Wernot gonna get him
- Thread starter LeTallecWiz
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
We’ll be fine.
We can’t afford Mbappe and Werner.
We wouldn't have needed to if we met the release clause. Werner would've knew what wages he'd have been on at Liverpool and was still mad keen on joining. The £200k per wages at Chelsea is no doubt a sweetener from Chelsea as they know he's only joining them because we've got tight arse miserable cunts of owners.
This stinks btw, we had a guaranteed goalscorer who wasn't going to cost silly money in today's market (albeit a compromised one but it's same for everyone) desperate to join us, who would've been a perfect alternative/addition or in some cases replacement for either one of the front three. And what have we done, let him go and sign for a Club that imo will challenge next season. I've never liked FSG from day one and nothing they've done since has changed my mind. Greedy self indulgent unambitious gang of pricks. Any success we've had last few years isn't down to them, it's in spite of them. I can't wait for the day they fuck off for good.
Do you think my post was serious?
Without knowing the ins and outs of your personality, yes, I presumed so buddy. Soz.
If we did have Mbappe we wouldn’t be going anywhere near Werner unless we sold both Mané and Salah.
I’ll make daft jokes about transfers, score predictions and the fume.
I’ll make daft jokes about transfers, score predictions and the fume.
The hacks at the Echo have been bad for some time but now they're like the club's Lord Haw Haw. Their last podcast was quite the most pathetic bit of PR crap I've heard in ages. Apparently, because the transfer team 'have a lot of credit,' we should simply sit back, not be remotely concerned, and trust them to make the right decisions in their own good time. The truth is that their access to news at the club has dried up and they're desperate to ingratiate themselves with the execs in the hope they'll start to be spoonfed a bit more info from time to time. The idea that, as journalists, they might get off their lazy arses and, you know, try to think a bit and find stuff out and express at least semi-independent opinions is obviously beyond them.
I think there is an element of us being in a bit of a pickle regards to the front 3 and them all being guaranteed starters. I guess it's not a bad thing, but, with them all having their places nailed down, it makes it really difficult to get quality cover in. It's not so bad in midfield as they're pretty inconsistent, but not the front 3. You can't go out and spend 50mill on a player, and 200k a week wages and ask him to sit on the bench and get the odd 10mins or cup games here and there.
Klopp has alluded to it before, it's difficult to bring quality players in without guaranteeing them game time, and who is going to dislodge the front 3.
I think the front 3, GK, and wingbacks are untouchable really, and we're not going to see any decent cover come in for them.
Klopp has alluded to it before, it's difficult to bring quality players in without guaranteeing them game time, and who is going to dislodge the front 3.
I think the front 3, GK, and wingbacks are untouchable really, and we're not going to see any decent cover come in for them.
The club is happy to seize on any story that suggests a player who signed for us could have gotten more money elsewhere. Werner had been making loads of comments about how much he respected the front three and how he couldn't expect to be guaranteed a place if he did move. ('I know that in Liverpool play a lot of good players and I have to improve myself to learn much more things to get on this level to play there' - that doesn't sound like a player who'd sulk if he wasn't immediately a starter.) The Chelski deal smacks more of a player making up for not coming here by getting a big wage there. I think he would have come here for less.
And unless we want another Origi to sit on the bench and be utterly unpredictable as backup when we're battling to retain a title, we'd better realise that we'll need to bring in a genuinely competitive attacking option.
All of this 'what Klopp wants, Klopp gets' stuff that's popping up all over the place is crap. He plainly wanted Werner and he hasn't got him. He gave enough hints last summer to suggest he couldn't get what he wanted in that transfer window, too. Klopp knows what it takes to follow a title win and it certainly isn't relaxing and moving on unchanged, so I worry a bit at how frustrated he might get next season.
I always assumed that, if we got Werner in, once he was up to speed, it would not so much be a case of him being backup to the front 3 or have to displace one, but rather we would have had four quality players for 3 positions, and we share the time between them.
In such a situation, if there was an even distribution of rotation, they would each play 30+ games a season
In such a situation, if there was an even distribution of rotation, they would each play 30+ games a season
Yep.. I even took it to mean that we could drop Firmino even deeper into a Coutinho role. But have 4 interchangeable attackers with Fabinho and Henderson behind.
I think Covid has definitely impacted or adjusted our targets and budget. Losing £3 mill for each home game hurts and we just don’t know when we can get back to fans in the ground.
Possibly we have decided we need to prioritise a back up left back and looking to improve/replace the older trio of Milner, Henderson and Wijnaldum before looking at the front 3.
Possibly we have decided we need to prioritise a back up left back and looking to improve/replace the older trio of Milner, Henderson and Wijnaldum before looking at the front 3.
Bobby has never really convinced me when he's played deeper. I hope that isn't a factor in our decision.
It's a myth that there won't be games available for a class attacker to play. That Origi hasnt played more is an indictment of his performances as a starter (a few extremely important exceptions aside) than of a lack of available matches.
Pure speculation but I've been wondering whether the Werner release clause was payable all in one go and that may be what's caused us problems. As I understand release clauses in Spain, for example, they are generally payable 100% up-front.
Under normal circumstances, about 40% of the total cost of signing a player would be payable in the first year (say 1/3 of the headline fee plus levies and agent fee). So if you have cash of £40m, you could do deals worth a headline £100m, say £90m after deducting fees.
So it's possible doing the Werner deal would have totally messed up our chances of bringing in other players or that someone like Sancho becomes a possibility because although the headline fee is higher, the drain on cash in the current year (which will be the big constraint here) should be about the same as you can negotiate instalments (or lower basic fee plus add-ons, which seems to be our preference) as normal.
Under normal circumstances, about 40% of the total cost of signing a player would be payable in the first year (say 1/3 of the headline fee plus levies and agent fee). So if you have cash of £40m, you could do deals worth a headline £100m, say £90m after deducting fees.
So it's possible doing the Werner deal would have totally messed up our chances of bringing in other players or that someone like Sancho becomes a possibility because although the headline fee is higher, the drain on cash in the current year (which will be the big constraint here) should be about the same as you can negotiate instalments (or lower basic fee plus add-ons, which seems to be our preference) as normal.
But their selling price will decline with each year they stay, so FSG had better have a clear sense of whether they want to try to keep them into their thirties or sell them soon-ish. If it's the former, they need to bring in hot young talent asap to develop alongside them, or if it's the latter, they need to let them go for a huge price and bring in superstars. It's exasperating that the covid-related loss of revenue keeps being brought up to justify us doing nowt - all clubs will have lost revenue, so prices must drop for sales and purchases. It shouldn't be a question of downgrading targets, just prices.
Whilst that is the reality, I would also imagine some clubs are waiting to see how this pans out, and if there is going to be a second wave next Winter, before adjusting prices or spending cash that may be required just to keep clubs above water.
It's likely that, but for a very few clubs with sugar-daddies (and I'd like to see how they are going to adhere to FFP), it'll be a very very quiet Summer.
Seems Klopp is stating this line too :
Klopp confirmed his admiration for both of his compatriots, but explained that uncertainty caused by the coronavirus pandemic complicated any hopes Liverpool had of signing them.
"There are a lot of good players on this planet," Klopp told Sky Germany. "Timo Werner is a great player, Kai Havertz is a great player.
"Right time, opportunity - everything has to come together. Six, seven weeks ago, we didn't know if we could play again this year. If we hadn't played the second half of the season, we would have thought, 'OK, when can you really play football again?' And now it starts right away.
"We act as if everything is already settled. It's not settled. We use this little loophole we've been left to play football again. Everything else we have to see the moment it happens. We can't pretend now that everything's going to be fine in the future."
If the next season kicks off nearly on time I think we'll piss it now. Just before the lockdown our side looked knacked, pretty much everyone had played summer tournaments and had zero time off and back to back CL runs to the final. Now they're all gonna be brand new. This certainly helps us more than every other team, none of which played as many games or with as much intensity
BUT. Can't be winning everything and getting huge sponsorship deals and selling out every match and pretend we can't compete. Bullshit. We won't compete, there's a difference. Chelsea aren't any richer than us and their owner gave up giving a shit a couple of years ago. FSG have always sold to buy and clearly that's not going to change no matter what the P&L says
BUT. Can't be winning everything and getting huge sponsorship deals and selling out every match and pretend we can't compete. Bullshit. We won't compete, there's a difference. Chelsea aren't any richer than us and their owner gave up giving a shit a couple of years ago. FSG have always sold to buy and clearly that's not going to change no matter what the P&L says
Little bit more info from that interview
At the moment, all clubs are losing money. Without spectators, we have to pay back the season tickets and probably sell none next year. At least maybe without the first 10 or 15 games. The VIP areas won't be packed and the tickets won't be sold. This will have an impact on other partners and things will look a bit different.
"Discussing with the players about things like salary waivers and on the other hand buying a player for £50-60m, we have to explain
There are all sorts of rumours in England about who Manchester United are going to pick, Chelsea are going to pick," he said.
"It's rather quiet here (at Liverpool) at the moment, I think it's safe to say. If you want to take it seriously and run a normal business and depend on income and have no idea how much you will earn... especially because we don't know when we can start playing with spectators again.
Chelsea are selling to buy too. They've brought in a shit load of money from transfers, and haven't spent anything during their ban. They're the exception to the rule.
It'll only be them, oil clubs, and clubs that profit from those clubs that'll be spending big this summer.
Are Chelsea still spending the Hazard money?
I assume the Morata sale proceeds would just be wiping off the amortization of his purchase that would sell be on the books.
- Status
Similar threads
