Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014/15

LuckyLloyd

8-10 wrote: »

How much would Dzeko cost if City are signing Bony?

I'd guess £20m. He's too much a finished article for us though no doubt.

super_furry

Dzeko would be such a good signing for us. It'll never happen.

rob316

Agent Coulson wrote: »

So he had agreed to join us in the summer and wages were set as well.

I wonder what happened.

Bayern wouldn't sell.

Charlie19

Agent Coulson wrote: »

So he had agreed to join us in the summer and wages were set as well.

I wonder what happened.

I would sway its all nonsense, that article on blick is saying he agreed with Juve inter and ourselves.

Sappy404

Bony is off to the ACON, and Aguero's injured. Jovetic is injury prone too. He played Milner up front last week. Dzeko isn't really an option for us or anyone else I would say.

Francie Barrett

Gerrard off to LA Galaxy for just £75k a week on an 18 month contract, or so it would seem - http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30700069

What a joke.

smileyj1987

Sappy404 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Liddellpool/status/552499346038861824

If that's the fee get him signed ASAP !!!

super_furry

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Gerrard off to LA Galaxy for just £75k a week on an 18 month contract, or so it would seem - http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30700069

What a joke.

Why is it a joke? He's going because he's no longer guaranteed to start every game.

Boom_Bap

super_furry wrote: »

Why is it a joke? He's going because he's no longer guaranteed to start every game.

We are going to get the last of his best out of him this season.
He'll move to a club where he will play week in week out.
And to componsate his wages, he'll get huge endorsement deals in the US of A. I'm sure his association with Adidas will help in that department if he signs up with the Galaxy.
It's win win for all involved.

smileyj1987

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Gerrard off to LA Galaxy for just £75k a week on an 18 month contract, or so it would seem - http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30700069

What a joke.

I don't find it a joke he wants to play regular games !!!!, I said earlier it's a good time for him to leave . I know some people think it's mad but it really does make sense for all involved .

NukaCola

8-10 wrote: »

Moneyball is not about increasing resale value or save money, some people seem to confuse this.

Buying under valued talent and selling over valued players is my take on moneyball.

Lovren went for 10m one season before we signed him for 20m
Can went for 5m one season before we got him for 10m
Markovich went for less than 10m one season before we spent 20m

So ya its not about resale value but we were a season too late buying them at under valued prices which was my point.

T-K-O

smileyj1987 wrote: »

I don't find it a joke he wants to play regular games !!!!, I said earlier it's a good time for him to leave . I know some people think it's mad but it really does make sense for all involved .

If he wants to go who are we or the club to stand in his way. He's earned the right to choose, however, him leaving is not the best move for the club. A player of his talent despite his age still has an important role in the squad.

S. Goodspeed

NukaCola wrote: »

Buying under valued talent and selling over valued players is my take on moneyball.

Lovren went for 10m one season before we signed him for 20m
Can went for 5m one season before we got him for 10m
Markovich went for less than 10m one season before we spent 20m

So ya its not about resale value but we were a season too late buying them at under valued prices which was my point.

You can call FSG's transfer policy/strategy a lot of things but moneyball ain't one of them. I think they scraped that the day the bought Andy Carroll

8-10

NukaCola wrote: »

Buying under valued talent and selling over valued players is my take on moneyball.

Lovren went for 10m one season before we signed him for 20m
Can went for 5m one season before we got him for 10m
Markovich went for less than 10m one season before we spent 20m

So ya its not about resale value but we were a season too late buying them at under valued prices which was my point.

Got it. With soccer it's a lot harder to define value, especially when you are talking about value over replacement (replacement being average player in the same position) which is one of the strongest measures of value that Sabermetrics has given baseball (WAR - Wins Above Replacement)

8-10

S. Goodspeed wrote: »

You can call FSG's transfer policy/strategy a lot of things but moneyball ain't one of them. I think they scraped that the day the bought Andy Carroll

I disagree with that. They spent 7.5m + Torres that day on Carroll and Suarez and value-wise I think they did well from that day

Hollister11

More money for the yanks to spend on baseball. After buying and selling players, FSG have spent a total NET amount of £30 million in the transfer market..thats about the same as any mid table club. FSGs policy is buying potential because potential wont demand a high salary or cost a big amounT and there is a chance of a sell on profit. Over the past 2 seasons they have steadilly got rid of the high earners and World class talent at LFC and they have never been replaced with players of a similar quality because FSGs buying policy doesn't allow it. LFC made over £90 million on TV royalties alone for last season plus over £150 million in sponsorship merchandise and gate receipts..The LFC Brand sells itself...FSG haven't put ONE PENNY into the club since the day they borrowed ( leverage ) the money to purchase the club For Half its market value ..They bought LFC at a bargain price !, LFC self generate its own finances.....To FSG Liverpool FC are a franchise.....FSG recently signed 2 World class baseball players for Boston Red .Sox, the total fee was over $180 million .......I 'll leave you to contemplate that....

klose

Gerrard gave an interview to the echo there, mentions he would have signed a contract for sure in the summer if offered and was offered one about a month ago. Basically the main reason he is leaving is he isint guaranteed game time and doesn't want to be a bit part player. Think it's fair enough both parties go their own ways. Let the bickering begin!

Link -

https://twitter.com/jamespearceecho/status/552542439807127557

smileyj1987

T-K-O wrote: »

If he wants to go who are we or the club to stand in his way. He's earned the right to choose, however, him leaving is not the best move for the club. A player of his talent despite his age still has an important role in the squad.

Yeah that's a good point ! I do think he has a role to play but if he can't accept the fact he will be a bit part player then it's time for him to leave and go down as an LFC legend .

mav79

Gerrard deserves a contract based on his outstanding career with the club. But he does not deserve a guaranteed place in the first eleven imo.

Turtyturd

klose wrote: »

Gerrard gave an interview to the echo there, mentions he would have signed a contract for sure in the summer if offered and was offered one about a month ago. Basically the main reason he is leaving is he isint guaranteed game time and doesn't want to be a bit part player. Think it's fair enough both parties go their own ways. Let the bickering begin!

Link - http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/steven-gerrard---ill-liverpool-8393442

Sure isn't he only saying that because he's the consummate professional.

rob316

Leicester on the verge of buying kramaric, lad is a ridiculously good finisher. Would of been worth a gamble for us even.

5starpool

rob316 wrote: »

Leicester on the verge of buying kramaric, lad is a ridiculously good finisher. Would of been worth a gamble for us even.

Don't worry, if he's any good we'll buy him when he scores 15, keeps them up and costs 25m.

So did the club fail to offer Gerrard a proper contract or what?

If so it's a bit mad when you see them píssing away cash on players every window

T-K-O

smileyj1987 wrote: »

Yeah that's a good point ! I do think he has a role to play but if he can't accept the fact he will be a bit part player then it's time for him to leave and go down as an LFC legend .

This is key, even the great Gerrard can not and must not start every game at this stage in his career.

rob316

5starpool wrote: »

Don't worry, if he's any good we'll buy him when he scores 15, keeps them up and costs 25m.

£9m he's 23 and has something like 30 goals in 31 app. He'd be dirt on wages too so right up fsg alley.

Devilman40k

Hollister11 wrote: »

More money for the yanks to spend on baseball. After buying and selling players, FSG have spent a total NET amount of £30 million in the transfer market..thats about the same as any mid table club. FSGs policy is buying potential because potential wont demand a high salary or cost a big amounT and there is a chance of a sell on profit. Over the past 2 seasons they have steadilly got rid of the high earners and World class talent at LFC and they have never been replaced with players of a similar quality because FSGs buying policy doesn't allow it. LFC made over £90 million on TV royalties alone for last season plus over £150 million in sponsorship merchandise and gate receipts..The LFC Brand sells itself...FSG haven't put ONE PENNY into the club since the day they borrowed ( leverage ) the money to purchase the club For Half its market value ..They bought LFC at a bargain price !, LFC self generate its own finances.....To FSG Liverpool FC are a franchise.....FSG recently signed 2 World class baseball players for Boston Red .Sox, the total fee was over $180 million .......I 'll leave you to contemplate that....

I'll leave you to contemplate this.... at NO point did FSG ever say they were putting a penny into the club.

From day 1 their stated aim was to make the club self financing and self sufficient. To increase its value to sponsors and generate global corporate partners...when they arrived there were 5 sponsors now there's a multiple of that and all at vastly greater rates.

What they are doing with Liverpool is exactly as they did with Boston. Let it stand on its own feet and generate it's own revenues.

They have a long way to go yet to match the big clubs when you consider that Bayern generated 325m in corporate revenue last year alone.

rob316

Alacer also available for €18m

Mr Alan

Devilman40k wrote: »

I'll leave you to contemplate this.... at NO point did FSG ever say they were putting a penny into the club.

From day 1 their stated aim was to make the club self financing and self sufficient. To increase its value to sponsors and generate global corporate partners...when they arrived there were 5 sponsors now there's a multiple of that and all at vastly greater rates.

What they are doing with Liverpool is exactly as they did with Boston. Let it stand on its own feet and generate it's own revenues.

They have a long way to go yet to match the big clubs when you consider that Bayern generated 325m in corporate revenue last year alone.

Wasn't Werner quite vocal in saying that we have the finances to compete with any team in world football?

Devilman40k

Mr Alan wrote: »

Wasn't Werner quite vocal in saying that we have the finances to compete with any team in world football?

I think that's been blown out of the water on more than one occasion

8-10

Hollister11 wrote: »

FSG recently signed 2 World class baseball players for Boston Red .Sox, the total fee was over $180 million .......I 'll leave you to contemplate that....

Ive contemplated it. Not entirely true is it? Both players were free agents, you're quoting their contact value, one is $95m over 5 years, the other is $88m over 4 years. Didn't cost anything to bring them in, which you seem to be misleadingly suggesting.

And that's not Liverpool money either before you mention the price of the contracts. That's what these players command in the free agent market. Red Sox generate more revenue than Liverpool do and you're talking about a team that for over a decade have sold out virtually all of their 81 home games a year. These big players will continue to being the crowds in this year and is astonishing for a team that finished bottom of their division in 2014. The economics of baseball are very different

Mr Alan

Devilman40k wrote: »

I think that's been blown out of the water on more than one occasion

But it's at odds with your statement?

I'll be totally honest, the amount of money we've spent under FSG is not the problem. It's the way it's been spent.

NukaCola

rob316 wrote: »

Alacer also available for €18m

Paco Alcacer?

Looks a tidy player, had a good season last year and having a decent season this year but still in the potential bracket.

Devilman40k

Mr Alan wrote: »

But it's at odds with your statement?

I'll be totally honest, the amount of money we've spent under FSG is not the problem. It's the way it's been spent.

It's not at odds with anything. We have never had the finances to compete for the best if that was the case we'd have a Willian, Sanchez, Varane already. Of course Werner would say that he has to big the club up.

But honestly have our actions matched that? They have matched exactly the model they set out. Spend within clubs means. FSG have staked everything on FFP and hoping every other club plays by those rules.

Problem is the spending has been haphazard and wasted in the majority of cases.

smileyj1987

Mr Alan wrote: »

But it's at odds with your statement?

I'll be totally honest, the amount of money we've spent under FSG is not the problem. It's the way it's been spent.

Yeah I would agree with this statement also . A lot of the money has been wasted . 17 or so alone on the Carroll deal !!! Not including what the club paid him weekly .
I don't know how anyone can complain about the owners spending money on their baseball team at the end of the day . They have spent money on LFC it's not their fault if money was spent on bad players they have a business model and are setting out to achieve it .
Also they are finally sorting out the stadium issue also . So no one can complain that they don't want to sort out LFC . They have two sports teams to worry about .

Vicxas

I really wish this Gerrard saga would be over.

He's made his decision. A valid, reasonable reason for it. The club have made a conscious decision to not let him warm the bench when he wants to play every game.

There's nothing that can be done now.

DVDM93

Vicxas wrote: »

I really wish this Gerrard saga would be over.

He's made his decision. A valid, reasonable reason for it. The club have made a conscience decision to not let him warm the bench when he wants to play every game.

There's nothing that can be done now.

Marty McFly and Doctor Emmet Brown say different.

Harry Palmr

He should have left this window - the MLS starts in March. The gap could have been used to move and get into the swing of "soccer" and doing the gladhanding that will go with this move.

Kerrigooney

Vicxas wrote: »

I really wish this Gerrard saga would be over.

He's made his decision. A valid, reasonable reason for it. The club have made a conscience decision to not let him warm the bench when he wants to play every game.

There's nothing that can be done now.

I agree and it's going to be torture after every single game. It's all anybody will talk about. There was lads trying to talk to me about it at work today and it's the first time they've ever mentioned football. It's crazy.

Chucky the tree

The worst thing is while Gerrards two goals were hugely important if Rodgers actually picked a decent line-up we would have destroyed Wimbledon. Instead we're told how important Gerrard is.

Harry Palmr

The longest farewell tour since Frank Sinatra or the Eagles.

Kerrigooney

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The longest farewell tour since Frank Sinatra or the Eagles.

Devilman40k

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The worst thing is while Gerrards two goals were hugely important if Rodgers actually picked a decent line-up we would have destroyed Wimbledon. Instead we're told how important Gerrard is.

Biggest issue is lack of pace in final third without Sterling or Sturridge. When they are there they stretch teams pushing them back to their 18 yard line. Lambert is far too static to lead the line.

gafferino

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The worst thing is while Gerrards two goals were hugely important if Rodgers actually picked a decent line-up we would have destroyed Wimbledon. Instead we're told how important Gerrard is.

What? It was virtually a full strength line up bar Sterling. More than enough to beat Wimbledon. I thought he would field a much weaker team To be honest but no real need the way the schedule is this month.

Harry Palmr

Here is something more interesting - its Alex Inglethorpe talking about the use of loans for U21s

http://thebibtheorists.com/2015/01/06/inglethorpe-mapped-out-the-next-two-years-for-academy-players/

Hidalgo

Devilman40k wrote: »

It's not at odds with anything. We have never had the finances to compete for the best if that was the case we'd have a Willian, Sanchez, Varane already. Of course Werner would say that he has to big the club up.

But honestly have our actions matched that? They have matched exactly the model they set out. Spend within clubs means. FSG have staked everything on FFP and hoping every other club plays by those rules.

Problem is the spending has been haphazard and wasted in the majority of cases.

Buying one Sanchez as opposed to a Ballotelli + Markovic could still see the club living within its means.

T-K-O

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The worst thing is while Gerrards two goals were hugely important if Rodgers actually picked a decent line-up we would have destroyed Wimbledon. Instead we're told how important Gerrard is.

Its a no win around these parts.

If Sterling played, he would be accused for ruining him, if Lambert doesn't play the odd cup game, that brigade would also be out.

Agent Coulson

Gerrard really should only start cup games and against the top 4 the rest of the league games he should be on the bench.

Let him run himself into the ground trying to win a cup or 3 before he leaves and let the rest of the team fight for league position.

Only start Gerrard in cup games and against top 4?

Why not utilise him properly?, ie. rest him for the odd game, bring him on after 60 in some games, play the full 90 in other games.

You'd swear our attacking midfielders were banging in goals left right and centre.

Damien360

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Gerrard really should only start cup games and against the top 4 the rest of the league games he should be on the bench.

Let him run himself into the ground trying to win a cup or 3 before he leaves and let the rest of the team fight for league position.

I agree.

I just read the rte news article on his reasons for going. Not sure who did the interview or the original source but he came across as deluded with regard to his current ability and form.

He never wanted to be a squad player and was told in November his playing time would be managed and it helped him make up his mind. Did not get a new contract in the summer as he expected was the first push.

Cup games only would be my preference. Wonder if LA Galaxy would pay to get him earlier in March ?

darced

This post has been deleted.