NESV/Fenway Sports Group: Owners of LFC

Forgot to add, this should apply to the 'potential' bracket but if your going to go after proven quality then we pay the market value in terms of wages.

But the potential aren't commanding big wages Shabs.. We are only paying Markovic a reported 35k.. Sterling is still on that figure, Ibe has just signed to that figure.

It's not a coincidence that our 'big money signings' are the likes of Lallana and Sakho who are on or around 70k a week

The big established players we lack who want north of 120k we can't get them in as we aren't offering the money, we can't be. And those won't take incentives because they can get it straight up at others places.

Also while we aren't getting those over the line we have lost or are losing
Gerrard
Reina
Carra
Suarez
Maxi
Agger
Etc etc who were on or around that figure..
Now the issue isn't those players or if you think they weren't still playing to justify those wages but we have replaced them with that level a player..

With what we are paying we are only attracting a certain level, it doesn't matter what we are paying in the market for them.. It's that with how we do it those are the limit to what we can/will pay

I wouldn't mind if they overhauled it renamed it as long as the people in charge of transfers right now are shown the door and a string of top flight scouts with extensive knowledge are brought in to chair it.

But my worry ( going on the facts we have witnessed in their time) that they can rebrand it, sack and replace but if they still work to the outline nothing changes

I guess what I'm trying to say in a Nutshell is.

We all know we need to be more successful when buying players, committee or no committee the way to achieve that is by having the best possible scouts we can find, who have extensive knowledge of leagues and players outside of Southampton.

I don't necessarily think FSG's vision is flawed, but I do think the men tasked with implementing that vision are. if you know what I mean ?

I guess what I'm trying to say in a Nutshell is.

We all know we need to be more successful when buying players, committee or no committee the way to achieve that is by having the best possible scouts we can find, who have extensive knowledge of leagues and players outside of Southampton.

I don't necessarily think FSG's vision is flawed, but I do think the men tasked with implementing that vision are. if you know what I mean ?

I think there are flaws Daz but agree that the men in the committee may have failed in their roles as well.

I guess what I'm trying to say in a Nutshell is.

We all know we need to be more successful when buying players, committee or no committee the way to achieve that is by having the best possible scouts we can find, who have extensive knowledge of leagues and players outside of Southampton.

I don't necessarily think FSG's vision is flawed, but I do think the men tasked with implementing that vision are. if you know what I mean ?

I get what you're saying Daz but we are nearly 5 years into their ownership and it's been one thing after another with scrapping things and starting again. No real identity, not moving forward.. Apart from last season where we fell lucky with one of the worlds best players, and another who hit the goals he did we've done nothing under them, we have won one trophy that they made clear they couldn't give a F**k about..
We've not built on last season as ultimately the plan they are setting out didn't seize upon the finish.

5 years and we are still renaming, rebranding and moving people around in the transfer structure

Sorry but I have no faith in them to succeed with this latest off field rebuild

No real identity, not moving forward..

They'd tell you that they are adding more seats in the house to raise match day revenue mate. They've cut fat wages off their books as well, brought in the donut, subway money. They moved the club forward their way. Can't wait for them to sell out once the new stand is done. Oh wait they may sell naming rights to the new stand. The "Toys R Us" stand.

They'd tell you that they are adding more seats in the house to raise match day revenue mate. They've cut fat wages off their books as well, brought in the donut, subway money. They moved the club forward their way. Can't wait for them to sell out once the new stand is done. Oh wait they may sell naming rights to the new stand. The "Toys R Us" stand.

Just be happy it won't be sponsored by Always Maxi-Pads. I can see the tagline now. "Come sit in the Always Maxi-Pads stand and soak up all the action"




I'll get my coat.

I guess what I'm trying to say in a Nutshell is.

We all know we need to be more successful when buying players, committee or no committee the way to achieve that is by having the best possible scouts we can find, who have extensive knowledge of leagues and players outside of Southampton.

I don't necessarily think FSG's vision is flawed, but I do think the men tasked with implementing that vision are. if you know what I mean ?

I agree with this completely

The "Toys R Us" stand.

Bit pointless when kids can't afford to set foot in Anfield 

the problem with FSG's plan is it take's no account of the other 19 teams also have plans and this year 5 of them had a better plan than us.

Bit pointless when kids can't afford to set foot in Anfield 

Isn't the club FSG's toy? The next thing they'll do is to float the club on the New York Stock Exchange for a big payday. OMG! 

Isn't the club FSG's toy? The next thing they'll do is to float the club on the New York Stock Exchange for a big payday. OMG! 

I wouldn't actually mind that to be honest, let the fans buy some shares and have some say in the Clubs direction.

I wouldn't actually mind that to be honest, let the fans buy some shares and have some say in the Clubs direction.

FSG: We'll float it at sky high valuations and let those sucker fans pay for it. Hahaha

FSG: We'll float it at sky high valuations and let those sucker fans pay for it. Hahaha

Well there is that I suppose.

Bit pointless when kids can't afford to set foot in Anfield 

Got that covered too Debbs, 'Mighty Red'

Isn't the club FSG's toy? The next thing they'll do is to float the club on the New York Stock Exchange for a big payday. OMG! 

That in itself is a frightening prospect; 'LFC for sale: a dependable above inflation company that requires little or no outlay.

That in itself is a frightening prospect; 'LFC for sale: a dependable above inflation company that requires little or no outlay.

Could be a reality.

Just be happy it won't be sponsored by Always Maxi-Pads. I can see the tagline now. "Come sit in the Always Maxi-Pads stand and soak up all the action"




I'll get my coat.

More like the Tena man Stand , comes in handy when you see the ticket prices you'll piss yer pants .

It's getting a little tedious reading and talking about the "structure" of the club as is the wages debate. The structure of the club has nothing to do with how the team turns out and performs on game day that is all down to the manager. The heartless performance in an FA cup semi and the embarrasment on the weekend have nothing to do with structure or how the club is run at corporate level. This has served as a nice distraction for some from the real issues take the pennies away whether they be counted in wages or transfer fees, there should be a group of players capable of beating Villa and Palace at home in addition to not being anihilated by Stoke.

The fact of the matter is FSG have sanctioned 230m on transfers in the last 3 years a jaw dropping amount, this was spent on players that were recommended by Brendan at first then the TC who were set up as a result of Brendan refusing to work under a DOF. Could those 230m being spent more effectively? Like hell they could have! Would we have been better off buying 7-8 quality players on higher wages as opposed to 15-20 on mid wages? absolutely. In addition when push came to shove  a new contract was put in front of Suarez in the 200k region making him the clubs highest earner at the time. The result was a second place finish on the back of Suarez, had a case being put forward to FSG that there was no need to sign Lallana and Markovic instead the transfer fee from those two would go towards Sanchez's wages I am not so sure they would have refused. Instead on the recommendation of BR and the TC we pursued Lallan as our number one target and gambled on an unproven youngster. There is a plethora of examples and different scenarios where we could have sacrificed the fee's on xy to bolster the wages of z. The point being here whilst they have not been acting like oligarch's and throwing billion dollars at us there has been significant investment to at least win a blooming carling cup in 3 years, yet we have failed even that. They are running the club as they said they were and have been quite transparent about it the comparisons to H and G are unjust in my opinion. Yes they are making money of the club and yes we did pocket 95m from TV rights last year but they are putting some of it back in to the squad whilst we are not able to field a world 11 we should be able to field a squad capable of doing better than they have after 3 years of investment. I am not being too harsh on Brendan I was quite realistic about our expectations for this season I would have taken 5th place and an FA Cup given the "transition" of 9 players and the loss of Suarez. The most concerning thing now is that not only did we not achieve those but we fail to deliver any style and substance on the pitch and are looking like we need another 9 players and 200m to change that.

How come when people want to beat on Brendan they use GROSS spend and when they want to beat on FSG they use NET spend?

Brendan should be sacked because he's spent 242.8 million over 3 years....OR FSG should be shown the door because they've only spent 98.2 million over 3 years. (figures from http://bitterandblue.sbnation.com/2014/9/11/6101855/premier-league-transfer-spend-over-3-5-and-7-years)

Sure does make it hard to keep track of the debate going on.

How come when people want to beat on Brendan they use GROSS spend and when they want to beat on FSG they use NET spend?

Brendan should be sacked because he's spent 242.8 million over 3 years....OR FSG should be shown the door because they've only spent 98.2 million over 3 years. (figures from http://bitterandblue.sbnation.com/2014/9/11/6101855/premier-league-transfer-spend-over-3-5-and-7-years)

Sure does make it hard to keep track of the debate going on.

Ok so your table (net spend)  puts us on par with City Chelsea and ahead of Arsenal.

123 m net spend is quite a signficiant amount with no silverware in sight and one CL campaign. All teams in the table with the exception of us have consistently achieved that. Most telling for me is that all other teams in your table have a much better current squad than ours, they will invest in the summer and widen the gap between us and them. The only way to close that gap is to flunk another 100m net spend this summer which we both know won't happen.

Whered did I state that I wanted Brendad sacked or gone? He needs to take responsibillity for the mess along with others in the club don't think he should be immune from that. If you can't recognise that then to quote Nigel Pearson you must be an ostrich.

Meet Mike Gordon Link

If Tony Barrett's article is to be believed then the only changes expected are back room one's then I think that tells us everything about FSG's ambitions for the club.

No Sporting Director?

No change of manager?

No change to policy?

I can only see more of the same nextvseason then.

YNWA