Trending Topics

      Next match: LFC v Brighton [Premier League] Sun 31st Mar @ 2:00 pm
      Anfield

      Today is the 28th of March and on this date LFC's match record is P26 W11 D3 L12

      Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?

      Read 13142 times
      0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
      solodee
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****
      • Started Topic

      • 6,027 posts | 147 
      • Liverpool FC All The Way
      Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Jul 26, 2014 09:14:18 am
      Is it even conceivable to sell a player like Suarez for £75 Million and not have a replacement in place?

      Our procurements so far, favour squad depth, which is much needed.....

      But..

      I have often felt Liverpool made Torres. When he left he couldn't recreate the level of success he had at Anfield.

      The same applies to Suarez. I doubt if he would be able to replicate the level of success he had at Anfield. Reason being that, at Anfield, we set up our strikers to shine through.

      Do we therefore need to dole out heavy on a huge name? Or are we, yet again on the verge of turning a Sturridge or Remy into a player worth the £80 million price tag?

      If we pull off turning one of them into a marquee signing, we will win the league.

      If we don't, the press and fans will remind Brendan of how clueless it is to not replace a player like Suarez with another big name.

      Worried....

      Brian78
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 19,046 posts | 2741 
      • A Liverbird upon my chest
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #1: Jul 26, 2014 11:17:58 am
      No

      All we need are signings who will be top class at doing the job asked of them by the boss. Signings who will bust a gut for the club. Big name signings are not always the answer
      CoutinhoRed
      • Forum Legend - Benitez
      • *****

      • 2,353 posts | 103 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #2: Jul 26, 2014 12:04:16 pm
      It's a good question you have asked there.

      Do we need a marquee signing? Firstly, what actually is a marquee signing? People have different interpretations to your 'marquee' or 'star' signing. There is a reason as to why someone is considered a star or marquee signing in the first place. You do not earn such a status by doing nothing. You do not just become a big name player by doing nothing. The way some people perceive it is that a marquee signing carries a lot of risk. It has always been unlike us, for whatever reason, to avoid signing big name players. Is that because we are worried about them failing at the club? Is the risk factor too high? Or are we just unable to temp them to the club?

      Any club will improve if they sign the RIGHT star player. By being the right marquee signing, you've got to ensure that he is compatible with our style of play. You've got to ensure that he abides by the club ethos. You've got to ensure that he doesn't have that inflated ego. And then you've got to ensure that the club does not rely on him solely for success.

      The way I see it is, someone like Marco Reus is labelled as that star player. Indeed he is, and his statistics adequately support that. So he is not just a big name player, but he is also a very capable player at the top level. That is how it works. If you are that good, then you earn that star status. If you are not that good, then you will not earn that star status. The best way to build a club is to buy players who have that potential to earn a star status (i.e Fernando Torres, Javier Mascherano, Xabi Alonso, Luis Suarez, Daniel Sturridge, Raheem Sterling, Phillipe Coutinho). Neither of these players were anything special when they first came to the club. I hadn't even heard of Xabi Alonso or Raheem Sterling when they first signed, and there was always doubt as to whether Suarez would've turned out as good as he is now.

      There is nothing wrong with buying a 'star' player if he fits into your system. He has to be the right star player nonetheless, and not just a 'star' player to appease the fans. I think a lot of posters here are getting on other posters back for wanting that star player, assuming they just want a big name so they can brag about it to their manc/chavvy friends. This isn't true. Some of us fans just want the best player possible for our system, and that player just tends to have a 'star' status (like Reus).

      So, to answer your question - do we need a marquee signing? No, we do not. What we do need however are players who have the potential to be star players, like your Daniel Sturridge, your Luis Suarez, your Philippe Coutinho, your Raheem Sterling and so forth. I think this is the direction the club has taken, and it's one we've got to be patient with. I don't know if it'll turn out to be better in the long run than buying your Filipe Luis, Cesc Fabregas and Diego Costas of this world. Only time will tell.
      srslfc
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 32,111 posts | 4876 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #3: Jul 26, 2014 12:05:36 pm
      Detest the term 'Marquee signing'.
      bad boy bubby
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 14,564 posts | 3172 
      • @KaiserQueef
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #4: Jul 26, 2014 12:23:23 pm
      I have often felt Liverpool made Torres. When he left he couldn't recreate the level of success he had at Anfield.

      The same applies to Suarez. I doubt if he would be able to replicate the level of success he had at Anfield.

      Sorry for just lifting this piece from your post Solo but it mirrors an interesting conversation I had with a very football savvy mate, on the same subject. His opinion/thoughts on Torres intrigued me and got me thinking [I'm not saying they're 100% accurate but they are food for thought to an open mind].

      First off; on the subject of success - whilst it could be argued (and I did) that Torres didn't attain the heady heights, in terms of goals scored; the mate points out that Torres did win trophies and medals. Is that success? Torres might think so.

      Secondly and this was his point, not mine - "Torres was a big fish in a small pond... when he moved he was playing with other big fish." You can imagine how I reacted to that but... I've often seen the same thing written, on here, about some of our transfers/targets.

      Finally, in answer to your question, "Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?"

      Well, by definition, the "Marquee" name is the headline act; the one who puts bums on seats so... no, probably not. Would any signing put more bums on seats? I doubt it but I suppose it might enhance our profile world wide.

      If, however, the question was "Do Liverpool FC really need a top quality signing on top of what we have?" The answer might change.  Given that Brendan said we would only sign players if they fit and FSG said we wouldn't overpay; then such a 'signing' wouldn't do any harm: would it?  :confused-smiley-013:
      « Last Edit: Jul 26, 2014 12:35:46 pm by bad boy bubby »
      waltonl4
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 37,585 posts | 7139 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #5: Jul 26, 2014 12:38:13 pm
      If Messi is a marquee signing I'd take him no matter what sort of signing you want to call him. Think our policy is to build a team and squad rather than buy instant success. If we win F**k all this season but go close again then maybe people would be able to ask why we didn't spend all the Suarez money on a star player. Its a case of wait and see this season.
      CoutinhoRed
      • Forum Legend - Benitez
      • *****

      • 2,353 posts | 103 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #6: Jul 26, 2014 12:45:43 pm
      If Messi is a marquee signing I'd take him no matter what sort of signing you want to call him. Think our policy is to build a team and squad rather than buy instant success. If we win f**k all this season but go close again then maybe people would be able to ask why we didn't spend all the Suarez money on a star player. Its a case of wait and see this season.

      I think you mean 'buy' a team and squad. The money we are due to spend this summer isn't peanuts. £50m on Southampton players, £20m on Markovic, more on Remy, Origi and a LB. It certainly isn't just 'building' a squad.
      ayrton77
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 13,775 posts | 627 
      • © Established Quality Since 1977
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #7: Jul 26, 2014 12:53:46 pm
      Detest the term 'Marquee signing'.

      To be fair, in the opening post, Solodee does go on to discuss the virtues of of signing an established/recognised talent compared to building from within by nuturing our current or younger players.

      Don't really think we should get stuck arguing over certain terms.

      Do we therefore need to dole out heavy on a huge name? Or are we, yet again on the verge of turning a Sturridge or Remy into a player worth the £80 million price tag?

      If we pull off turning one of them into a marquee signing, we will win the league.

      If we don't, the press and fans will remind Brendan of how clueless it is to not replace a player like Suarez with another big name.

      This is the crux of the matter; you can never tell if a player, any player, will settle in and perform to past levels.

      In the same way, players can unexpectedly raise their level and improve hugely from one season to the next.

      It's all a lottery, and we can discuss it all we like, but it's still mainly a matter of trusting the manager and club's judgement and hoping things work out next season.
      The Kopite91
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,654 posts | 246 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #8: Jul 26, 2014 12:58:30 pm
      I'm not a fan of this "Marquee Signing" myth. It's just another term thrown about and used as a stick to beat managers or players with. It is based on the price of a player, not necessarily that talents of said player. Both Torres and Suarez have been mentioned here, both were talented players before joining us but the potential was still there. Nurturing and coaching brought out unthinkable results in both players and they went on to be "Marquee signings" for other clubs. We have to wait and see what happens with Suarez but it is very fair to say we got the best out of Torres before he moved.

      At the risk of turning this into another FSG thread, that is what they want to do. Buy them at a lower value, bring them on and sell that at their peak... only way is down from there. And there is merit to that philosophy. **I am not agreeing or disagreeing with it, I don't want an argument about FSG here** And it is clear that they have they same hope/expectation for Remy / Markovic / Lallana / Lovren. And if any of those do turn out to reach the same heights as Torres and Suarez in a red shirt, can they not be considered a success, or looked back at as a "Marquee signing" in hindsight? The same applies to Sturridge. When we first signed him, we expected a decent player, but he has come on leaps and bounds, same with Coutinho... We seem to have a decent track record developing at this sort of thing.

      So if we have two or three good players growing and developing into top quality players a season at the same time that previous players with "potential" are peaking, that sounds like a good cycle to me? Or we could make the "Marquee signings" have a strong squad for a season or two, block the progression of young players and after two seasons have to clear out the bulk of the squad and start again... Chelsea anyone?

      I suppose what I'm trying to say is no, we don't need a Marquee Signing. We just need shrewd signings... something much harder to find!
      srslfc
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 32,111 posts | 4876 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #9: Jul 26, 2014 01:01:08 pm
      To be fair, in the opening post, Solodee does go on to discuss the virtues of of signing an established/recognised talent compared to building from within by nuturing our current or younger players.

      Don't really think we should get stuck arguing over certain terms.

      Apologies Ayrton but I genuinely wasn't looking for an argument over it.

      I'm not sure we do need this type of signing but I also feel that if one of the top quality players is available and we can get him then we have the money to buy one and it would impress me, and many others I'd guess, that we can compete for the very best players.

      I think Brendan wants to go down a different route and as I've always thought his plans for how to progress mirror FSG's very closely which is why he was appointed in the first place.
      ayrton77
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 13,775 posts | 627 
      • © Established Quality Since 1977
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #10: Jul 26, 2014 01:10:28 pm
      Apologies Ayrton but I genuinely wasn't looking for an argument over it.

      I'm not sure we do need this type of signing but I also feel that if one of the top quality players is available and we can get him then we have the money to buy one and it would impress me, and many others I'd guess, that we can compete for the very best players.

      I think Brendan wants to go down a different route and as I've always thought his plans for how to progress mirror FSG's very closely which is why he was appointed in the first place.

      Wasn't really wanting to single you out, just feel that people often get in a fuss over terms, even when the general feel of of the post is easily understandable.

      Personally, I agree, that if a player fits Brendan's system then we should go all out for him, whether he be famous and expensive, or unknown and untested.

      But I don't think we need to spend big for the sake of it, and don't think the club will anyway. That's more a case for the oil-rich clubs needing to appease the loud-mouthed glory hunting masses they call supporters. ;D
      LFCexiled
      • Guest
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #11: Jul 26, 2014 01:37:11 pm
      Ignoring the term used, nope we don't. We need 'shrewd' signings that within time can become other clubs potential 'marquee' signings, we need to sign players with qualities that can blossom at Anfield. I want us to sign players that are stuck at clubs that don't use them in the way we will and then they'll become quality players that everyone wants to sign but will be grateful for becoming so wanted that they'll give their all for LFC.

      What I don't want is some billy F***ing big time coming in thinking he's a superstar because someone called him a F***ing big tent.
      dunlop liddell shankly
      • 2009 LFC quiz champion (now to be known as "Kate")
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 20,954 posts | 3334 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #12: Jul 26, 2014 02:50:32 pm
      I don't know because I don't know what a "marquee signing" is.

      And I'm not being arsey here, I just don't know qualifies a "marquee signing".

      Is it the reputation the player has? I mean Bayern have signed Lewandowski for this season (one of the few foreign players I've heard of so he must be a relatively big name) on a free. Is that a "marquee signing" because he's a big name? Or is it how much the player costs because United just forked out 25 mill on Herrera (who I've never heard of) so does that make him a "marquee signing" because he cost a bomb?

      If so, we've already done that in Lallana.
      bmck
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 9,404 posts | 1611 
      • YNWA
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #13: Jul 26, 2014 03:38:58 pm
      The term 'marque' signing is imo derogatory. Insinuation being to splash out big, but kinda cluelessly, on someone 'famous'. Would I do that? ... no.

      Would I stretch to spend 30 - 40 mill (possibly more) on a guy who would be an automatic starter, one of first 2 or 3 names on the teamsheet? ... yes.

      To be honest, after selling Luis (a 'marque' signing you would make?) given that about thirds of people on here voted not to sell him, would've thought they'd be really pissed about not yet signing a top drawer striking replacement. We've signed Lambert and Remy, neither of whom is yet better than Studge.

      S&S got masses of goals for us last year. We've loads of attacking mids, and the ones we had last year chipped in too ... but strikers are the sharp end. BR is a brilliant man manager and definitely improves players. But imo it would be a big risk not to sign another top striker (Studge level or better).
      waltonl4
      • Forum Legend - Shankly
      • ******

      • 37,585 posts | 7139 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #14: Jul 26, 2014 03:39:56 pm
      I think you mean 'buy' a team and squad. The money we are due to spend this summer isn't peanuts. £50m on Southampton players, £20m on Markovic, more on Remy, Origi and a LB. It certainly isn't just 'building' a squad.

      of course it is because we had the smallest squad of any of the top teams and that means we need numbers in order for us to compete in all comps this season.
      therealjr
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 1,116 posts | 147 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #15: Jul 26, 2014 03:54:08 pm
      Signings don't have to have a huge name (a marquee signing) they need to have an impact on the team. Or put another way if you look at the treble winning team of 2000/1 would you have considered Gary Mac a marquee signing?
      ash1
      • Forum Youth Player

      • 13 posts |
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #16: Jul 26, 2014 04:21:06 pm
      I don't think we do,besides Chelsea paid £50mill for a so called marquee signing in Torres and look what happened there,the team we have and the signings we have made should be good enough,what I'm saying here is it is a team game and we need the team to perform.
      lester76
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 4,810 posts | 242 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #17: Jul 26, 2014 07:02:41 pm
      Simply put, no
      What we need and have always needed are the the right players of a better standard to come in and improve us year in, year out.
      Feel that the boss is mostly doing that, though with a few flops along the way.
      Scottbot
      • Forum Legend - Dalglish
      • *****

      • 9,542 posts | 2135 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #18: Jul 26, 2014 07:14:47 pm
      Steering clear of the "what is a marquee signing" debate.

      However, could or should we be looking to spend big on a player that most of the top teams in the world would like to have? And because of that his price is likely to be very high.

      And should we being doing it this summer when it is probably the only time (ie. with 75 million in the coffers, new tv deal etc) the club will be in this position?

      For me it's a simple yes. The club have just been paid a massive sum of money for the best player in the world last season. Should a big chunk of that money be used the make a purchase that would (in other circumstances) be beyond the usual financial restrictions?

      A lot of good work has been done to improve the depth and quality of the squad and there have been some very clever signings in there, shrewd I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread. Lambert was a clever piece of business at that money, same goes for Remy and the Origi signing (when it goes through) has Brendan's finger prints all over it, really impressive. BUT could this club use a player like Paul Pogba? He'd cost a fortune, and a few other big clubs might spring into action if we were to make a bid. The club would be overpaying I guess (you often do for marquee players ;-) but he would be a mainstay in our midfield for the next 10 years, an absolute guarantee of success of you ask me. The money is there, why not spend it? If not Pogba, why not a player like Barclay? I don't think we'd get him but 40 odd million might change that for a player who is nailed on to be an absolute star. There has been a bunch of weak speculation surrounding Reus the past couple of weeks but i would much prefer we spent double on a player like him than an unknown quantity like Markovic, again he would cost but the club have the money and were trying to replace a phenomenal player. Despite hoarding centre-halves the past 18 months we still look shaky a the back, why not spend a chunk on a player like Mats Hummels? A truly quality player (not potential) who has proved his worth. He would cost a bit, he would fall into that marquee category I guess but he would instantly improve our back 4.

      I can't help but feel a little underwhelmed by our transfer business this summer, there has been lots of it, some of it decent but I can't get away from the fact that our team has just got a lot worse for losing Suarez and I haven't seen anything in our new signings to suggest we will concede less goals next season so the challenge will be to score as many and that will be tough without little Luis.
      fishpie
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,570 posts | 212 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #19: Jul 26, 2014 09:03:18 pm
      We should buy an amazing player who is already showing his level of technique and skill if he's available, but not just spend the money on a name because it sends the right message.
      Instead of marquee I'll use the term world class, marquee has got to be one of the worst things associated with LFC the past couple of seasons, who started it and what marquee did they get?

      mar·quee  (mär-k)
      n.
      1. A large tent, often with open sides, used chiefly for outdoor entertainment.
      2. A rooflike structure, often bearing a signboard, projecting over an entrance, as to a theater or hotel. Also called marquise.
      adj.
      Being an athlete of exceptional skill and popularity: The team is hoping to sign a marquee player.

      vulcan_red
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 2,580 posts | 212 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #20: Jul 27, 2014 01:16:16 am
      No you want to sign players who are going to become great in our system, but cost us bugger all. Madrid sign 'Marquee' players and pay well over the odds for them, because they make so much from marketing these players it almost necessary to pay a lot to confirm the players standing.

      Beerbelly
      • Banned
      • *****

      • 6,983 posts | 2054 
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #21: Jul 27, 2014 03:11:14 am
      Steering clear of the "what is a marquee signing" debate.

      However, could or should we be looking to spend big on a player that most of the top teams in the world would like to have? And because of that his price is likely to be very high.

      And should we being doing it this summer when it is probably the only time (ie. with 75 million in the coffers, new tv deal etc) the club will be in this position?

      For me it's a simple yes. The club have just been paid a massive sum of money for the best player in the world last season. Should a big chunk of that money be used the make a purchase that would (in other circumstances) be beyond the usual financial restrictions?

      A lot of good work has been done to improve the depth and quality of the squad and there have been some very clever signings in there, shrewd I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread. Lambert was a clever piece of business at that money, same goes for Remy and the Origi signing (when it goes through) has Brendan's finger prints all over it, really impressive. BUT could this club use a player like Paul Pogba? He'd cost a fortune, and a few other big clubs might spring into action if we were to make a bid. The club would be overpaying I guess (you often do for marquee players ;-) but he would be a mainstay in our midfield for the next 10 years, an absolute guarantee of success of you ask me. The money is there, why not spend it? If not Pogba, why not a player like Barclay? I don't think we'd get him but 40 odd million might change that for a player who is nailed on to be an absolute star. There has been a bunch of weak speculation surrounding Reus the past couple of weeks but i would much prefer we spent double on a player like him than an unknown quantity like Markovic, again he would cost but the club have the money and were trying to replace a phenomenal player. Despite hoarding centre-halves the past 18 months we still look shaky a the back, why not spend a chunk on a player like Mats Hummels? A truly quality player (not potential) who has proved his worth. He would cost a bit, he would fall into that marquee category I guess but he would instantly improve our back 4.

      I can't help but feel a little underwhelmed by our transfer business this summer, there has been lots of it, some of it decent but I can't get away from the fact that our team has just got a lot worse for losing Suarez and I haven't seen anything in our new signings to suggest we will concede less goals next season so the challenge will be to score as many and that will be tough without little Luis.

      Very persuasive argument for why we should sign a marquee signing, good post.

      Personally, I wasn't convinced we did need one perhaps because I have bought into Rodgers' apparent transfer philosophy. But who is to say he won't pull one off?
      bad boy bubby
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 14,564 posts | 3172 
      • @KaiserQueef
      Re: Do Liverpool FC really need a Marquee signing?
      Reply #22: Jul 27, 2014 10:18:13 am
      Ignoring the term used, nope we don't. We need 'shrewd' signings that within time can become other clubs potential 'marquee' signings, we need to sign players with qualities that can blossom at Anfield.
      But that's the thing Exi...

      Given that Brendan said we would only sign players if they fit - "Our signings are strategic. They are not just names. They all fit into the purpose of the team. The character is important. It is not just about the player, but the right type of person" [irrespective of cost] - logic dictates that... if we were to sign a top quality player, (at a high premium) then it would only be because he was deemed 'right'.

      Why, in the name of sweet F**k, would or could any Red have any objection to that?  :confused-smiley-013:

      Quick Reply