Discussion in 'The Albert - LFC Talk' started by Nevoo34, Mar 13, 2017.
Suarez also signed an extension.
Here's my take on on it.
The big players who have forced a move in recent years are
The first two have definitely nothing to do with the club. Both to some extent, as you might expect with Spanish speaking players, wanted their move when one of the big Spanish clubs came knocking. Alonso's relationship with Rafa had broken down to some degree, and Masch had wanted to move on the same year but Rafa forced him to stay as he didn't want to lose both. Although Rafa had gone when the next summer rolled round, he pushed for the move he felt he had been promised. Anyway as both were sold pre FSG we can probably draw a line here and start again.
Torres was sold against the clubs wishes, submitting an official transfer request. He looked a shadow of his former self at Chelsea and it can be argued that the £50m we pocketed was a good deal. The reason for Torres leaving (from him) were that he was running out of time to win stuff, and at 28 he could wait through another rebuild. Fair fucks. He did also say that he wasn't happy that LFC had forced him to play through injury (Owen said s similar thing, incidentally)
Suarez was sold in a pre-arranged agreement, likely from the previous summer, to the club he always wanted to end up at. There seems to be no bad feeling from either party, and Luis has been made welcome at the club from time to time. This really seems like a transfer all parties were happy with. I think Luis was 28 at the time he left, and thats probably about right. How we squandered the money is another story...
With all these players we have to recognise that, at some point, they want to play for one of the Spanish Giants. Let's not forget that Utd, at the height of their powers, had to let Ronaldo go in the end.
Sterling is the one that stands out, because we should have fought tooth and fucking nail to keep hold of him. In fact the club come out of this terribly. The contract dispute was really amateurish. The previous season saw him establish himself as one of our most important players, and we relied on him more the following year - in the absence of Sturridge he was probably our best player. For the club to turn round and tell him he was only a nipper and should be happy with a youngsters salary was really bonkers. The media games on both sides were really unpleasant.
I think only really the Sterling sale was really the only one where the club fucked up. The rest are either the inevitable move to the Spanish giant or cashing out at the right time.
Add Agger to the list. He couldn't get on with Bodgers.
Agree in the main. With Sterling, though, I think the biggest barrier to keeping him was his relationship with Rodgers, pretty much confirmed by a lot of what his agent was coming out with. I actually wonder whether had we been able to recruit Klopp that summer (the delay being chiefly on Jurgen's end, through wanting a bit of a break post-Dortmund) as we likely wanted, if there's a good chance Sterling would have pulled a u-turn and stayed.
I also felt though that Sterling is a malcontent little shit and his concerns/objections were a bit of a moving target. We did not handle it well and largely created the situation by not being good enough for an ambitious young player, but he was also really opportunistic and threw every excuse he could find against the wall and just ran with whichever one seemed to stick. I think with a player like that, who lets remember was by then in his 3rd separate contract dispute with the club, the only way we avoid that situation is to win.
He couldnt get on with his own legs.
Agree with @Zinedine Biscan and @Limiescouse, the club obviously made mistakes with the way they handled Sterling's situation but i think Sterling's camp deserves most of the criticism for the way it went and was clearly angling to leave whatever happened. I dont call £100k per week a youngster's salary.
Some might say they aren't good enough to attract big money move, or in some cases like Coutinho and Firmino, have not make the impact to make big teams tapping them up. I don't see clubs like Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern Munich come in for the likes of Henderson and Lallana even if they didn't sign an extension, can't even see United, Chelsea and City going for them both. Sturridge has been injured for nearly the entire season, you think he dare make noise he wants to go somewhere else? Even his agent would not dare to rock that boat.
I cannot subscribe to the "oh these guys never had their head turned, they have our club in their heart", especially the current crop. The last few players I believe that would not leave us even if those giants came in for them would probably be Hyypia, Agger, Hamann and Carragher. These are probably the only guys I can put my money on them turning down offers from those clubs I mentioned.
I think FSG has struggled on two basic elements.
First, football is behind 'the curve', although it has made huge gains in the past 5 years - notably not really in the type of models Comolli was talking up. But just because everyone else is behind the curve doesn't automatically make you ahead of it when you do something different. The arbitrage opportunity only exists if you are getting something right no one else is. Arguably in a dynamic team game, it is far harder to build an arbitrage opportunity from a single statistical observation. With baseball, classically there really was an overvaluation of hitting percentage versus on-base percentage, and you really could use that to create situational advantage. In football, that led you to Downing, who came with the attached unfortunate property of having to be on the field for all of the other minutes in which he was not crossing the ball(even if you could not actually see him for much of that time). LFC's analytics have never created that opportunity, and other clubs have been improving very quickly, so at this point I think it is safe to say they won't.
The other major miscalculation is fundamentally player power. Torres was a model sale. Suarez was perhaps a model sale, selling a player just after the peak being the ideal ratio of market to playing value. Maybe a year too early. Sterling definitely wasn't. For all the reasons that we can say Henderson's price tag ends up being worth it when you look at the number of seasons you should get from him, you can turn around and say we sold Sterling at the wrong time.
The model FSG is looking to is fundamentally based on stocking young talent, keeping the best and moving out the second tier for value at an opportune time, so that over a 4-6 year frame you have a side absolutely loaded with talent, a couple of players coming into their peak, and a few not there yet, but definitely established as elite. Then maybe you keep the Suarez-age guy, get 2-3 titles out of, and sell him at 30. But that relies on a Suarez not wanting or being able to leave when he is 26, and looks around the dressing room to realize that the title-winning side is two years away. In baseball, only in extremis is a player going to be able to do much to change his situation, whereas in football it is absolutely expected.
This got an actual guffaw. Nothing else needs to be said about Downing's time at the club.
I think FSG have done quite well to pull back from the Comolli era (even if they were culpable in it too).
There was a point when we were the mugs of the transfer market, when everyone knew they could add on another 5-10m to the price for other clubs, and we would probably pay it.
Under Klopp we seem to have reached a point where we CAN find value, won't overpay, but will put up the cash for players that are worth it. Ultimately though the sample is too small to make bold predictions. We have only had FSG/Klopp for one summer window, we don't know the targets, we don't know what the prices will be.
The only certainty is that some people will be unhappy if we spend too much on our targets and some people will be unhappy if we manage to get all our targets with a low net spend.
Some cracking debate in here and I doff my cap to @Jase @lfc.eddie @Hope in your heart @Zinedine Biscan @Mascot88 @rab @Limiescouse @redfanman and @Arminius for your well reasoned responses and discussion.
The whole point of the OP was to draw on everyone's thoughts on what represents a good summer, not just in terms of the calibre of recruits needed but that buzz word 'value'
It's good that you've all raised some discussion and I'm glad someone has because one of the strengths of the OP is that I didn't want it to fall into hyperbole about FSG but question whether their strategic approach to running the business is a good fit to running our football club and irrespective of where you stand on that it's this question, it's that which is at the heart of the post not the level of dissent about Jurgen Klopp's tenure as manager, so the post is hardly predicated upon a 'straw man'.
Only as a way of introduction do I look at the 'madness' of a situation where sections of the fanbase, no matter how small, are questioning the suitability of a manager who is one of the best managers in the world and a brilliant fit for Liverpool. And it follows that the aim of the post isn't really to predict what is going to happen in the close season but to question whether that approach will be the best thing for both Liverpool FC and ironically as a knock on effect FSG.
There is no denying that in the history of football, you can point to foolish attempts to use money to take the 'next step' and that has ended up with the well documented disasters such as Risdale at Leeds United but for every Real Madrid, Barcelona, Microsoft or Apple there are far more failures than successes, the principal should never be that a bold investment strategy is in it's self bad, or good for that matter; or conversely, that caution is inherently good or bad because that will always depend on the concrete situation the football club or business is in.
I have tried to argue compellingly why, at the present, for Liverpool football Club despite having a world class manager, who believes in development rather than just buying superstars, that an over cautious approach to investment will make a hard job impossible. In fact I try to go further by questioning whether the aim of FSG really is to push onto the top tier of world football or to be happy with an investment that gives a good return because it was bought so cheaply and was so badly run.
I'd certainly argue it's possible for Liverpool to get back on our perch at the top of European elite while being run sensibly, with one of the worlds greatest managers who fits us like a glove but that would require the owners to make a conscious decision to do that and if they trust Klopp back him, with Spurs that would be a pipe dream but because of our historical fanbase etc we have that possibility whether we have the will is another matter but the oportunity won't be there for ever. That is the question we will see the answer to because no matter how much you develop players, no matter how great the managers football philosophy is, you can't do what we want if you only have quality within the first eleven because that handicaps the manger so much as to make his task impossible. That is the experience under Benitez, Rodgers and now Klopp, a few injuries to the first team squad effects us disproportionately to our rivals, who we also having to compete with at a disadvantage to start with. If Klopp who is indisputably one of the managerial greats fails, it's doubtful we'll get another manager of his quality and our window of opportunity will be gone. When things are so competitive standing still is not an option, you go forward or backwards.
Well reasoned responses,no mention of @Scott Jones in the thank you list at all,must be a mistake surely no.
A big summer ahead, or is it........... I'd hope so. There's a lot of dross to shift, and a lot of quality to bring in.
Bold words, Dragon. Literally, it's in bold.
Fuck off @Scott Jones, succinct one liners don't count
Yeah, sorry about that! The point is true enough though!
You made me fucking swear too @Scott Jones am trying to curb my language here.
@Scott Jones does however get special mention for all of my likes
I feel guilty now
Am just a forum posting snob
You're probably on his ignore list.. new accounts start that way now for some reason
No way,Im far too friendly and charming.
Just for clarification in point one - which agents are you referring to? I am assuming not the agent of the player. Those guys are pretty much out for the player they represent and themselves.
If they are engineering a move - they will talkt o tyou because it's good for them - not neccesarily you.
Can't have it both ways though. We were not playing him as a 'youngster'. He was starting every game, carrying most of the attacking threat, and clearly our second or third best player.
We tried to have our cake and eat it.
Well, I for one don't think that selling a player at his peak value represents good business. It's a flawed model, at least when talking about special talents. To take Suarez' case: we would have been much better off if we had managed to keep him at the club, even by paying him a fortune in wages, even by making him the best paid player in the world. Because he would have allowed the club to stay competitive (thus taking in CL money) and build a strong team around him, with players attracted by our strength, our ability to win trophies and wanting to play with such a genius.
I know that this is hindsight now regarding Luis, and I know that the player's wishes come into reckoning as well, but in general terms, I don't think it's best to sell a player at peak value when talking about a genius. The best is to keep him by all means and to build everything around him. A genius will attract other geniuses. Having no genius on board will make it very difficult to attract others, as we are witnessing these days, now that Luis has been sold and Gerrard has retired.
We have allegedly money to buy really good players, but they haven't wanted to come to us. Hence Klopp having kept the purse's strings tight for now, rightly so imo. If we make it into the CL, it could help us though. But only if the owners are genuinely ready to then pay top wages for top players. Otherwise, we'll continue with our current predicament I'm afraid: devolving from a former top club to one who forms young talented players, and sells them at the best possible price.
Who else at the club was earning £100k at the time? Gerrard and Studge who benefitted from Suarez leaving and had a recognised history of scoring goals in the premier league. Anyone else?
How long had sterling been performing in the first team - less than a full season.
Doubt the club would have had an issue inserting something further in the contract to look again after a further 12 months.
Am not new, I been on here for years.
Just to be clear, the idea is not really to be selling at peak value - it is almost inherently after that point which is the ideal timing. That timing is defined by market value expressed against playing value, with playing value being a function of the remaining seasons of a player's career (in practical terms, estimated).
For simplicity, we can assume that players lose half their remaining playing value every year over 32, having reached a peak/plateau at 27. If we consider a player purchased at 26 for 50 million and on a 5 year contract, that player will deliver 10 million of playing value per season (assuming way the uncertainty around the accuracy of the acquisition of value). If you can sell the player for more than 10 million when he is 30 and done his fourth year, it makes sense to do so. If you get 25 million for that 30 year old, you are walking away from a declining asset, getting half your resources back out having received 40 million of playing value.
It really is nothing more than putting mathematical precision to the idea of having a player's legs go on someone else's pitch. As I noted above, it explains Torres, but Suarez was too early, and it just cannot explain Sterling.
Yes, that's a fair point.
Separate names with a comma.