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

whatawaster

Mr Alan wrote: »

Look, I get it, regardless of what happens this summer you'll give Rodgers the benefit of the doubt. You don't need to keep trying to justify the possibility of us selling everyone. I get it.

It's really simple for me.

Agger = really good
Liverpool = really average
Mission = to become really good
Required = more really good players
Not required = selling existing really good players

Is there a price you'd sell him at?

If he refuses a new contract this summer would you let him run down to 12 months?

Fowler87

-Ade- wrote: »

Liverpool sign 13-year old centre-back Conor Masterson from Lucan United. He'll join the Academy when he's 16.

The deal for Masterson is worth €1m. United, City & Chelsea were keen but he chose Liverpool because he's a Liverpool fan.

Missing piece to the jigsaw.

Serious deal for a small local club that!

D'Agger

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Maybe he'd like to have a CB who can play more than 66% of our league games?

Our side improves dramatically from both an attacking and defensive point of view when Agger is in it.

He brings organization & leadership as well as the ability to bring the ball out of the back and give us an attacking platform.

Even if we only have him for 66% of our games he's one of our few world class players, we should fight tooth and nail to keep him.

noodler

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Maybe he'd like to have a CB who can play more than 66% of our league games?

Was the last year? The 66%?

Thats an improvement on previous years, then?

Either way Agger has improved in terms of performance but even more in terms of fitness and injuries. I think we should back his improving fitness as signs of a permanent recovery rather than some lapse.

His importance goes so far beyond simple defending, a bit like Johnson (albeit in a different area of the pitch), his importance to our attacking game is immense.

When we are being busparked by some of the lesser EPL teams, Agger's ability to drive the ball into midfield and create space for others to recieve is vital.


Wiki says it was 71% by the way (not 66%) and a substanital improvement on the last two seasons (particularly the one before last).

noodler

whatawaster wrote: »

Is there a price you'd sell him at?

If he refuses a new contract this summer would you let him run down to 12 months?

Ah, thats a different dynamic in fairness.

We will all change our stances if he actually wants to go.

Chucky the tree

Mr Alan wrote: »

Look, I get it, regardless of what happens this summer you'll give Rodgers the benefit of the doubt. You don't need to keep trying to justify the possibility of us selling everyone. I get it.

It's really simple for me.

Agger = really good
Liverpool = really average
Mission = to become really good
Required = more really good players
Not required = selling existing really good players

I know it's simple for you, mainly because you think on that type of simple level where Agger=really good so keep him. Unfortunately there is a lot more to consider then just that. It has nothing to do with Rogers either.

PaulieC wrote: »

Our side improves dramatically from both an attacking and defensive point of view when Agger is in it.

He brings organization & leadership as well as the ability to bring the ball out of the back and give us an attacking platform.

Even if we only have him for 66% of our games he's one of our few world class players, we should fight tooth and nail to keep him.

I disagree here. I don't think it's smart handing a guy a large contract when he has serious injury issues.

noodler wrote: »

Was the last year? The 66%?

Thats an improvement on previous years, then?

Either way Agger has improved in terms of performance but even more in terms of fitness and injuries. I think we should back his improving fitness as signs of a permanent recovery rather than some lapse.

His importance goes so far beyond simple defending, a bit like Johnson (albeit in a different area of the pitch), his importance to our attacking game is immense.

When we are being busparked by some of the lesser EPL teams, Agger's ability to drive the ball into midfield and create space for others to recieve is vital.


Wiki says it was 71% by the way (not 66%) and a substanital improvement on the last two seasons (particularly the one before last).

He played 71% in 06-07, followed it up with 5 games the next season. Permanent recovery? Please. It's not like he's had one long term injury that he can recover from. He's constantly picking up different injuries.

martingriff

redzerdrog wrote: »

well Lloyd is more than capable of sticking up for himself so I am reluctant to do so but seen as you asked.

Firstly wtf do you mean he is infactated with kenny? iirc Lloyd like myself did not want kenny sacked but could understand it as long as a superior manager was brought in and we are not talking unrealistic rubbish that you have spouted above pepe?? i presume you mean pep? and mourinho. No there was a whole host of other option including the likes of LVG and Rafa.

I am sure nobody hopes LLoyd his wrong more than himself and one thing is he will certainly not back peddle over them, more likely to hold his hands up and happily say he was wrong.

So yes pretty much everything you wrote above was rubbish!

So sorry about my spelling (PLEASE FORGIVE ME):rolleyes::rolleyes: (not that it means anything I have dyslexia)

I have no doubt that LL can defend himself and he will he mustly always does. I have no problem with him having an opinion it is the point after all of this forum it is just the way he put it.

But I must ask if you are sure LL can defend himself then why the first post unless it was because of being a spelling Nazi.

SlickRic

i don't see us selling Agger unless Barcelona come in.

City would need to give us an astronomical amount of money to even consider it. as Al said, i really don't think Rodgers is stupid, and Agger is precisely the kind of CB that would thrive in what Rodgers will set out to do with the team.

Mr Alan

whatawaster wrote: »

Is there a price you'd sell him at?

If he refuses a new contract this summer would you let him run down to 12 months?

How long does he have left on his deal?
Who would be available for us to buy in his place before the end of the window?

If he has 2 years left on his deal & was saying point blankly that he'll not be signing a new one I'd listen to any offers for around £30m. Anything less than that & they can go **** themselves. I'd be pretty sure he'll not rock the boat too much based on what we know about him. So we could keep him to help us get back to CL where the loss of a player like him in 2 years would not be as devastating.

redzerdrog

martingriff wrote: »

So sorry about my spelling (PLEASE FORGIVE ME):rolleyes::rolleyes: (not that it means anything I have dyslexia)

I have no doubt that LL can defend himself and he will he mustly always does. I have no problem with him having an opinion it is the point after all of this forum it is just the way he put it.

But I must ask if you are sure LL can defend himself then why the first post unless it was because of being a spelling Nazi.

I am far from a spelling nazi and your spelling has nothing got to do with your first post being a load of rubbish as I already pointed out.

LuckyLloyd

martingriff wrote: »

I will keep my opinion open on Rodgers untill we actually get in the thick of things. WE all know you are infactated with Kenny and any manager par Pepe or Murinho (even then I would not know) you be playing the downgraded card.

I hope you are wrong i really do and not just so Liverpool will be playing will but to see how you will try to back pedal from your remarks this summer

martingriff wrote: »

He has been asked that numerous times and still has not answered so do not hold your breath

Jeez, I really have been getting the haters mad.

- I posted a list of managers I would have accepted as improvements on Dalglish, Rodgers wasn't on it;
- I don't back peddle. I'll take the stick if it's there to be taken - and hopefully that's how things turn out because it will mean LFC are winning lots of football matches;

noodler

Chucky the tree wrote: »

He played 71% in 06-07, followed it up with 5 games the next season. Permanent recovery? Please. It's not like he's had one long term injury that he can recover from. He's constantly picking up different injuries.

71% of games last year too.

No need to say permanent recovery like I implied it was a fact!




20m would turn my head but I still think we are better off with a team that has Agger for most of the season.

ThunbergsAreGo

Agger is Rodgers wet dream of a Centre Back

Chucky the tree

noodler wrote: »

71% of games last year too.

No need to say permanent recovery like I implied it was a fact!


20m would turn my head but I still think we are better off with a team that has Agger for most of the season.

You said it should be backed as sign of permanent recovery. Maybe 71% was just a blip in his career of normal playing far less.

NukaCola

We couldnt replace Agger, even with a massive bid.....if Barca and ManCity are in for him it tells a story of its own, if he wants out i'd rather see him run down his contract and receive nothing, hopefully we'd be in a better position in 2 years than we are now to replace him.

He doesnt seem the like to kick up a fuss and refuse to play etc (that being said nothing would really surprise me)

jenno86

-Ade- wrote: »

Liverpool sign 13-year old centre-back Conor Masterson from Lucan United. He'll join the Academy when he's 16.

The deal for Masterson is worth €1m. United, City & Chelsea were keen but he chose Liverpool because he's a Liverpool fan.

Missing piece to the jigsaw.

Apparently hes 6 ft tall already. Hes only 13 :eek:

missingtime

NukaCola wrote: »

We couldnt replace Agger, even with a massive bid.....if Barca and ManCity are in for him it tells a story of its own, if he wants out i'd rather see him run down his contract and receive nothing, hopefully we'd be in a better position in 2 years than we are now to replace him.

He doesnt seem the like to kick up a fuss and refuse to play etc (that being said nothing would really surprise me)

That sounds awful...if he wants to go (I don't think he does)..we need every penny we can get to replace him.

NukaCola

missingtime wrote: »

That sounds awful...if he wants to go (I don't think he does)..we need every penny we can get to replace him.

With who

Gbear

jenno86 wrote: »

Apparently hes 6 ft tall already. Hes only 13 :eek:

I was 6ft tall when I was 13 and I didn't turn into much of a footballer.

There must be something seriously good about him if they're willing to spend a million quid on a 13 year old.

I do hope it's not just his build though.

IvySlayer

I am so going to boo Conor from now on

jenno86

Gbear wrote: »

I was 6ft tall when I was 13 and I didn't turn into much of a footballer.

Good to know

martingriff

redzerdrog wrote: »

I am far from a spelling nazi and your spelling has nothing got to do with your first post being a load of rubbish as I already pointed out.

Look at your post again as your first point was about my spelling of infactuated and the spelling of Pep and Mourinho so if it was not part of the rubbish why say it.

missingtime

NukaCola wrote: »

With who

I'm not entirely sure, I guess I'm hoping that if he is sold our management and scouting team have someone suitable in mind.

To let him go for nothing would be a huge mistake in my mind.

redzerdrog

martingriff wrote: »

Look at your post again as your first point was about my spelling of infactuated and the spelling of Pep and Mourinho so if it was not part of the rubbish why say it.

My 1st post on the subject was to say your oringinal post was a load of rubbish that hasnt changed no matter what way you spell, the points you made were still a load of rubbish. You appear to be using your dyslexia as an excuse to cover the fact your original points were a load rubbish.

martingriff

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Jeez, I really have been getting the haters mad.

- I posted a list of managers I would have accepted as improvements on Dalglish, Rodgers wasn't on it;
- I don't back peddle. I'll take the stick if it's there to be taken - and hopefully that's how things turn out because it will mean LFC are winning lots of football matches;

No hater just have an opinion about your posts it is what this forum is about no.

You did name a few other managers and I do apologise that i forgot them. However my post are in response to to the vile to seem to say whenever you say his name e.g. Brendan f*****g Rogers.

Yes he maybe unproven in the big time managers but all the great managers of the present area have been young unproven managers who have been given there chance. Can you not give him at least that before you pronounce his judgement.

NukaCola

martingriff wrote: »

No hater just have an opinion about your posts it is what this forum is about no.

You did name a few other managers and I do apologise that i forgot them. However my post are in response to to the vile to seem to say whenever you say his name e.g. Brendan f*****g Rogers.

Yes he maybe unproven in the big time managers but all the great managers of the present area have been young unproven managers who have been given there chance. Can you not give him at least that before you pronounce his judgement.

I think your infactuated with LL

martingriff

redzerdrog wrote: »

My 1st post on the subject was to say your oringinal post was a load of rubbish that hasnt changed no matter what way you spell, the points you made were still a load of rubbish. You appear to be using your dyslexia as an excuse to cover the fact your original points were a load rubbish.

Okay Your secong post:rolleyes: where you pointed out my spelling of Pep and Mourinho and it was infactuated by kenny. In relation to Rodgers been inferior to Kenny we have to see don't we and I be the first to admit if I am wrong about Rodgers. How about you amd LL give him a couple of competitive games first.

My dyslesia comment was in relation to people correcting spelling not as an excuse.

GavRedKing

For what its worth, I think Rodgers is a huge gamble, any unproven manager is, look at us with AVB, it could all go very wrong very easily, but Chelsea and managers....well ye all know how that story goes. :pac:

On the other hand it could go right for Rodgers, he plays an attractive style of football that if it goes right will have the Anfield faithful drooling and he certainly has a few players that can acheive his goal.

If he can keep the core good players and sell some deadwood and save money for the wage bill and sign a few good players Liverpool will be back playing for top 6 in no time, could very well be this seasonif Borini hits the ground running, that guy has the ability to score the goals Liverpool need to push up the table and challenge again for a sustained period.

Its only natural that Liverpool fans will be cautious with Rodgers but I'm telling ya what, hes better then Martinez anyway.

martingriff

NukaCola wrote: »

I think your infactuated with LL

LOL (ya meant to be infactuated in the post) no just having a talk in relation to different opinions. I have no problem with LL. It be very boring if we thought the same around here.

When I heard Rodgers name in relation to the Liverpool job I was happy. I like his style of playing he plays and unlike Kenny in a lot of matches last season seems to have a Plan B and C during games.

He will allways be King Kenny to me for his playing days and 1st stint as manager

NukaCola

martingriff wrote: »

Okay Your secong post:rolleyes: where you pointed out my spelling of Pep and Mourinho and it was infactuated by kenny. In relation to Rodgers been inferior to Kenny we have to see don't we and I be the first to admit if I am wrong about Rodgers. How about you amd LL give him a couple of competitive games first.

My dyslesia comment was in relation to people correcting spelling not as an excuse.

I dont wish to jump on you, but believe it or not your not the first to call out LL on his views. Lots of posters have done this and to LL credit he has defended his opinions wheter we agree or not. The problem i have however is it clogs up this thread have to read the same comments over and over and over again, and its getting to a point where i cant read this thread anymore, so please, if you want answers from him can you not PM him, i cant take anymore of this ****.

/RANT

martingriff

GavRedKing wrote: »

For what its worth, I think Rodgers is a huge gamble, any unproven manager is, look at us with AVB, it could all go very wrong very easily, but Chelsea and managers....well ye all know how that story goes. :pac:

On the other hand it could go right for Rodgers, he plays an attractive style of football that if it goes right will have the Anfield faithful drooling and he certainly has a few players that can acheive his goal.

If he can keep the core good players and sell some deadwood and save money for the wage bill and sign a few good players Liverpool will be back playing for top 6 in no time, could very well be this seasonif Borini hits the ground running, that guy has the ability to score the goals Liverpool need to push up the table and challenge again for a sustained period.

Its only natural that Liverpool fans will be cautious with Rodgers but I'm telling ya what, hes better then Martinez anyway.

If he was our manager I would have cried

martingriff

NukaCola wrote: »

I dont wish to jump on you, but believe it or not your not the first to call out LL on his views. Lots of posters have done this and to LL credit he has defended his opinions wheter we agree or not. The problem i have however is it clogs up this thread have to read the same comments over and over and over again, and its getting to a point where i cant read this thread anymore, so please, if you want answers from him can you not PM him, i cant take anymore of this ****.

/RANT

I agree its getting out of hand but this is an opinion forum so people say what they want to and allways will

GavRedKing

martingriff wrote: »

If he was our manager I would have cried

If Martinez was ye're manager I'd assume there would be a melt down in here.

Time will tell though, Rodgers could easily go onto push for Europe this year and finish inside the top 6 or could stagnate and not progress at all.

I'm sure if you offered any Liverpool fan 4th right now theyed take your arm off and if they keep the squad and add another 2 players they could very easily be there or there abouts.

NukaCola

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'm sure if you offered any Liverpool fan 4th right now theyed take your arm off and if they keep the squad and add another 2 players they could very easily be there or there abouts.

Too much optimism for this thread

redzerdrog

Just on rodgers playing attractive football, I think this is a bit of a myth. Swansea last year were quite boring, they were quite defensive and kept the ball well in there own half without creating many chances.

NEDDURC

redzerdrog wrote: »

Just on rodgers playing attractive football, I think this is a bit of a myth. Swansea last year were quite boring, they were quite defensive and kept the ball well in there own half without creating many chances.

What? Keeping the ball is attractive. Compare that to Ireland in the euros and lumping it forward. I'd definitely prefer to watch us pass the ball around and keep it. The problem is obviously it gives teams time to get back into a good shape against us but BR has talked about penetration (full backs getting forward etc.). I think this will be the hardest thing in the first few games to get right and create some chances.

Kirby

redzerdrog wrote: »

Just on rodgers playing attractive football, I think this is a bit of a myth. Swansea last year were quite boring, they were quite defensive and kept the ball well in there own half without creating many chances.

If you think keeping the ball is unattractive football.......what IS attractive football in your eyes? Merely scoring lots of goals? So if Big Sam football scored lots of goals that would be attractive?

Spain and Barca are described as "boring" by some people and alot of their possession involves keeping the ball moving between your back four. It's very attractive in my eyes. I think most people agree with me. There is nothing uglier than a long hoof forward.

Knex*

Kess73 wrote: »

In fairness to Llyod, he, like myself, came on here and named the managers he would be happy to see come in just after Kenny was sacked.

Pretty sure that he had a few in common with me, with Pep and Jose not being on the realistic choices list.

I had the likes of Van Gaal, AVB, Deschamps, and Benitez. Would be confident that Llyod had the the pair bookending that quartet and possibly one of the remaining two.

I'd be surprised if many had even considered Rodgers as a viable choice before we started getting word of his appointment.

Also, I'm still getting nightmares about the fact that Martinez seemed to get so close. Dear Jesus, Martinez. :mad:

Gbear

NEDDURC wrote: »

What? Keeping the ball is attractive.

That's an incredibly simplistic way to look at it.

If the back 4 exchange passes for 10 minutes is that good football? It's possession football alright but it's still ****e.

My hope is that Rodgers saw the limitations in the Swansea squad, figured that discretion was the better part of valour and played % football to maximise points.
He's talked alot about possession not being much use if you do **** all with it so he's saying the right things. That won't count for much if 10 games into the season we're averaging 70% possession but 5 shots per game. We're going to have to wait and see what he does.

By default, we should create more chances than Swansea - we have Suarez.

Over the past 3 seasons we've lost 1/3 of our matches. That has to be rectified. Directly transplanting Swansea's boring footy will do that but alone it wont be enough to get top 4 and it wont be enough to keep the fans entertained.

LuckyLloyd

NEDDURC wrote: »

What? Keeping the ball is attractive. Compare that to Ireland in the euros and lumping it forward. I'd definitely prefer to watch us pass the ball around and keep it. The problem is obviously it gives teams time to get back into a good shape against us but BR has talked about penetration (full backs getting forward etc.). I think this will be the hardest thing in the first few games to get right and create some chances.

Using the ball decisively is attractive.

Kirby wrote: »

If you think keeping the ball is unattractive football.......what IS attractive football in your eyes? Merely scoring lots of goals? So if Big Sam football scored lots of goals that would be attractive?

Spain and Barca are described as "boring" by some people and alot of their possession involves keeping the ball moving between your back four. It's very attractive in my eyes. I think most people agree with me. There is nothing uglier than a long hoof forward.

Real Madrid and Man Utd play the best football imo. They rarely keep the ball for the sake of it, and they are devastating on the counter.

GavRedKing

redzerdrog wrote: »

Just on rodgers playing attractive football, I think this is a bit of a myth. Swansea last year were quite boring, they were quite defensive and kept the ball well in there own half without creating many chances.

If Liverpool can keep the ball like Swansea and then mix it with the attacking threat of Borini/Suarez/Gerrard they'll create and finish more chances then Swansea managed.

Liverpool have a fairly solid base to build on and if they mix in some possesion football and picking the right pass they'll manage to unlock some doors.

I get what Kess and LL are saying and its natural to be a littel apprehensive of a fairly novice manager but I'm sure everyone is happy to eat their words if Rodgers goes onto, what some see, as over-acheiveing in his first season.

5starpool

For Liverpool to get 4th this season will mean that we will have to perform above expectations by about 15%, and Either Arsenal or Chelsea will have to underperform by about 10% or so, and that's without the possibility of Spurs or possibly Newcastle getting 70+ points themselves. We will need around 70 points to have a shout at it which given the last 3 seasons is a tough enough ask with a new manager in place.

NukaCola

redzerdrog wrote: »

Just on rodgers playing attractive football, I think this is a bit of a myth. Swansea last year were quite boring, they were quite defensive and kept the ball well in there own half without creating many chances.

Well that would depend on what boring means to you.

Last season Newcastle created 302 chances. 39 from setpieces. 263 from open play.

Swansea created 329 chances. 47 from setpieces. 282 from open play.

Would you describe Newcastle as boring?

Kirby

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Real Madrid and Man Utd play the best football imo. They rarely keep the ball for the sake of it, and they are devastating on the counter.

Yes but that question wasn't what is effective football. The question was what is attractive football? In the same way that a knockout bird can be a bit of a bore in the sack but the plane jane is an animal.

GavRedKing

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Using the ball decisively is attractive.

Real Madrid and Man Utd play the best football imo. They rarely keep the ball for the sake of it, and they are devastating on the counter.

If you can manage use the ball correctly and know when to keep it and when to spring the counter, then it can be a brillant tactic, Liverpool have the quality to try it but it may be hard to implement straight away.

Alonso would have been perfect for a Rodgers setup in midfield, Adam and Lucas should be capable of keeping the ball moving fairly quickly aswell though and Rodgers has the assets at his disposal to at least try it.

Handsome Bob

If reports are true (yeah big if, just go with me here), fair play to Carroll for rejecting a loan move to West Ham. This is the kind of **** that really pisses me off about the current regime, an utterly bizarre way of doing business. And for those who say it'll be a good deal in the long run, just look at the idiotic way we've conducted business over Aquilani for the past 2 years, going on 3.

LuckyLloyd

Kirby wrote: »

Yes but that question wasn't what is effective football. The question was what is attractive football? In the same way that a knockout bird can be a bit of a bore in the sack but the plane jane is an animal.

When you've been around the block a bit plain Jane becomes the prize imo!

For me, effective = attractive. Watching teams get cut open with the minimum of fuss is awesome. Watching Barcelona make 1000 five yard passes is not imo.

GavRedKing

5starpool wrote: »

For Liverpool to get 4th this season will mean that we will have to perform above expectations by about 15%, and Either Arsenal or Chelsea will have to underperform by about 10% or so, and that's without the possibility of Spurs or possibly Newcastle getting 70+ points themselves. We will need around 70 points to have a shout at it which given the last 3 seasons is a tough enough ask with a new manager in place.

Very possible, yes we've spent over £60 Million but theres still question marks over a few elements in the team so we could very well have another stuttering season and Arsenal amde a terrible start to last season so theres a chance, I dontt hink Spurs will finish 4th this season anyway.

Kirby

Handsome Bob wrote: »

If reports are true (yeah big if, just go with me here), fair play to Carroll for rejecting a loan move to West Ham. This is the kind of **** that really pisses me off about the current regime, an utterly bizarre way of doing business. And for those who say it'll be a good deal in the long run, just look at the idiotic way we've conducted business over Aquilani for the past 2 years, going on 3.

This deal was nothing like that deal. You always get taken for a ride with "upon playing x amount of games" deals. Liverpool fans seem to think that this is a new phenomenon. It's not.

If west ham stay up they are obligated to buy him. It's a binding contract. And it's for good money.....more than he's worth in my eye especially as your coach doesn't want him.

5starpool

NukaCola wrote: »

Well that would depend on what boring means to you.

Last season Newcastle created 302 chances. 39 from setpieces. 263 from open play.

Swansea created 329 chances. 47 from setpieces. 282 from open play.

Would you describe Newcastle as boring?

The term 'chance' covers a multitude of sins. Downing created a load of chances last season, some of which were good chances, but mostly were chances that were not anything like clearcut, yet they are still lumped under the same definition. Statistically Downing created a lot, but from watching pretty much all his playing time, he did not.