting early(which with our first 5 fixtures is key) are much better with Allen.

he could be our carrick!

Melion

Sappy404 wrote: »

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1131178/liverpool-owner-john-w-henry-may-sell-anfield-naming-rights?cc=5739




Surely - surely - FSG aren't that stupid.

People give out about us having to sell players to raise funds. Who cares what the stadium is called? I'd rather go to the Etihad or Emirates and sign a 20/30m player every summer than go to Anfield to see 4/5m players

mike65

Sappy404 wrote: »

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1131178/liverpool-owner-john-w-henry-may-sell-anfield-naming-rights?cc=5739

Liverpool's principal owner John W Henry says he is prepared to consider selling the naming rights to Anfield to raise funds.

Surely - surely - FSG aren't that stupid.

http://tomkinstimes.com/2012/08/exclusive-john-henry-qa/

Does staying at Anfield impede a stadium rights naming deal? If costs can be offset with such a deal, this could give the club a clear FFP advantage too?

A naming rights deal at Anfield could occur, I suppose

whatawaster

Sappy404 wrote: »

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1131178/liverpool-owner-john-w-henry-may-sell-anfield-naming-rights?cc=5739



Surely - surely - FSG aren't that stupid.

Why is that stupid. It will still be Anfield to you and me and it will give us the funds to bring in better players

ThunbergsAreGo

whatawaster wrote: »

Why is that stupid. It will still be Anfield to you and me and it will give us the funds to bring in better players

Agree see no problem with this

murpho999

Sappy404 wrote: »

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1131178/liverpool-owner-john-w-henry-may-sell-anfield-naming-rights?cc=5739



Surely - surely - FSG aren't that stupid.

I think they'd be stupid not to.

Millions there that could be tapped.

Sappy404

Melion wrote: »

People give out about us having to sell players to raise funds. Who cares what the stadium is called? I'd rather go to the Etihad or Emirates and sign a 20/30m player every summer than go to Gillette Fusion Proglide Park to see 4/5m players

FYP

Francie Barrett

Kess73 wrote: »

---

Reina

---

Johnson - Skrtel - Agger - Enrique
---Gerrard- - Lucas- - Shelvey----
Downing--- - Borini

---

Suarez



Is the rumoured starting XI

Like it!

Mr Alan

naughtb4 wrote: »

Agree see no problem with this

Agreed.

LuckyLloyd

Sappy404 wrote: »

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1131178/liverpool-owner-john-w-henry-may-sell-anfield-naming-rights?cc=5739

Surely - surely - FSG aren't that stupid.

whatawaster wrote: »

Why is that stupid. It will still be Anfield to you and me and it will give us the funds to bring in better players

THIS IS GOLDMAN SACHS STADIUM
THIS IS CHICK FILLET STADIUM
THIS IS THE AT & T ARENA


Don't think the players would be touching that sign on the way out to the pitch...

THIS IS ANFIELD

means something. This is not Eastlands, etc. Our club is more important than that.

gafferino

If it is Allen for £15m im assuming he wont be on massive wages so all in all over the term of the contract wont be too bad??

Leiva

I'm hoping Reina is as refreshed, bouncy and alert as a Thomson Gazelle.

Kess73

Sappy404 wrote: »

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1131178/liverpool-owner-john-w-henry-may-sell-anfield-naming-rights?cc=5739



Surely - surely - FSG aren't that stupid.

In this day and age a club most clubs would be stupid not to consider the option tbh.

LuckyLloyd

gafferino wrote: »

If it is Allen for £15m im assuming he wont be on massive wages so all in all over the term of the contract wont be too bad??

He's worth nowhere near £15m, lol

Phoenix Park

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

THIS IS GOLDMAN SACHS STADIUM
THIS IS CHICK FILLET STADIUM
THIS THE AT & T ARENA


Don't think the players would be touching that sign on the way out to the pitch...

THIS IS ANFIELD

means something. This is not Eastlands, etc. Our club is more important than that.

Do you want to compete or not? Welcome to modern day football. And for what its worth, unless its a second division team coming to Anfield in an FA or Carling Cup game, teams have not been intimidated by the Anfield factor in years. It will always be Anfield to us, but you need to live in the real world if you want to compete, these are the things you have to sacrifice nowadays.

Sell it to the highest bidder imo.

ThunbergsAreGo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He's worth nowhere near £15m, lol

What is he worth?

And who shoould we have considered instead?

noodler

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He's worth nowhere near £15m, lol

Didn't stop us before.

LuckyLloyd

Phoenix Park wrote: »

Do you want to compete or not? Welcome to modern day football. And for what its worth, unless its a second division team coming to Anfield in an FA or Carling Cup game, teams have not been intimidated by the Anfield factor in years. It will always be Anfield to us, but you need to live in the real world if you want to compete, these are the things you have to sacrifice nowadays.

Sell it to the highest bidder imo.

Remember the first half against Juventus in 2005? Real Madrid 2009? Chelsea 2007 / 2005? Man City in the second leg last year?

To deny Anfield being a special place is not living in the real world imo.

Be careful with what you put on sale.

ThunbergsAreGo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Remember the first half against Juventus in 2005? Real Madrid 2009? Chelsea 2007 / 2005? Man City in the second leg last year?

To deny Anfield being a special place is not living in the real world imo.

Be careful with what you put on sale.

Surely the atmosphere wouldnt change as a result of the name being different :rolleyes:

LuckyLloyd

naughtb4 wrote: »

What is he worth?

And who shoould we have considered instead?

He's a British midfielder who was outplayed by his opposite number against the South Korean U23's a few days ago, and has one season at the top level under his belt.

Lists of midfield talent from around the world get posted up here ad nauseum. His fee is large part young British player tax, and lol at us to be paying it just one year after acquiring Jordan Henderson.

Sappy404

It's stupid because they're already on thin ice with a lot of the supporters. They bought a world-famous football club with one of the highest revenues in the world at a knock-down price, cancelled it's debt in the process, and are complaining that there's not enough money so they have to sell a historic part of the club to get more.

Thinking about it though, perhaps they are that stupid. Discussing this when the club appear to be flirting with Manchester City about selling one of our few world-class players is simply incredible.

LuckyLloyd

naughtb4 wrote: »

Surely the atmosphere wouldnt change as a result of the name being different :rolleyes:

The atmosphere is a product of tradition and history, and the emotional feeling people get walking into the stands for a big game at that stadium. You start selling off parts of that tradition and history it will feel different, mean less.

Kess73

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

THIS IS GOLDMAN SACHS STADIUM
THIS IS CHICK FILLET STADIUM
THIS THE AT & T ARENA


Don't think the players would be touching that sign on the way out to the pitch...

THIS IS ANFIELD

means something. This is not Eastlands, etc. Our club is more important than that.

The last time naming rights were brought up in a big way (under H&G) the suggestion was that Anfield would be used in the name along with the sponsor's name.


As in The Anfield <insert sponsor name> stadium.


Whilst I do lean strongly towards wanting to keep Anfield as Anfield, I do recognise that such a longing resides in an ideal world. Unfortunately if we want to maximise revenue streams and try to compete with other big money clubs we have to look outside of the ideal world scenario and see what we can do to get that money.


In all honesty though, if we sold the naming rights of the stadium in the morning and it became the Anfield Apple stadium or whatever, do you really think you or I would call it anything other than Anfield? Same goes for the vast majority of supporters.

I think selling the name of the stadium would be easier for people to accept if it were for a brand new stadium, but unless we can bring in the same amount of extra revenue from another area that naming rights would bring, I think it is something that has to be considered. Would not like it to happen, but the logic behind such an idea is pretty obvious

murpho999

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Remember the first half against Juventus in 2005? Real Madrid 2009? Chelsea 2007 / 2005? Man City in the second leg last year?

To deny Anfield being a special place is not living in the real world imo.

Be careful with what you put on sale.

It wasn't the name that intimated them but the venue itself and the atmosphere generated by the crowd.

Wouldn't have a problem with it.

I'm sure they could find a compromise like 'Sponsor Name Anfield'.

LuckyLloyd

Sappy404 wrote: »

It's stupid because they're already on thin ice with a lot of the supporters. They bought a world-famous football club with one of the highest revenues in the world at a knock-down price, cancelled it's debt in the process, and are complaining that there's not enough money so they have to sell a historic part of the club to get more.

Thinking about it though, perhaps they are that stupid. Discussing this when the club appear to be flirting with Manchester City about selling one of our few world-class players is simply incredible.

What's more incredible is that these things will get defended to the hilt by our fanbase on here and elsewhere. Something has been lost the last few years.

Phoenix Park

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Remember the first half against Juventus in 2005? Real Madrid 2009? Chelsea 2007 / 2005? Man City in the second leg last year?

To deny Anfield being a special place is not living in the real world imo.

Be careful with what you put on sale.

Ironically you won't be seeing those sort of nights again without doing the likes of name-selling unfortunately.

mike65

LL you are such a hopeless romantic fool

gafferino

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He's worth nowhere near £15m, lol

Yeah but my question really is this: We know he is not worth 15m but he has just signed a new contact and his very young etc etc. When wages are taken into account (assuming they are not too high) it might not be a bad deal overall?

LuckyLloyd

mike65 wrote: »

LL you are such a hopeless romantic fool

And you, one of those who wanted Benitez sacked, are what? I'll never lose sight of where this club was and where it should be. I refuse to apologise for that.

opr

Sure why have the stadium in Liverpool at all. I'm sure we could come up with more profitable places to play the games.

Opr

skywalker

Melion wrote: »

People give out about us having to sell players to raise funds. Who cares what the stadium is called? I'd rather go to the Etihad or Emirates and sign a 20/30m player every summer than go to Anfield to see 4/5m players

Exactly. Were already earning circa 20m each per annum from standard chartered & warrior. If renaming anfield brings another 20m then happy days.

If they can cobble another 20m a year together by having a banks savings accounts all over our goalposts, a hardware shop sponsoring our benches & M&S sponsoring our dressing rooms then even better.

As for the Anfield sign, theres always a creative solution to be found if theres a will. Rename the tunnel "anfield", eh voila! Sign stays in place. Id be surprised if any renaming deal didnt take that into consideration.

I think in this area fsg & John Henry in particular have their heads screwed on right. I read this summer that the redsox have around 80 corporate spsonsors at various levels, Liverpool had something like 12 when they took over. When you go to the Nou Camp theres something like 12 main sponsors draped all over the place, but so what, last year they paid for Fabregas & Sanchez. Id sure like to see that level of player being bought every year.

whatawaster

In 1979 I'm sure there were similar reactions from fans about putting a sponsors name on our football shirts. Our jersey is as important a symbol of the club as the stadium and we sold out for money. Didn't destroy the club. Thirty years later it doesn't seem like such a big deal.

This is just sponsorship on another level. It's a way of financing the improvements that Anfield needs (should we stay there) and it's much more attractive to me than bank loans.

Mr Alan

It's a harsh reality that some compromises would have to be made.

If Anfield were to be renamed with Anfield still in it's title, I could live with that.

The Adidas Anfield Stadium or somesuch. Sign stays in place. People still call it Anfield etc etc.

Kess73

opr wrote: »

Sure why have the stadium in Liverpool at all. I'm sure we could come up with more profitable places to play the games.

Opr

Which is why some of the proposed sites for a new stadium were outside of the city limits.

whatawaster

I'm sure keeping the "This is Anfield" sign would be an obvious condition of such a deal.

I don't get the fuss, to be honest. It's just a name. It will still be the same pitch, the Kop will remain, as will the Shankly gates and the memorial.

opr

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He's a British midfielder who was outplayed by his opposite number against the South Korean U23's a few days ago, and has one season at the top level under his belt.

I was really impressed with some of their players. They all seemed to have such good close control and technical ability. The midfielder in the centre of the park who plays for Celtic was particularly impressive, Ki.

Opr

The Rooster

Sappy404 wrote: »

It's stupid because they're already on thin ice with a lot of the supporters. They bought a world-famous football club with one of the highest revenues in the world at a knock-down price, cancelled it's debt in the process, and are complaining that there's not enough money so they have to sell a historic part of the club to get more.

Thinking about it though, perhaps they are that stupid. Discussing this when the club appear to be flirting with Manchester City about selling one of our few world-class players is simply incredible.

Do you not believe them when they say there isn't enough money? Do people really expect owners to pump money into a club? Do we want to take out loans to finance player acquisitions? Do people forget how close we came to administration/receivership?

We need to be stable and sustainable. We don't want to be paying out interest (except on major capital projects). We don't want owners taking profits out of the football club. We want the club run on the basis that we can spend whatever income we earn, and no more. This is what FSG promised and this is what they are trying to deliver. The more successful we are, the higher revenues will become and the more valuable the club will become.

The naming rights issue will only come up if we go ahead with renovating Anfield (or building a new stadium). Handing over naming rights will mean much lower interest/capital repayments on the loan we take out build/rebuild.
We'd certainly be absolutely mad not to consider it.

LuckyLloyd

opr wrote: »

I was really impressed with some of their players. They all seemed to have such good close control and technical ability. The midfielder in the centre of the park who plays for Celtic was particularly impressive, Ki.

Opr

Don't disagree, but when it was their players that looked to have the technical talent it does make you wonder why they move around the world for a pittance and any of the young players in and around the GB eleven would go for millions. I'm just sick of how stupid the British player tax is and am astounded that FSG are ready to sign off on Allen one year after being burned on Henderson.

mike65

opr wrote: »

Sure why have the stadium in Liverpool at all. I'm sure we could come up with more profitable places to play the games.

Opr

Rent out the Millennium Stadium, not too far for most supporters esp those flying in!

MD1990

there are tons of of Midfielders in Spain,Portugal, & Italy who are as good or if not better than Allen
who would cost 5-10 Million

SlickRic

The Sports Direct Arena is still St James' Park to those fans, and they still rock the place.

it wouldn't be a huge deal.

Tusky

Just catching up on recent transfer news (I'm away travelling) and I'm so disappointed with the Agger developments. From reading Rodgers comments, it's clear that he is off (once Man City make a bigger offer) which really frustrates me.

The rot at Liverpool will not be corrected by selling our best players. Every player has their price? I disagree. We failed to replace Torres despite getting stupid money. We also failed to replace Alonso and Mascherano. I have zero faith in us properly replacing Agger. Let's stop selling our best players and start surrounding them with quality players instead. This is a guy who is future captain quality, loves the club, and has plenty of years left at the top of his game. I would argue that he is just about to come into his prime.

...and our rumored targets fill me with a whole big pile of MEH also. I thought we were going to be much more aggressive in this window.

Mr Alan

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Don't disagree, but when it was their players that looked to have the technical talent it does make you wonder why they move around the world for a pittance and any of the young players in and around the GB eleven would go for millions. I'm just sick of how stupid the British player tax is and am astounded that FSG are ready to sign off on Allen one year after being burned on Henderson.

It's a big call by Rodgers to be fair to him.

Between him having worked in close quarters with Allen before & with us having already been somewhat burnt with Henderson last season (not as much as people seem to try & make out), he'll have absolutely no excuse if the move goes tits up.

El Inho

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

THIS IS GOLDMAN SACHS STADIUM
THIS IS CHICK FILLET STADIUM
THIS IS THE AT & T ARENA


Don't think the players would be touching that sign on the way out to the pitch...

THIS IS ANFIELD

means something. This is not Eastlands, etc. Our club is more important than that.

ridiculous logic being applied to the 'problem' of naming rights...

that is almost like saying, no i like the adidas kit why should we change to warrior...reason is money money money monaaaaaaaay....

naming rights are a great source of revenue, and as has been pointed out, naming rights would raise the same money as selling the likes of Agger...

make your choice

(fear of loss...summer sales job taught me something)

we should try get some German company to sponsor us....some company with a name like An Feld or something

osnola ibax

Mr Alan wrote: »

It's a big call by Rodgers to be fair to him.

Between him having worked in close quarters with Allen before & with us having already been somewhat burnt with Henderson last season (not as much as people seem to try & make out), he'll have absolutely no excuse if the move goes tits up.

I strongly disagree with the sentiment that we have been burnt with the Henderson move. He will be a great player for us, maybe even this season.

murpho999

Daily Fail say that Fenway Sports Group are open to naming rights as they have put their name on Fenway Park.

Honestly, I shudder at how poor some journalism is and people actually believe them.

Link

LuckyLloyd

MD1990 wrote: »

there are tons of of Midfielders in Spain,Portugal, & Italy who are as good or if not better than Allen
who would cost 5-10 Million

I mean, people are trumping FSG's business mind and the realities of money, etc on one hand; then suggesting that Joe Allen could be 'good business' at £15m on the other. I don't get it.

FSG coming down hard on Rodgers and saying 'we refuse to sanction £15m for this type of player, it isn't anywhere near a palatable valuation' would be fine by me. That's financial prudence that makes sense. It's just mad that we're talking about how a £25m bid for Agger should be strongly considered so that we can get money to buy players if we're willing to spend £15m on Joe Allen.

Ugh, so many things to be angry and frustrated about with respect to Liverpool the last few months.

LuckyLloyd

osnola ivax wrote: »

I strongly disagree with the sentiment that we have been burnt with the Henderson move. He will be a great player for us, maybe even this season.

Will he even get game time if Lucas and Gerrard are fit?

murpho999

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I mean, people are trumping FSG's business mind and the realities of money, etc on one hand; then suggesting that Joe Allen could be 'good business' at £15m on the other. I don't get it.

FSG coming down hard on Rodgers and saying 'we refuse to sanction £15m for this type of player, it isn't anywhere near a palatable valuation' would be fine by me. That's financial prudence that makes sense. It's just mad that we're talking about how a £25m bid for Agger should be strongly considered so that we can get money to buy players if we're willing to spend £15m on Joe Allen.

Ugh, so many things to be angry and frustrated about with respect to Liverpool the last few months.

That's the problem, you're judging them on a work in progress but I think they have a long term plan and we're not going to be turned into world beaters in one summer.

gafferino

MD1990 wrote: »

there are tons of of Midfielders in Spain,Portugal, & Italy who are as good or if not better than Allen
who would cost 5-10 Million

£5m - I doubt it and if so its prob because they are near the end of their contract. There are bargains to be had of course but maybe those players dont want to come to Liverpool?

We are paying so much because Swansea have all the power on this one - he just signed a new deal, he's young and they dont want to sell. Simple as. Its like Agger - we dont want to see him but if you offer us a shed load of cash then things happen. After all Real Madrid were fleeced when they bought Ronaldo for outrageous money :rolleyes: