Liverpool Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014 - Mod Note in OP 28/8

gafferino

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/latest-news/169169-markovic-to-wear-no-50-at-liverpool

Lazar wearing No. 50

Underpaid Mike

Well his shooting stats are pretty bloody poor unfortunately.
I for one hope we dont sign him, he is 29 and is hardly going to drastically improve at this stage of his career. He also had no assists in the entire of last season in a PSG team that scored 84 goals

dogbert27

Talisman wrote: »

It's simple really - Real have too many of those pesky foreigner types in their squad. Their solution is to offload one of them (Di Maria). The headache for them is that the only club that have actively shown an interest in him, PSG, are hamstrung by FFP rules and can't afford the player without offloading somebody in their squad. Hence the speculation about Cavani and Lavezzi leaving - both were linked with Liverpool and a host of other clubs.

The injury to Ibrahimovic has thrown into doubt whether Cavani will be allowed to leave PSG.

If Di Maria stays at Madrid, then Falcao is available to go elsewhere. So if Liverpool are in for him it will most likely be done on the transfer deadline.

PSG are not the only active club interested in Di Maria. Apparently United are about to splash 100 million on him!

Augmerson

9 Days until the draw....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qqd6T_A9LY

Anyone

gafferino wrote: »

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/latest-news/169169-markovic-to-wear-no-50-at-liverpool

Lazar wearing No. 50

Time to get cracking on a song to the theme tune of Hawaii 5 0. Original, not that modern ****e.

Hotfail.com

dogbert27 wrote: »

PSG are not the only active club interested in Di Maria. Apparently United are about to splash 100 million on him!

Ha. Ha.

Kess73

Underpaid Mike wrote: »

Bonkers good, right ?
Only thing I will say is his age, the injury he is just coming back from and moving to a new country then its not a guaranteed 25+ goals a season signing for me. Could take him a few months to get up to speed in the premiership. It is a huge statement of intent from the club however if they were to land him. Would make us favourites for 3rd surely and outside title contenders

His (disputed) age would not be the problem. The big risk with Falcao is the fact he is coming back from an ACL injury. We only have to look at Lucas to see what kind of impact such an injury can have on a player.

If Falcao comes back at the same level (or even close) to what he was at pre injury, then he would go straight back to being one of the most natural and clinical finishers in the game.

If however he did not return to his old form, then he would be a player costing £20m for just one season.

Would see him as a massive gamble albeit one with the potential for an equally massive pay off if it went right.

Utopia Parkway

Hope we are not putting all our eggs into this Falcao on loan basket. Can see that inevitably falling through and us being left with a few days to go in the transfer window and being left with Eto'o in at the last minute.

Not to mention it's 20M for one season. If he scores the goals that gets us back into the CL again then you make the money back and more but if not you are left having spent a lot of money for very little return.

Just cannot see it happening.

Dickerty

Any chance we could get Huntelaar for a reasonable fee? He only has a year left on his Schalke deal.
He's not in the Falcao league, but has bags of experience for his 31 years (turned 31 last week), wouldn't be on a huge wage either. He has a better than 1 in 2 scoring rate across club and international football (2 in 3 during his time at Schalke, including pens).

If we were to lose Sturridge for any length of time, I'd be happy with him as our focal striker...

Fescue

I get the feeling we are looking for a short term solution. Once Origi arrives next season, we would be strong.

If Rodgers plans on playing with one up top, then 3 strikers is ample. If he wants to play with two, then you need to make sure the second striker is top notch.

Underpaid Mike

Dickerty wrote: »

Any chance we could get Huntelaar for a reasonable fee? He only has a year left on his Schalke deal.
He's not in the Falcao league, but has bags of experience for his 31 years (turned 31 last week), wouldn't be on a huge wage either. He has a better than 1 in 2 scoring rate across club and international football (2 in 3 during his time at Schalke, including pens).

If we were to lose Sturridge for any length of time, I'd be happy with him as our focal striker...

Huntelaar is one of the slowest strikers in the game.
He would be a disaster and also command big wages.
No thanks

Dickerty

Fescue wrote: »

I get the feeling we are looking for a short term solution. Once Origi arrives next season, we would be strong.

If Rodgers plans on playing with one up top, then 3 strikers is ample. If he wants to play with two, then you need to make sure the second striker is top notch.

It seems like he'll play 1 more often than not, and bring on a second striker (or replace Sturridge) when needed. So 3 IS enough.

The big concern is if Danny gets injured, the drop in quality is very substantial. But the same could be said for Chelsea with Costa, and neither of Arsenal's central strikers are 20+ goal players (Giroud/Sanogo). So the question is also about where else we'll get goals (Sterling, Lallana, Hendo, Coutinho, set pieces), and whether we can reduce the number we concede (3 new starting defenders!)

Talisman

dogbert27 wrote: »

PSG are not the only active club interested in Di Maria. Apparently United are about to splash 100 million on him!

It's a waiting game - will Man Utd spend £100M on a player when they could fill the gaps in their team with that money?

My feeling is that of the players speculated about, Liverpool want Cavani, but PSG are only offering Lavezzi. If Liverpool want Cavani then a substantial offer is going to be required, say £50M for arguments sake, then PSG will take that money to pay Di Maria's wages and their deal with Madrid is back on. The club will explore all other options before sanctioning such an offer for Cavani.

garra

Brendaõ wrote: »

Wow. Jordan showed unbelievable courage and mentality to go out and perform how he did after hearing that. Glad to hear the club were so supportive too.

And there was me being miffed with him for getting sent off in 3rd last match, he is starting to reach Kuyt-like levels of consistency and productivity and am delighted to hear his dad is on the mend

Dickerty

Underpaid Mike wrote: »

Huntelaar is one of the slowest strikers in the game.
He would be a disaster and also command big wages.
No thanks

He's quicker than Lambert! And he's a 18 yard box striker, clinical and good in the air. He's a different option, when options are what we need.

When our choices are aging legends after a pay-day (Eto'o), world class players costing £10M/20M a year (Falcao, Balotelli) and young strikers that we cannot be sure we can rely on (Lacazette, Diao), I think Huntelaar could be a shrewd choice...

Talisman

Dickerty wrote: »

Any chance we could get Huntelaar for a reasonable fee? He only has a year left on his Schalke deal.
He's not in the Falcao league, but has bags of experience for his 31 years (turned 31 last week), wouldn't be on a huge wage either. He has a better than 1 in 2 scoring rate across club and international football (2 in 3 during his time at Schalke, including pens).

If we were to lose Sturridge for any length of time, I'd be happy with him as our focal striker...

His performance level wasn't great at Real Madrid or Milan but he has done okay in the lower quality leagues. Similarly Kezman, was a goal machine in the Dutch and Turkish leagues but not so in Spain and England.

I don't think he could adapt to the Premier League at this stage of his career.

Underpaid Mike

Dickerty wrote: »

He's quicker than Lambert! And he's a 18 yard box striker, clinical and good in the air. He's a different option, when options are what we need.

When our choices are aging legends after a pay-day (Eto'o), world class players costing £10M/20M a year (Falcao, Balotelli) and young strikers that we cannot be sure we can rely on (Lacazette, Diao), I think Huntelaar could be a shrewd choice...

Ricky lambert cost 4m and is on 40k a year
Total outlay probably 10m over 3 years on him.
Huntelaar wanted 100k a week to join Arsenal

Prefer to sign Falcao for £20m on a season long loan than spend that kinda money on Huntelaar

noodler

The amount of faith being placed in Origi is mental imo!

We need a class striker full stop - not just for a season.

Agent Coulson

So I'm thinking if Napoli get through to the CL group stages Lucas & Agger might be heading there.

If they don't then Higuain is probably another striker to add to the list of those who could be available.

IITYWYBMAD

I knew Lambert was Underpaid....

0028673

Agent Coulson wrote: »

So I'm thinking if Napoli get through to the CL group stages Lucas & Agger might be heading there.

If they don't then Higuain is probably another striker to add to the list of those who could be available.

If we were to go shopping in Napoli I always liked Callejon and I think his worth a look.

Underpaid Mike

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

I knew Lambert was Underpaid....

If i was on 40k a week I wouldnt be posting on internet forums, id be living dan bilzerans life !

https://twitter.com/DanBilzerian

Augmerson

Would it really cost 20m for Falcao on loan for a season? That would surely be the most spent on a loanee. Remy was only gonna cost 8 or 9m pounds.

Dickerty

Augmerson wrote: »

Would it really cost 20m for Falcao on loan for a season? That would surely be the most spent on a loanee. Remy was only gonna cost 8 or 9m pounds.

The mooted figures were £10M in wages (he's only €250K a week!?) and a £10M fee. If they actually WANTED him off the books to save money, you have to think they would accept much less, just to make it realistic to do the deal.

But why would they??

Agent Coulson

Augmerson wrote: »

Would it really cost 20m for Falcao on loan for a season? That would surely be the most spent on a loanee. Remy was only gonna cost 8 or 9m pounds.

He's on about €350k a week tax free that's about €14m a year.

So that is £11.5m in wages a year tax free before the loan fee of close to £10m

So yes £20m is what we aere looking at.

Edit: Not sure what the tax rate for footballers is in England so it could be a lot more than £20m if he wants the same kind of wages.

Augmerson

Madness. We should just sign someone for 20m pounds, and have them for more than one season.

Harry Palmr

50%

Its nuts - for that money you could buy someone decent and keep him. Depay and Eto'o would be my current preferred solution. The former for the PL the latter for the CL, than look at the options again in January if still in that competition.

Agent Coulson

So you are talking about a player who would come close to tripling the higest paid players wages at the club and you are only bringing him in on loan.

As much as I love the idea of Falcao coming in it would be crazy and a huge gamble as was said earlier he is only just back from an ACL injury and has yet to prove his full fitness.

Also a major thing Brendan Rodgers has worked on is team spirit and morale, to have a player on those kind of wages so far off everyone else can only cause trouble in the long run.

Drexel

Is there really a possibilty of Falco on loan? I find it hard to believe

Liverpool would be mental to pay 20million for a guy for one year.

martyos121

There's only one solution: Bring Robbie Keane back.

MarkY91

did suarez really for for just 65 million? we really do make a mug of ourselves in the transfer window..

Agent Coulson

MarkY91 wrote: »

did suarez really for for just 65 million? we really do make a mug of ourselves in the transfer window..

Barcelona told the world Neymar cost £45m we all know now he cost close to £70 so I wouldn't believe a word out of them.

Paddy Power said it best.

googled eyes wrote: »

https://twitter.com/paddypower/status/501678639189344256

Utopia Parkway

jonny666 wrote: »

Is there really a possibilty of Falco on loan? I find it hard to believe

Liverpool would be mental to pay 20million for a guy for one year.

Not sure I would take the risk personally but he could fire Liverpool back into the CL again next season. Then you make your money back and more. If he doesn't though it will have been one big waste of money.

whatawaster

If it really did cost £20 million to have Falcao for the season I would be happy enough.

A striker that good would cost in excess of £50 million (£10 million a season on a 5 year contract) and probably not far off £10m a year in wages (£200K a week).

So £20 million a season is not far off the going rate for a striker that good. You can be damn sure we would be paying something in that region for Cavani (who I would prefer btw).

Agent Coulson

whatawaster wrote: »

If it really did cost £20 million to have Falcao for the season I would be happy enough.

A striker that good would cost in excess of £50 million (£10 million a season on a 5 year contract) and probably not far off £10m a year in wages (£200K a week).

So £20 million a season is not far off the going rate for a striker that good. You can be damn sure we would be paying something in that region for Cavani (who I would prefer btw).

You would have to double that in England just to match his tax free wages in Monaco so you are talking £20m in wages for one player after telling a player like Sterling he isn't get a pay raise up to £100k a week because money will go to his head at such a young age.

Team morale would be in tatters in a couple of months.

K-9

Agent Coulson wrote: »

So you are talking about a player who would come close to tripling the higest paid players wages at the club and you are only bringing him in on loan.

As much as I love the idea of Falcao coming in it would be crazy and a huge gamble as was said earlier he is only just back from an ACL injury and has yet to prove his full fitness.

Also a major thing Brendan Rodgers has worked on is team spirit and morale, to have a player on those kind of wages so far off everyone else can only cause trouble in the long run.

It's only a loan signing so wont have any long term effects really. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

It's huge money but for me its worth a punt. Has the potential to move us up to title challengers.

MarkY91 wrote: »

did suarez really for for just 65 million? we really do make a mug of ourselves in the transfer window..

Wouldn't believe a word of it. The Echo journos had it at around £72 Million.

dogbert27

I agree, I think the Falcao loan deal looks crazy for any club apart from Real Madrid!

It could all be a smokescreen while we're lining up a real target or as per previous transfer windows at this stage, nothing happens.

Francie Barrett

Lads, Falcao for £20M isn't actually expensive at all. In fact, it might actually be underpaying for him slightly if anything.

£10 million of the loan fee will go to paying his wages. For a world class striker, £200k a week is about what you'd expect to have to pay. That leaves us paying £10M to Monaco to secure his services for the year. That's not actually that much when compared to other world class footballers. Ronaldo, Bale, Neymar, Suarez, etc all cost £70M-£90M. If you amortise the cost of the player (financial lingo for spread the cost over several years) then clubs are pretty much paying £10M-£15M each season for a world class player. Don't forget, that amortised cost is just for the transfer fee alone - the club will still have to pay the £10M in wages on top of that. If anything, by shelling out £10M, we might actually be slightly underpaying for Falao. Given the fact that Falcao is at the height of his powers and at 28 now, it's better to pay £10M for him now then in 5 years when he's 33 and he's less effective. Also, by paying for his service for the season, we avoid the unpleasant scenario that Chelsea faced when they bought Torres and were stuck with a player who has went from a valuation of £50M to practically zero - while still having to pay a Galactico wage. Finally, another benefit of bringing Falcao in is the prestige it brings to this club. That sends a very powerful message out to other clubs and players that we are a force and that we can secure the best players in the world.

Let's get the deal done, I say. £20M at very worse is a fair price and may prove to be a bargain.

Connavar

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Lads, Falcao for £20M isn't actually expensive at all. In fact, it might actually be underpaying for him slightly if anything.

£10 million of the loan fee will go to paying his wages. For a world class striker, £200k a week is about what you'd expect to have to pay. That leaves us paying £10M to Monaco to secure his services for the year. That's not actually that much when compared to other world class footballers. Ronaldo, Bale, Neymar, Suarez, etc all cost £70M-£90M. If you amortise the cost of the player (financial lingo for spread the cost over several years) then clubs are pretty much paying £10M-£15M each season for a world class player. Don't forget, that amortised cost is just for the transfer fee alone - the club will still have to pay the £10M in wages on top of that. If anything, by shelling out £10M, we might actually be slightly underpaying for Falao. Given the fact that Falcao is at the height of his powers and at 28 now, it's better to pay £10M for him now then in 5 years when he's 33 and he's less effective. Also, by paying for his service for the season, we avoid the unpleasant scenario that Chelsea faced when they bought Torres and were stuck with a player who has went from a valuation of £50M to practically zero - while still having to pay a Galactico wage. Finally, another benefit of bringing Falcao in is the prestige it brings to this club. That sends a very powerful message out to other clubs and players that we are a force and that we can secure the best players in the world.

Let's get the deal done, I say. £20M at very worse is a fair price and may prove to be a bargain.

The only issue I have with that, is Players like ronaldo and bale sell a ton of shirts and get loads of promo money in.
If he is only a one season player, the potential income from him may drop considerably
(Not saying I wouldn't take him)

Utopia Parkway

Dr Phil called up to the Brazil squad.

whatawaster

Agent Coulson wrote: »

You would have to double that in England just to match his tax free wages in Monaco so you are talking £20m in wages for one player after telling a player like Sterling he isn't get a pay raise up to £100k a week because money will go to his head at such a young age.

Team morale would be in tatters in a couple of months.

I said £20 million a season would be good value for Falcao. £200K a week. I wouldn't pay him £400K a week.

Team morale seemed fine last season with Suarez earning far more than almost everyone else.

Kirby

Sure don't you know that renting a player is dead money...........:P

Utopia Parkway

whatawaster wrote: »

Team morale seemed fine last season with Suarez earning far more than almost everyone else.

One thing that cures team morale. Winning.

Hollister11

It's mad Sturridge has scored the most goals in 50 games

witnessmenow

Agent Coulson wrote: »

You would have to double that in England just to match his tax free wages in Monaco so you are talking £20m in wages for one player after telling a player like Sterling he isn't get a pay raise up to £100k a week because money will go to his head at such a young age.

Team morale would be in tatters in a couple of months.

But Liverpool aren't paying him, Monaco are. Liverpool have to pay Monaco ok, but it wouldnt be income taxed right? If my company sends me to America for a few months my wages and tax are still done in Ireland

skywalker

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Lads, Falcao for £20M isn't actually expensive at all. In fact, it might actually be underpaying for him slightly if anything.

£10 million of the loan fee will go to paying his wages. For a world class striker, £200k a week is about what you'd expect to have to pay. That leaves us paying £10M to Monaco to secure his services for the year. That's not actually that much when compared to other world class footballers. Ronaldo, Bale, Neymar, Suarez, etc all cost £70M-£90M. If you amortise the cost of the player (financial lingo for spread the cost over several years) then clubs are pretty much paying £10M-£15M each season for a world class player. Don't forget, that amortised cost is just for the transfer fee alone - the club will still have to pay the £10M in wages on top of that. If anything, by shelling out £10M, we might actually be slightly underpaying for Falao. Given the fact that Falcao is at the height of his powers and at 28 now, it's better to pay £10M for him now then in 5 years when he's 33 and he's less effective. Also, by paying for his service for the season, we avoid the unpleasant scenario that Chelsea faced when they bought Torres and were stuck with a player who has went from a valuation of £50M to practically zero - while still having to pay a Galactico wage. Finally, another benefit of bringing Falcao in is the prestige it brings to this club. That sends a very powerful message out to other clubs and players that we are a force and that we can secure the best players in the world.

Let's get the deal done, I say. £20M at very worse is a fair price and may prove to be a bargain.

That all makes perfect sense, if he wasnt coming back from an acl injury.

Its a risky move, if we pulled it off, it will either pay off big time, or be a noteable example in future textbooks & clip shows about transfers gone wrong.

Agent Coulson

whatawaster wrote: »

I said £20 million a season would be good value for Falcao. £200K a week. I wouldn't pay him £400K a week.

Team morale seemed fine last season with Suarez earning far more than almost everyone else.

He wasn't thought he was due to go on to the big wages £200K this season. last season he was still earning less than or the same as Gerrard if I remember right.

I agree I'd be happy to pay Falcao £200k a week but double that would be crazy I think.

Harry Palmr

Agent Coulson

witnessmenow wrote: »

But Liverpool aren't paying him, Monaco are. Liverpool have to pay Monaco ok, but it wouldnt be income taxed right? If my company sends me to America for a few months my wages and tax are still done in Ireland

From what I have read the reason Monaco want rid of him either by loan or sale is to take him completely off their books.

I could be wrong but that seems to me they don't want to pay him anything and whatever team he goes to takes control of his wages.

I think this is the same thing that happened at Anzhi when they tied to get rid of all the big wage players.

Kirby

Well good luck with that. No team is going to pay 100% of Falcao's wages on loan. He's on too much money.