The Owners

Discussion in 'The Albert - LFC Talk' started by liveforthereds, Nov 12, 2012.

  1. Elessar

    Elessar Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    708
    One supporter had a banner the FSG didn't like so they made a photoshop job and changed it.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpool-fans-accuse-clubs-tv-10335480
     
  2. Elessar

    Elessar Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    708
    I don't think they will sell us anytime soon. Owning us and Red Sox most probably helps them out in other business deals. Gives them a lot of good PR. The club goes up i value and at the same time they get free PR. How many would know about them if they didn't owned us? They do their business deals quietly and that is they way they should do it. Keeping a low personal profile.

    Roman must do it in a different way because he is Russian. He could have been killed/jailed/having his money confiscated if he didn't own Chelsea and keeping a high profile. Look at many other mega rich Russian billionares for example.
     
    Anfield rd Dreamer likes this.
  3. gr_sounder

    gr_sounder Always Watching

    Messages:
    2,036
    Likes Received:
    1,237
    First, this is something claimed at this point.
    Second, if it is true.... I don't think it's offensive. If this is a mural on a wall and something for a backdrop, it's entirely rational to modify it to remove that flag/sign.
     
  4. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    Actually they would if the asking price was met.... and you cannot compare us to Red Sox where they actually have some affiliation towards. They are American, owning an American favourite past time and probably watched and played the game when they were young, a fan of the sport all their lives too. That is where the line is drawn I am afraid. But yes, if the price they slapped on the club was met, they would have sold it. Offer not met, so they didn't sell.

    You do realise billionaires or not, there is never a limit to anyone when they are on top of the world to say "I have enough", don't you? This is not to slate the owners, every rich person I have met has it all and yet they want more. If there is ever a limit where everyone is happy with, there will be no war.

    Nothing wrong for profit gain in investment, that is something we all have to live by knowing that our club is now owned by a group who invest in sport business to make money at some point, they are not treating like a non-profit organisation, a social enterprise that generates profit is what they are driving our club towards. How they take the money out is another story, but that's the reality.

    So they are in it for as long as there are no buyers that could match their valuation.
     
  5. Maurice

    Maurice TIA Youth Team

    Messages:
    296
    Likes Received:
    33
    That's the problem with our owners. They only want players which have a good sell-on value. So do they want to be Champions??? If so than sometimes you need to invest in the end-product that maybe has no sell-on value after a couple of years............. But when those players make you champions they repay you with the money that comes in for winning titles........... Think about bigger sponsorcontracts, more shirt selling etc etc etc

    Did Barcelona buy Suarez because they thought they could sell him for more money? No they bought Suarez for having a bigger chance to win titles.
    Did the scum bought Pogba because they thought they could sell him for more money? No they bought Pogba for having a bigger chance to win titles.
    Do Chelsea, Man City buy topplayers because they think they can sell them for more money? No they buy topplayers for having a bigger chance to win titles.

    FSG must buy players with the priority that they can make them winning titles after titles and not with the priority that they have a bigger sell-on clause ffs.......... We've got owners with the wrong mentaly. I don't care about a sell-on clause. I care about winning titles!!!!!!!!!!

    So FSG, get on with Aubamayang and try and buy that player ffs.....................
     
  6. Red_Jedi

    Red_Jedi Anfield kick about

    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    610
    My point is that even if someone else offered an amount that showed them a profit, they would take it (if they wanted a tidy profit). Yes everything does have a value, and millionaires or not, most people always want more - kind of human nature.

    John Moores and Rick Parry ran LFC like a social enterprise, had childhood connections to the city and club - as did Steve Morgan.

    But ultimately, they could never take the club forward - and now there are very few British owned clubs that are moving forward... That is the reality.

    But FSG have not endowed the club with debt, but invested in it. Things could be 100 times worse, the only things better could be a Sheikh with oil money or local business man who has the wealth to buy the club and propel forward. The local business man with the wealth isn't about - and the Sheikh never really materialised.

    So we have pretty much the best option available - Owners with expertise in sports ownership, and investing in the club to (yes increase the value) but also increase the chances of success on the pitch.
     
  7. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    Seriously mate, it was a tidy profit, but not enough for our current owners because they value us higher. Everyone is in it for the money, to say otherwise is just plain naive. I could even get on board if we are here discussing about Red Sox, that they actually have some vested interest in it, but us? They didn't even know we exists until one of their staff told them we are a good buy, can't remember who it was, Hogan I think.

    Lastly, I am still waiting to see their definition of success. I have been very vocal about them till they actually went out to get us Klopp. Now if they were to splash them cash Klopp needed to bring in those reinforcement we've been reading about then their idea of success aligned with ours (fans). Arsenal board of directors for the past decade or more have a very different ideas when it comes to success. Self sufficient, profitable club and stick around in the Champs League is their idea of success. Is that what we want?
     
  8. The Elusive 19th

    The Elusive 19th TIA Youth Team

    Messages:
    3,359
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Err. Always thought they wanted to emulate the Arsenal model.
     
  9. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    That my friend will be my biggest concern....
     
    redbj likes this.
  10. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,078
    Likes Received:
    8,900
    It is very very difficult to make money from owning a football club. Henry and Co did not buy us with the idea that he could buck that trend. These people own an integrated sports marketing and broadcast company and it is through that that they will make money. Liverpool are only valuable in the long run to that end if we are successful on the pitch. They are not going to spend like drunken sailors, but it is in their best interests that we are succesful.
     
    redfanman and Red_Jedi like this.
  11. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    Champs League football every season can be considered a success if P&L don't go red, but is that the level of success everyone is looking for, from fans onwards? It is in every football club owners to want to see their club being successful, but the definition of success varies from fans to owners.
     
  12. Red_Jedi

    Red_Jedi Anfield kick about

    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    610
    They are the current owners, there is no alternative.

    And I would say we would hold them to account to run our club in the right way.

    They've listened to us when we stood up against prices etc.
    And they listened about stadium expansion.

    But the next couple of transfer windows will let us know how serious they are - the early sounds coming are positive - just not the way we are going about it.
     
  13. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    Now that is something everyone would agree with, instead of them being "just a custodian" to the club, they are actually the owners while we are the consumers. That I can agree with wholeheartedly.
     
    Red_Jedi likes this.
  14. gr_sounder

    gr_sounder Always Watching

    Messages:
    2,036
    Likes Received:
    1,237
    This summarizes some of the biggest misconceptions of the current owners of Liverpool FC.
    "They only want players which have a good sell-on value"
    "We've got owners with the wrong mentaly [sic]. I don't care about a sell-on clause. I care about winning titles!!!!!!!"

    The tired old line of them only wanting players that have sell on value is NOT something these owners have declared. They want to buy players that are a value-purchase which is a totally different thing. They have never come out and said we are only buying players that we think we can sell later for profit.

    Also, they DO care about winning titles... and in order to do so have shown a willingness to splash the big bucks in order to land the players they need to make it happen. They did it with the Boston Red Sox and it looks like they are trying to do it here. They have tried to build the team. Yes mistakes have been made, but you can't say they aren't willing to try and back managers. No they are not trying to throw around stupid money but this team needed a massive change when they took over. The team they inherited was in a complete mess. Many players past their prime and others that were never going to be good enough. It was not a team that needed 1-2 players, though they did try to land a few that looked like they could become stars.

    If they were only worried about sell-on value, they would not have looked to buy VVD (his stock is at a high now) and they wouldn't have hired Klopp. These are moves to try and push to challenge for titles and remain at the top of the table.

    Yes they are wanting to buy value players... you have to unless you have unlimited (essentially) funds... which we don't. Have mistakes been made... absolutely... every team makes them.

    But to say the owners only care about sell-on value and don't care about winning titles is just wrong.
     
  15. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,078
    Likes Received:
    8,900
    Ignoring Leicester, most people would agree that to win a title you're going to have to put together a squad that has a market value of probably somewhere between 400-500 million quid. Some of the teams we are competing against can afford to spend that much and so buy the bulk of their squad at their peak. We cannot. So for us the only way to get a squad with that sort of market value is to find players earlier in their development and have them make those final steps while playing for us (as their value appreciates). It is not about sell on value, it is about how we go about putting together a competitive squad with less money than the sides we are competing against. Henry has specifically addressed this point, explaining it clearly, but it continues to be misconstrued.

    The often underappreciated thing about this sort of approach is that the closer you get to genuinely competing the more you can push the boat out of the players you hope are the final piece of the jigsaw.
     
  16. redbj

    redbj hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road

    Messages:
    15,443
    Likes Received:
    8,744

    I quoted you not becuase I wanted to discuss this solely with you but for two reasons.

    1st is a request, can we please stop the polarising statements like 'anti FSG circle jerk', I think we are better than that as a forum....that's the exact way to shoot down a topic. ( don't care who 'started it')

    2nd is because you seem a fairly positive kinda person, maybe to a point of militancy, but hey, whatever, I like that you try to see the good, so I thought you as a poster would be an ideal person to quote.

    You see, I do see a few positives in FSG, not least one jurgen norbett Klopp, I like the look of this Edwards fella, purchases like Coutinho and mane ( to name just two of many) have me very positive, but I do have this overall feeling that they have no direction, the who Klopp situation just seems like another roll of the dice to me.

    After they have been here seven full years, it's very hard to discern any long term plan, from Kenny, to Rodgers, now to Klopp, there is no continuance, no semblance of a long term mission statement.

    So many transfers reek of buying to sell, then an anomaly like the andy carol transfer happens....

    I think there are a hell of a lot worse out there, but we don't have the strong leadership that is needed to get us back to where we ( as fans) think we belong.

    To me, we are just floating around as a very sellable brand, with no real commitment to knock United off our perch, incremental improvements are all good, the stadiums great, until you see that we are just keeping up with the jones, not being market leaders.

    The question I like to ask is, 'what if Klopp doesn't work out' and the answer is pretty grim really, I can't see anything but tearing the whole blueprint up and starting again, and to me, that's simply not good enough.

    I'm not discussing the need for a picket line, I don't subscribe to a campaign of FSG. Out, I do however see serious critical issues about their running of the club, but to me a lot of the defence of FSG seems to be based around 'they haven't done anything wrong' which is all good and well if you are referring to your childs behaviour at pre school, but what have they done to outpace our competitors.....that's what concerns me. What IS the ACTUAL plan for this club?.....7 years on, and we as a. Fan base have no clear indication.....

    This can't go on indefinitely and end well.
     
  17. redbj

    redbj hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road

    Messages:
    15,443
    Likes Received:
    8,744
    Whilst I agree the LCFC season was pure freak, it just sounded funny......' Ignore the obvious example that. Proves me wrong'
     
  18. Red_Jedi

    Red_Jedi Anfield kick about

    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    610
    Well the first thing FSG have done is close the gap to the other clubs around us - and they've expanded the stadium.

    Yes, they could have built a 75000 seater new stadium, but would it get filled?

    We are also now competing for players that were beyond our reach for probably close to 2 decades.

    And they've got one of the best managers in the world who they are fully backing with a longer term vision.

    The point is close the gap to those above/wealthier than us - then perhaps take the step to be market leader.

    What exactly are your expectations - what's happened at city or Chelsea? You have to remember FFP comes into play too.
     
    NYRhockey likes this.
  19. NYRhockey

    NYRhockey Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,089
    @redbj , sure, i'm happy to have a discussion re: FSG.

    Regarding the trolls, i started calling them that to have some fun because there are only a few of them but they mainly (if not only) focus on taking an anti-FSG stand on everything with zero objectivity. It's simply an agenda with nothing else to contribute on. If, for example, LFC inquires about a player and the other team says he's not for sale, these are the people that see that as a failed transfer and a black mark on FSG, such is their bias. Trolls and idiots exist everywhere, not just here, so you have some fun with it and move on. When FSG bought Liverpool, people in Boston were enraged because it meant (to them) that they were going to invest in Liverpool and forget about the Red Sox. Stupidity is global. If this board was made up of only the anti-FSG and the anti-Liverpool crowd it'd be a dumpster fire, but there are so many great posters who make this an overall very enjoyable and informative place.

    As for FSG and Liverpool, i am a US fan who up until discovering this forum a few months ago was not that close to the team, as i do not get the local radio stations that talk about LFC daily, or local papers, or even know of the best websites to go to for information (espnfc is still my go-to site, unfortunately). I became a LFC fan in 2002 when i studied abroad for almost a year in England and saw the greatness that is Gerrard but after that mostly kept following the team from afar as it was hard to get their games. It was not til the last 3-4yrs that NBC got the premier league games so before that it was not as easy. Given this i'm just simply not as familiar with every decision they have made with Liverpool, and i know more about FSG from their Red Sox ownership that anything else and think they are a good ownership group with good intentions.

    When they bought the Red Sox in 2002 they were known for "the curse" because they had not won a world series since 1918 but under FSG they have won 3 world series and up until recently basically contenders year in and year out. This didn't happen by coincidence and they spent on the club, both in expensive players and in youth development. I think they got attracted to Liverpool for the same reason they got attracted to the Red Sox, and that is being a storied franchise that they want to bring back to glory with historic stadiums.

    There are also similarities in how they run the teams. In Boston they knew and made it clear they could not compete financially with the Yankees and thus looked for ways to get value players as well as focus on developing the youth/prospects because they could not afford to fill every open spot with an expensive player. Similarly, they know they can't compete financially with City, United, Chelsea, etc and have been trying to find a successful way to do the same as in Boston.

    Before FSG bought the Red Sox the team was very close to building a new stadium but FSG scratched that and instead spent millions on renovating it. That is basically what they're doing with Anfield, and from a personal level i'm happy they kept both because new stadiums have a 'corporate' feel to them and are nowhere near as intimate. In NY, for example, many people hate the new yankee stadium vs. the old one.

    They've also had the same approach in trying to "globalize" the brand to try to get raise revenues to compete with the rich teams.

    I personally don't think they view Liverpool purely as a sellable brand and have genuine interest in making this team a winner. If they were in purely for a profit i'm sure they could have bought other teams, straightened them out and flipped them, or bought a NFL franchise in a league that practically prints money and i'm sure would make crazy ROI. Henry is not that young, however, so sooner or later he'll be selling.

    They haven't quite figured it out but i think the hiring of Klopp is a huge sign of intent. I don't think we were doing all that bad at the time of Rodgers firing but next think you know "holy shit, he was fired" and soon after "holy fuck, they're going for Klopp!". I don't think they do that if we're just a sellable brand with no commitment to it.

    They have tried and keep trying to bring us back to glory and seeing what they've done for the Red Sox lets me know they're not greedy bastards looking to bleed the team and truly want it to win. With Klopp i think they finally got us in the right path and i have no concerns that they'll support him financially.
     
    eythor, redfanman and redbj like this.
  20. TFC

    TFC TIA Squad Member

    Messages:
    7,507
    Likes Received:
    3,419
    In regards to continuance, I don't think its as bad as it sounds...off the cuff I can't think of too many teams that haven't gone through as much if not more changes other than Arsenal. In the last 7 years if I'm not mistaken Spurs have had 4 different managers, Chelsea have had 5-6(?), ManU has had 4 and Man City has had 3.
     
    redfanman and redbj like this.
  21. redbj

    redbj hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road

    Messages:
    15,443
    Likes Received:
    8,744

    but the other teams have a continuance regarding focus.

    the players they buy etc etc... they switch managers because basically, they can and the football department still has a very similar focus.

    mitigating circumstance is that at the very top of the food pile its a fairly easy blueprint...buy the very best players....

    but even then, if you look at mourinho (whose been at two of those clubs) hes just passing through and their purchasing stratergy and club aims are still ridged...especially Chelsea who are, if anything, at odds with a mourinho philoshophy...he get rid of the reserves if he could, where as Chelseas mission statement appears to be buy, buy in bulk and develop through loans. regardless of the current encumbant.

    I don't see that vision from FSG....take the Rodgers hiring...they had an idea of a DOF, Rodgers said no, so they ripped the whole plan up, made some quasi transfer department committee (whatever it was in the end) and now we are back to a DOF....if Klopp walks, I can see the whole blueprint being scrapped for whatever the latest guy wants.

    I get minor tweaks, but I see (gut feel) more than minor tweaks.
     
  22. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    So you are baiting other forum members for your own amusement then? You do realise there is a clause in this forum for that, yes?

    You are right about continuance when it comes down to the managerial changes. The 4 clubs you mentioned, Spurs, Chelsea, United and City, only one seems to be having a pretty linear trajectory in their progression, the rest are quite erratic. But though they may have been erratic, City and Chelsea have won league titles in the process and United won the Europa League in what was considered their worst performance since the inception of Premier League. They may have done a lot of changes, but I think they have a very consistent direction and strategy that made them what they are even though they made some major changes in their management.

    I do think Spurs will struggle without Pochettino, just like us without Klopp, but we do have a better position to attract a much more experienced and good manager as a replacement compared to Spurs TODAY. It is down to our financial backing from the owners, that I would definitely say we are better than Spurs. Spurs owners are no slouch, but they are super stingy, scrooges running the board. But once they have finished their stadium expansion, and probably takes them 4-5 years to recoup their investment through sale of players and also tickets, they will be in a position of strength financially to fight us.

    I have been complaining about the owners direction and strategy for a while now. They surprised me with the hiring of Klopp and I am hoping they keep him for a lot longer than just one season of £150m of spending and sack after not winning the title or failed to qualify for Champs League. We need to make sure the Sporting Director and his crew get up to speed when it comes to football strategies and planning (on the pitch and style of play), and the ability to have a proper succession planning when things don't pan out with Klopp. This will take Edwards a good few more years to get that going for him. That will be my hope moving forward with these bunch of people running the office.
     
    Red_Jedi and redbj like this.
  23. Red_Jedi

    Red_Jedi Anfield kick about

    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    610
    Certainly feel with the appointment of Klopp there is direction and identity of the club (on the pitch at least) - but that is what Brendan tried to do.

    But this day and age, the likes of the Boot Room ethos rarely exists.

    So when Klopp does go, will we have to start again? What options to FSG truly have?
     
  24. redfanman

    redfanman TIA Regular Valued Member

    Messages:
    9,220
    Likes Received:
    6,562
    Not true in Spurs' case. They have chopped and changed their structure repeatedly under Levy who remains as almost the only constant.

    The loss of Fergie at Utd was a blow to them because so much of their structure relied on him.
     
  25. MikeOscar

    MikeOscar Klopp Klopp

    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    2,781
    I'm prefacing my reaction to say that I'm certainly not wholly anti-FSG. They're far from the best owners, far from the worst. Definition of 6/10 for me and I agree with almost all the points @redbj makes.

    Genuine question - have they closed the gap with the teams around us? Has our commercial revenue grown faster than that of our competitors? Earlier this decade we had a number of high profile commercial deals such as Standard Chartered and New Balance - I have not seen much if anything of that recently. We were told for years they wanted to sell the naming rights to the new stand - but in the end they couldn't find anyone prepared to pay for this honor

    The stadium discussion is a whole thread to itself - suffice to say here that what they did was good, but perhaps not ambitious enough given the size of the season ticket waiting list.

    Are we truly competiting for a higher level of player? Haven't wet been able to snatch players off Hoffenheim, Southampton, Mainz, Aston Villa, Newcastle, Augsburg, Burnley, Red Star and Lille in the past two decades (these were all the paid transfers from the past two seasons)? I'm still waiting for the first Torres like transfer under FSG. I'd argue that we've definitely been targeting a lower level of player under FSG compared to the previous decade. Partially this was down to the lack of CL, partially down to a mixture of choice and incompetence.

    They've gotten Jurgen Klopp and full credit to them for getting him on board. It's genuinely the most exciting thing they've done since buying the club. As for fully backing him - they're currently doing that via a negative net spend on the transfermarket. Forgive me for not being impressed. This may change this summer, it may not. If they deliver the summer they've been promising in the papers then my point is obviously moot - but until that happens I remain hopeful but skeptical.

    Have we been closing this gap under FSG? Average league position suggest it's gotten worse not better, especially when you factor in that the two good seasons have come without any European football, which is a clear advantage.

    I'm fine with their general principles - I find fault in their execution of these principles. Do what we're doing in a smarter way, hold to a vision instead of ripping the playbook every few years. Present one unified club approach - for example don't go pissing off your fans with ticket prices and stealing away the banners when your manager talks about the importance of the fans literally during every single press conference he's ever given. Instead make the fans happy in the stadium, encourage them to come earlier by lowering drink and food prices and do everything you can to help the fans make it a great atmosphere for every single home game (Just don't add plastic flags).

    There are many more examples I could list, but I'll just reiterate my main point. There are numerous worse owners in world football - just look at Leeds, Hull City or the previous two cancers. FSG are not the devil and we could be doing a lot worse. Yet we're not Southampton or Villa, content to be a midtable club. We're LFC and want to be the best. We may finally have a manager who is approaches the quality we had during our glory years, but the off the field support for that manager is certainly not on that level yet. Back then we were the best on the field because we were run fantastically off the field. Until we get back to that situation, I feel we as fans should always ask more from the owners.
     
  26. Wyld@Heart

    Wyld@Heart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    2,691
    I remember a certain toothy Uruguyan joining us... Just saying....
     
    eythor and Red_Jedi like this.
  27. MikeOscar

    MikeOscar Klopp Klopp

    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    2,781
    Not comparable in stature in the market at that time. We're not talking about impact on the field (which in the end was arguably higher for Suarez), but in terms of status. Torres was being chased by half the clubs in Europe, while Suarez had scared off just about all suitors except for us. The Torres transfer was a real coup, Suarez was just a normal deal which worked out so much better than anyone thought he would.
     
  28. Red_Jedi

    Red_Jedi Anfield kick about

    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    610
    @MikeOscar - you make some thoughtful valid points.

    I think for FSG to come into the "soccer" market in another country - was a huge leap, but they saw an opportunity and hence thats why they did it.

    But since they have been in, our commercial activity and revenue has nearly doubled - look at the accounts.

    They've placed two CEO's in that time - both having connections to the city.

    This summer is the 1st time (possible in over 2 decades) that we have been seriously at the table with the likes of VVD and Mbappe (we wouldn't even dream about that calibre/level of signings for last decade odd?)

    When Arsenal went through building their new stadium - they sold players for a tidy profit every year - Toure, Viera, Fabregas, Van Persie, Adebayour etc etc - but in recent seasons they've started splashing the cash again.

    You watch the same will happen to Spurs over the next couple of seasons.

    So last season we had a positive transfer budget left - but squad needed trimming, and Klopp was supported. I'm pretty sure there will be some solid arrivals in this summer, lets wait and see - but I can't think of anything significant that FSG have promised or mooted at, but then not delivered.

    I give them 8/10 possibly 9/10 - as I am not sure what else they could have done to make things better - we are a business end of the day.
     
  29. redbj

    redbj hurry up, July 1st, let's get the show on the road

    Messages:
    15,443
    Likes Received:
    8,744
    9/10 for two champions league placings from 7?

    Very generous in my opinion.

    Serious question, after how many years of control do you expect to see us as REGULAR CL placement as a minimum target?
     
  30. Wyld@Heart

    Wyld@Heart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    2,691
    I remember being excited by both. In terms of stature though, my memory of Torres was not that we beat of all and sundry to get him. Clubs across Europe had looked at him, granted, but they had passed on him for whatever reason just as Suarez was an obvious talent who was passed on by clubs for the concerns over his temperament. The two transfers were similar in that we snaffled up highly talented players without much competition for either.
     
    redfanman, Kanonkop and Limiescouse like this.