NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

Not even a good try at deflection.
So tell me why Agger etc were all given improved contracts.

so why sell Luis we held him to a contract the previous season even though arsenal met the buy out clause.

Don't really know, almost look at it as one of those deals where Spurs didn't want him coming to us, knowing it would improve us and they could come in and spend a relatively small fee to keep us from signing him. I'm sure that happens, in fact I'm pretty sure Chelsea has done that to us at least a couple of times in the last couple of years with Willian and Salah.

Yeah, I don't really buy into that.
I think it's just a way for people to avoid looking at the harsh reality that some players prefer to go elsewhere.

Add to that, 4 million quid or whatever it was for a player that didn't improve spurs, just to stop us getting our hands on him?
I'm pretty sure Daniel Levy isn't that stupid.

The bigger problem is. now we have ventured down this route, and it clearly hasn't worked. Be it due to lesser quality players, bad management decisions, poor training methods or whatever, the fact is, we are now in 12th position in the prem, and hanging on in the C.L. by the skin of our teeth. If any top quality players did become available in January, i'm sure they'd prefer to sign for West Ham or Bar Codes at the moment. The longer this goes on, the less likely we are to attract top players. It can only get worse, fasten your seat belts for a very rocky second half of season.

so why sell Luis we held him to a contract the previous season even though arsenal met the buy out clause.

Maybe because he wanted to go to Barca?
Maybe because he did his Hannibal Lecter impression again?

You know exactly why Suarez left Walton, because he wanted to go to Barca.

Stop trying to fudge the issue, and tell me why so many players have been given improved contracts if FSG don't want to pay the wages.
Incidentally, our wage bill is again approaching 70% of turnover (according to Tomkins) which gives the lie to your statement that we won't pay decent wages.
By the way, that's 70% of a much higher turnover, which in turn means our wage bill is higher than it has ever been, assuming Tomkins has his figures correct.

all of the signings are made by rodgers . what resale value lambert has ?

alex song could have been loaned by us, don't tell me west ham are better than us in players eyes

And what "theory" do you think I've put forth?
Because to my knowledge, I haven't.
If something is uncertain, I'll be sure to put in words like "allegedly" or "supposedly".
So, please tell me what this theory is that I've been posting.

Well I assumed and I apologise if it's not correct that as you were arguing against my assertion then you feel that Brendan has free reign and full backing of the club to sign who ever he wants.

I'm pretty sure Daniel Levy isn't that stupid.

There's possibly 4 managers who may dispute that claim Swabs. 

Maybe because he wanted to go to Barca?
Maybe because he did his Hannibal Lecter impression again?

You know exactly why Suarez left Walton, because he wanted to go to Barca.

Stop trying to fudge the issue, and tell me why so many players have been given improved contracts if FSG don't want to pay the wages.
Incidentally, our wage bill is again approaching 70% of turnover (according to Tomkins) which gives the lie to your statement that we won't pay decent wages.
By the way, that's 70% of a much higher turnover, which in turn means our wage bill is higher than it has ever been, assuming Tomkins has his figures correct.

That's simply because we have bought so many squad fillers. The more players = higher wage bill.

Well I assumed and I apologise if it's not correct that as you were arguing against my assertion then you feel that Brendan has free reign and full backing of the club to sign who ever he wants.

I'll only go off what the manager says when he stated "I have the first word and the last word on all players that come in".

I'll assume that like pretty much every other manager in the world, BR has a budget that he needs to work to.

That's simply because we have bought so many squad fillers. The more players = higher wage bill.

That doesn't add up either.
If we won't pay high wages, we'd have to have a squad about double the size it is now to allegedly account for 70% of our turnover.

None of these arguments make any sense to me.
Even just thinking about them for a minute, you can see that they just don't add up.

That doesn't add up either.
If we won't pay high wages, we'd have to have a squad about double the size it is now to allegedly account for 70% of our turnover.

None of these arguments make any sense to me.
Even just thinking about them for a minute, you can see that they just don't add up.

We have 3 players who earn over 100k a week, Johnson is soon gone, Stevie if he stays will be on half his wage so that only leaves Sturridge. So where are all these high earners?

Maybe because he wanted to go to Barca?
Maybe because he did his Hannibal Lecter impression again?

You know exactly why Suarez left Walton, because he wanted to go to Barca.

Stop trying to fudge the issue, and tell me why so many players have been given improved contracts if FSG don't want to pay the wages.
Incidentally, our wage bill is again approaching 70% of turnover (according to Tomkins) which gives the lie to your statement that we won't pay decent wages.
By the way, that's 70% of a much higher turnover, which in turn means our wage bill is higher than it has ever been, assuming Tomkins has his figures correct.

Maybe they are prepared to give wage increases after a player has proved his worth.

I'm sure I heard we offer a base wage which will increase. Like a performance bonus.

But why would any top player want to come here and potentially reach a high wage if all goes well when they can go elsewhere and get what they are worth right from the start.

Edit: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-fc-change-player-contracts-3325019

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2263807/Liverpool-offer-players-lower-basic-salaries-performance-related-bonuses.html

Maybe they are prepared to give wage increases after a player has proved his worth.

I'm sure I heard we offer a base wage which will increase. Like a performance bonus.

But why would any top player want to come here and potentially reach a high wage if all goes well when they can go elsewhere and get what they are worth right from the start.

Your correct it's basically prove your worth and you will be rewarded. It's a good policy in principal but Can you imagine if your Sanchez, Costa etc they are going to think F**k that I will go where I am valued from the start. At the end of the day most of these players are not fans like us who would play for free they want to see the cash.

Your correct it's basically prove your worth and you will be rewarded. It's a good policy in principal but Can you imagine if your Sanchez, Costa etc they are going to think f**k that I will go where I am valued from the start. At the end of the day most of these players are not fans like us who would play for free they want to see the cash.

Exactly mate and I think that is where the problem lies.

Should I go to liverpool on £100k a week and maybe reach £150k if everything goes well...

Or should I go to chelsea and get £150k a week from the start.

I know what I would choose if I was a top player.

Sure you may get away with this strategy with younger players with potential but top players expext to be paid what they are worth from the off.

Edit: And rightly so because as we seen last season compared to this season with and without Luis they can almost single handedly make or break a team

Exactly mate and I think that is where the problem lies.

Should I go to liverpool on £100k a week and maybe reach £150k if everything goes well...

Or should I go to chelsea and get £150k a week from the start.

I know what I would choose if I was a top player.

Sure you may get away with this strategy with younger players with potential but top players expext to be paid what they are worth from the off.

Correctamundo harsh reality of the way things are in the real world.

Bottom line,  backing FSG = No world class players,  no regular success (if any at all), a constant stream of player with the potential to be great (someday),  players purchased from mid table table clubs, and managers that will not rock the boat!

Of course,  that's just my opinion!

Why is it so hard to understand that the committee sets a value for a player and won't pay crazy money if, say Chelsea, step in with a much higher offer?

We could throw bucket loads of cash at a player but we can't afford to keep doing that since we have less money than our rivals.

It's not rocket science.

Was Siggurdson or Salah or Konolyanka worth the inflated prices we were quoted? They've hardly been pulling up trees since the deals fell through.

Why is it so hard to understand that the committee sets a value for a player and won't pay crazy money if, say Chelsea, step in with a much higher offer?

We could throw bucket loads of cash at a player but we can't afford to keep doing that since we have less money than our rivals.

It's not rocket science.

Was Siggurdson or Salah or Konolyanka worth the inflated prices we were quoted? They've hardly been pulling up trees since the deals fell through.

Suarez wasn't crazy money when we bought him either....don't know that you can judge a player's potential or ability by their price?

Suarez wasn't crazy money when we bought him either....don't know that you can judge a player's potential or ability by their price?

Not sure what you are getting at.

The fact is we have been screwed over in the transfer market for years and FSG got their fingers burnt buying Big Andy.

It seems pretty sensible to set a maximum limit for a player - say we are in for Alonso and we think he is worth 20 million - maybe our maximum is 22 million. If Man City step in and offer 30 million and double his wages then we walk away and go for plan B.

If not it means we can't afford to buy a goalkeeper or a left back.

We have less money than our rivals so we can't afford to overpay like they can.

Not sure what you are getting at.

The fact is we have been screwed over in the transfer market for years and FSG got their fingers burnt buying Big Andy.

It seems pretty sensible to set a maximum limit for a player - say we are in for Alonso and we think he is worth 20 million - maybe our maximum is 22 million. If Man City step in and offer 30 million and double his wages then we walk away and go for plan B.

If not it means we can't afford to buy a goalkeeper or a left back.

We have less money than our rivals so we can't afford to overpay like they can.

I don't think it means we can't afford to buy a goalkeeper or left back...it just means you don't buy two players at every position like we seemed to do this summer.

Buy one really good player at those positions, someone that will come in and make an immediate impact. Or buy one really good player at a position of dire need and then buy quantity at a position of lesser need. It just seems like looking back, we should have had more players ready to slot right into the first 11 than we did.

Other than Lallana, I don't believe any of our signings should be starting and to me that's not good buying.

Not sure what you are getting at.

The fact is we have been screwed over in the transfer market for years and FSG got their fingers burnt buying Big Andy.

It seems pretty sensible to set a maximum limit for a player - say we are in for Alonso and we think he is worth 20 million - maybe our maximum is 22 million. If Man City step in and offer 30 million and double his wages then we walk away and go for plan B.

If not it means we can't afford to buy a goalkeeper or a left back.

We have less money than our rivals so we can't afford to overpay like they can.

Because we got burnt on the Andy Carroll transfer we now go into our shell and accept mediocrity.............. ..behave.
Who is talking about going petrodollar style transfers.
You have your 1 main target in a transfer window and you make sure you get him if that means paying over the odds on wages that's fine. Otherwise all we do is what what we have been doing for ages.............paying over the odds on average players - Lovren, Lallana. You can go back to any year and barring the odd gem it's what we have excelled at.

I don't think it means we can't afford to buy a goalkeeper or left back...it just means you don't buy two players at every position like we seemed to do this summer.

Buy one really good player at those positions, someone that will come in and make an immediate impact. Or buy one really good player at a position of dire need and then buy quantity at a position of lesser need. It just seems like looking back, we should have had more players ready to slot right into the first 11 than we did.

Other than Lallana, I don't believe any of our signings should be starting and to me that's not good buying.

To me it seems like the strategy was to buy young players who spend three or four years playing together and maturing as a team.

Problem is you can buy a "great" player but unless there are other players on the same wavelength you don't reach a critical mass to push the team to the next level - I think we are seeing that at the moment with Arsenal who have Ozil, Sanchez and Cazorla - all arguably world class talents.

To me it seems like the strategy was to buy young players who spend three or four years playing together and maturing as a team.

Problem is you can buy a "great" player but unless there are other players on the same wavelength you don't reach a critical mass to push the team to the next level - I think we are seeing that at the moment with Arsenal who have Ozil, Sanchez and Cazorla - all arguably world class talents.

How is Lambert a young player again ?