Georginio Wijnaldum - Newcastle

This is f**king pathetic.  West f**king Ham are showing more ambition than us.  While we are shopping at Saints and in the Championship.

I'm starting to feel bad about being so hard on Rodgers now.  There's no way in hell that Klopp came in and said "I want Sadio Mane, a couple of Championship players and some blokes on a free from Germany who no one wants."  no f**king way.

first Kenny, then Rodgers, now Klopp.  Too much of a coincidence that ALL THREE of them would want to sign mediocre players.  The only common denominator is FSG.  Their methods are getting old very fast.  "we can compete with anyone in the world, they said."     We can't even compete with West Ham right now.

I want someone to ask John Henry why we can't sign top players.  Can't be because we aren't in London, or don't have Champions League.  Look at the Mancs, a disaster of a season yet they brought in Mkhitaryan, Ibrahimovic and are on the verge of bringing in Pogba.  Last time I checked Manchester isn't in London.  And they don't have CL this season.

So what's the difference?  That's right folks, the difference is---FSG just won't invest in the football side of things enough to make us a top side.   They won't pay for top players.  End of.  Sponsorships, renovations, etc, sure they'll pay for that.

But actually getting top, game changing players?  nope.  Not going to happen.

Let me ask you this. What would have been your reaction if we had signed Wijnaldum last year instead of Milner?

This is f**king pathetic.  West f**king Ham are showing more ambition than us.  While we are shopping at Saints and in the Championship.

I'm starting to feel bad about being so hard on Rodgers now.  There's no way in hell that Klopp came in and said "I want Sadio Mane, a couple of Championship players and some blokes on a free from Germany who no one wants."  no f**king way.

first Kenny, then Rodgers, now Klopp.  Too much of a coincidence that ALL THREE of them would want to sign mediocre players.  The only common denominator is FSG.  Their methods are getting old very fast.  "we can compete with anyone in the world, they said."     We can't even compete with West Ham right now.

I want someone to ask John Henry why we can't sign top players.  Can't be because we aren't in London, or don't have Champions League.  Look at the Mancs, a disaster of a season yet they brought in Mkhitaryan, Ibrahimovic and are on the verge of bringing in Pogba.  Last time I checked Manchester isn't in London.  And they don't have CL this season.

So what's the difference?  That's right folks, the difference is---FSG just won't invest in the football side of things enough to make us a top side.   They won't pay for top players.  End of.  Sponsorships, renovations, etc, sure they'll pay for that.

But actually getting top, game changing players?  nope.  Not going to happen.

West Ham are showing more ambition than us how exactly? . You slag off the signing of Matip yet praise the signing of Tore on a free, typical f**king Fed. The only posting you do on here these days is Liverpool bashing.

Who have we missed out on to West Ham may I ask?

All this from a person who wanted f**king Diame of all players! F***ing hypocrite!!

Pathetic isn't it.

West Ham are showing more ambition than us how exactly? . You slag off the signing of Matip yet praise the signing of Tore on a free, typical F***ing Fed. The only posting you do on here these days is Liverpool bashing.

Who have we missed out on to West Ham may I ask?

All this from a person who wanted F***ing Diame of all players! F***ing hypocrite!!

Honestly, I'm surprised you lads and lasses are still falling for his shtick.

When I see a post, I just automatically scroll past it

Honestly, I'm surprised you lads and lasses are still falling for his shtick.

When I see a post, I just automatically scroll past it

Thats what I do ,to be honest
I am sure if we sign messi and he misses a penalty ,fed will be in here saying ,'who the hell signed this sh*t'
so scroll down ,its not worth a read
YNWA

All this from a person who wanted f**king Diame of all players! F***ing hypocrite!!

You're missing the point.  Kenny had Diane signed up on a free the summer of 2012 before he got sacked.  So you're also having a go at Kenny when you say Diame is sh*te,

The point is this: Diame was a very low risk signing.  Literally, we would have paid nothing for him.  He was available on a FREE that summer, and yet, instead of signing him, we chose to SPEND £15m on Joe Allen.  In the exact same summer.  I don't think Diame is a world beater.  But in our pathetic midfield at the time he would've added some grit and power.  FOR FREE.  Before we even judge Allen's career with us, if in 2012 you had the choice, Diame on a free, or Joe Allen for £15m, which would you have done?  Of course you would have f**king taken Diame!  Not because he had proven himself to be a million times more reliable than Allen, but because both were risks.  And because both are risks, but one is a risk WITHOUT A TRANSFER FEE, you would have taken the one on a free every day.

Now, ESPECIALLY when you look back at what Joe Allen did (and didn't do), I ask again, which would have been the better choice?  Even if Diame had ended up having the exact same underwhelming career with us that Allen did, well hell, it would've been ok because WE WOULD HAVE PAID NOTHING FOR HIM.

Don't you see how that changes everything?  If we are going to insist on signing Mane and Wijnaldum, alright, fine, do it, but for £60m, combined?!  Absolutely not.  why?  Because those players are both HUGE RISKS.  and we don't have enough money to be spending amounts like that on HUGE RISKS.  If we signed them each for £10m then okay, low risk, we can recoup that if it doesn't go well.  But not at those fees.  Those are fees you save for top players.  And before you start talking about inflation and market value blah blah blah, look at Mkhitaryan.  A top player.  Champions League pedigree.  went to the Mancs for LESS THAN WE PAID FOR MANE.  Without them having CL football, without them living in London.  IN THE SAME SUMMER.  So why are they going for the likes of Mkhitaryan and Pogba while we are going for Wijnaldum and Mane?

You know the answer.  It's not rocket science.  It's because the owners aren't ambitious.  End of.

Really happy with this signing.

For the first time in years I can count goalscorers in our team on two hands.

Pretty much our whole midfield is a goal threat now!

bloody hell Ross where you been hiding ?

You're missing the point.  Kenny had Diane signed up on a free the summer of 2012 before he got sacked.  So you're also having a go at Kenny when you say Diame is sh*te,

The point is this: Diame was a very low risk signing.  Literally, we would have paid nothing for him.  He was available on a FREE that summer, and yet, instead of signing him, we chose to SPEND £15m on Joe Allen.  In the exact same summer.  I don't think Diame is a world beater.  But in our pathetic midfield at the time he would've added some grit and power.  FOR FREE.  Before we even judge Allen's career with us, if in 2012 you had the choice, Diame on a free, or Joe Allen for £15m, which would you have done?  Of course you would have F***ing taken Diame!  Because both are risks, but one is a risk WITHOUT A TRANSFER FEE. 

Now, ESPECIALLY when you look back at what Joe Allen did (and didn't do), I ask again, which would have been the better choice?  Even if Diame had ended up having the exact same underwhelming career with us that Allen did, well hell, it would've been ok because WE WOULD HAVE PAID NOTHING FOR HIM.

Don't you see how that changes everything?  If we are going to insist on signing Mane and Wijnaldum, alright, fine, do it, but for £60, combined?!  Absolutely not.  why?  Because those players are both HUGE RISKS.  and we don't have enough money to be spending amounts like that on HUGE RISKS.  If we signed them each for £10m then okay, low risk, we can recoup that if it doesn't go well.  But not at those fees.  Those are fees you save for top players.  And before you start talking about inflation and market value blah blah blah, look at Mkhitaryan.  A top player.  Champions League pedigree.  went to the Mancs for LESS THAN WE PAID FOR MANE.  Without them having CL football, without them living in London.  IN THE SAME SUMMER.  So why are they going for the likes of Mkhitaryan and Pogba while we are going for Wijnaldum and Mane?

You know the answer.  It's not rocket science.  It's because the owners aren't ambitious.  End of.

Mkhitaryan does not get on with Klopp, so wouldn't have signed for us anyway, I would rather have Mane and Wijnaldum than some over the hill 35 YEAR OLD egotistical tw*t like Ibrahimovic and from all the talk today Pogba isn't even moving from Juve to the mancs. Plus even if he was I find him a bit overrated at £120 million.

How about supporting the manager and the players WE HAVE bought instead of being a miserable moaning c**t all the time?

You're missing the point.  Kenny had Diane signed up on a free the summer of 2012 before he got sacked.  So you're also having a go at Kenny when you say Diame is sh*te,

The point is this: Diame was a very low risk signing.  Literally, we would have paid nothing for him.  He was available on a FREE that summer, and yet, instead of signing him, we chose to SPEND £15m on Joe Allen.  In the exact same summer.  I don't think Diame is a world beater.  But in our pathetic midfield at the time he would've added some grit and power.  FOR FREE.  Before we even judge Allen's career with us, if in 2012 you had the choice, Diame on a free, or Joe Allen for £15m, which would you have done?  Of course you would have f**king taken Diame!  Not because he had proven himself to be a million times more reliable than Allen, but because both were risks.  And because both are risks, but one is a risk WITHOUT A TRANSFER FEE, you would have taken the one on a free every day.

Now, ESPECIALLY when you look back at what Joe Allen did (and didn't do), I ask again, which would have been the better choice?  Even if Diame had ended up having the exact same underwhelming career with us that Allen did, well hell, it would've been ok because WE WOULD HAVE PAID NOTHING FOR HIM.

Don't you see how that changes everything?  If we are going to insist on signing Mane and Wijnaldum, alright, fine, do it, but for £60m, combined?!  Absolutely not.  why?  Because those players are both HUGE RISKS.  and we don't have enough money to be spending amounts like that on HUGE RISKS.  If we signed them each for £10m then okay, low risk, we can recoup that if it doesn't go well.  But not at those fees.  Those are fees you save for top players.  And before you start talking about inflation and market value blah blah blah, look at Mkhitaryan.  A top player.  Champions League pedigree.  went to the Mancs for LESS THAN WE PAID FOR MANE.  Without them having CL football, without them living in London.  IN THE SAME SUMMER.  So why are they going for the likes of Mkhitaryan and Pogba while we are going for Wijnaldum and Mane?

You know the answer.  It's not rocket science.  It's because the owners aren't ambitious.  End of.

Agree or not,  your argument has merit and is logical. You  (and probably me for posting this)  will get battered for it, but people should be willing to challenge their own opinions sometimes.

You're missing the point.  Kenny had Diane signed up on a free the summer of 2012 before he got sacked.  So you're also having a go at Kenny when you say Diame is sh*te,

The point is this: Diame was a very low risk signing.  Literally, we would have paid nothing for him.  He was available on a FREE that summer, and yet, instead of signing him, we chose to SPEND £15m on Joe Allen.  In the exact same summer.  I don't think Diame is a world beater.  But in our pathetic midfield at the time he would've added some grit and power.  FOR FREE.  Before we even judge Allen's career with us, if in 2012 you had the choice, Diame on a free, or Joe Allen for £15m, which would you have done?  Of course you would have f**king taken Diame!  Not because he had proven himself to be a million times more reliable than Allen, but because both were risks.  And because both are risks, but one is a risk WITHOUT A TRANSFER FEE, you would have taken the one on a free every day.

Now, ESPECIALLY when you look back at what Joe Allen did (and didn't do), I ask again, which would have been the better choice?  Even if Diame had ended up having the exact same underwhelming career with us that Allen did, well hell, it would've been ok because WE WOULD HAVE PAID NOTHING FOR HIM.

Don't you see how that changes everything?  If we are going to insist on signing Mane and Wijnaldum, alright, fine, do it, but for £60m, combined?!  Absolutely not.  why?  Because those players are both HUGE RISKS.  and we don't have enough money to be spending amounts like that on HUGE RISKS.  If we signed them each for £10m then okay, low risk, we can recoup that if it doesn't go well.  But not at those fees.  Those are fees you save for top players.  And before you start talking about inflation and market value blah blah blah, look at Mkhitaryan.  A top player.  Champions League pedigree.  went to the Mancs for LESS THAN WE PAID FOR MANE.  Without them having CL football, without them living in London.  IN THE SAME SUMMER.  So why are they going for the likes of Mkhitaryan and Pogba while we are going for Wijnaldum and Mane?

You know the answer.  It's not rocket science.  It's because the owners aren't ambitious.  End of.

Again, spot on. Don't know how anybody can dispute or disagree with that.

You will probably find some bellend who goes on to say Allen was a good signing though or we recouped 13m so it doesn't matter or some sh*te like that though. When in reality Allen was a poor signing and only came out of his shell in the final six months of his career (playing for a move or for his spot in the euros perhaps?) and the money we spent on him could have gone elsewhere at the time I agree.

I'm with you, I don't mind these players coming in as much but it has to be for the right fee. The money we are spending on this lad and Mane etc can be spent better elsewhere. We aren't getting value for our money.

But again some bellend who doesn't understand that we work to a budget will say 'it's not your money so why do you care'. Quite frankly I'm sick of seeing that phrase on here.

I'll be lying if I said I'm pleased with this signing and i can't help but feel same old same old. Over spending on average premiership players.

FSG are really starting to get on my tits now and I sat on the fence with them for years.

Personally not all that fired up by this (possible) signing, or some of the other signings so far to be honest.  What DOES give me confidence is Jürgen's experience and the fact that he has brought success to clubs in the past. And the belief that he can do it again here.

Mkhitaryan and Gotze on the move, and not to us, is a bit disappointing. Not sure what people think, but I thought the 'Klopp factor' would help us attract those kinda guys, though it seems to not be quite working out that way right now unfortunately (like, could we really say any of the players signed could not have been signed by BR)

Re. Wijnaldum and Newcastle almost doubling their money in a year, am a bit surprised we'd spend 25mill on a guy about to play a season in the Championship, regardless of how many goals he got in a poor side. Would have thought somewhere < 20mill.  Still, if he signs, and is a success, nobody will give a toss about the money.

Do think we'll be a physically stronger side than last season. More direct. Certainly should be more goals in the squad, and the first XI will be interesting. Have we signed the 'top quality' players, the leaders many want, guys to dig deep in the big games, get on the ball and show courage in the big games at big moments... remains to be seen.

Jürgen has had the best part of the season to identify where he can improve, and we're seeing a lot of changes now, so hopefully as he gets closer to the game plan he wants, we can push on.

This, all day long. Brendan's team management / tactics didn't loose him his job (back 3 with wing backs aside). He was completely out of his depth when looking at the top end of the transfer market.

Can't argue with that, his downfall was the signings.

He did come 2nd in his 2nd season, playing brilliant football, so hoping for big things from Klopp in 2016/17

You're missing the point.  Kenny had Diane signed up on a free the summer of 2012 before he got sacked.  So you're also having a go at Kenny when you say Diame is sh*te,

The point is this: Diame was a very low risk signing.  Literally, we would have paid nothing for him.  He was available on a FREE that summer, and yet, instead of signing him, we chose to SPEND £15m on Joe Allen.  In the exact same summer.  I don't think Diame is a world beater.  But in our pathetic midfield at the time he would've added some grit and power.  FOR FREE.  Before we even judge Allen's career with us, if in 2012 you had the choice, Diame on a free, or Joe Allen for £15m, which would you have done?  Of course you would have f**king taken Diame!  Not because he had proven himself to be a million times more reliable than Allen, but because both were risks.  And because both are risks, but one is a risk WITHOUT A TRANSFER FEE, you would have taken the one on a free every day.

Now, ESPECIALLY when you look back at what Joe Allen did (and didn't do), I ask again, which would have been the better choice?  Even if Diame had ended up having the exact same underwhelming career with us that Allen did, well hell, it would've been ok because WE WOULD HAVE PAID NOTHING FOR HIM.

Don't you see how that changes everything?  If we are going to insist on signing Mane and Wijnaldum, alright, fine, do it, but for £60m, combined?!  Absolutely not.  why?  Because those players are both HUGE RISKS.  and we don't have enough money to be spending amounts like that on HUGE RISKS.  If we signed them each for £10m then okay, low risk, we can recoup that if it doesn't go well.  But not at those fees.  Those are fees you save for top players.  And before you start talking about inflation and market value blah blah blah, look at Mkhitaryan.  A top player.  Champions League pedigree.  went to the Mancs for LESS THAN WE PAID FOR MANE.  Without them having CL football, without them living in London.  IN THE SAME SUMMER.  So why are they going for the likes of Mkhitaryan and Pogba while we are going for Wijnaldum and Mane?

You know the answer.  It's not rocket science.  It's because the owners aren't ambitious.  End of.

Lets just go about signing free players then. No risk.

We do have money... loads

I'm not really looking at transfer fees now TBH. That's all I'm hearing is this player and that player is not worth this much or that much. We all know that they're not worth the fees this season as every transfer to the epl has been exaggerated because of the TV money. All I know is that Jürgen wants the players that he thinks can play in his system and if we have to pay top dollar then so be it. Who would of thought we would get a fee for Joe Allen close to what we paid for him in the first place...and that Pogba fee to the scum well thats rediculas.

Twitter , gave me hope , Wijnaldum also scored more goals from midfield than martial who's worth £56 odd million ??
Mané - 13 PL goals
Wijnaldum - 11 PL goals

But...
£52m De Brune - 7 PL goals
All the fuss Payet - 9 PL goals
£42m Ozil - 5 PL goals

He has some obvious natural gifts:  strength, speed, and raw athleticism. 

Watching his videos, I've been very surprised at how good he is in the air (lots of headed goals), how comfortable he is shooting with both feet, and how composed he is under pressure with the ball at his feet. 

Ultimately, my opinion of the lad has the same value as the rest of the forum -- sweet f**k all

Klopp has his man, so I'm happy

The point is this: Diame was a very low risk signing.  Literally, we would have paid nothing for him.  He was available on a FREE that summer

So what is wrong with signing Matip because as I remember it, clubs were hardly beating down the door to sign Diame. How is it okay in your mind to sign Diame on a free and Ibra on a free, one of which didn't have a glowing reputation and the other a 35 year old having spent the last 4(?) years in a weak league and now getting to the end of his career but you question Matip who is 24 and highly rated? We had the deal wrapped up as soon as his contract at Schalke allowed it.

Like you said, it's free and low risk. It's about as hypocritical as you could have possibly have gotten.

regardless of how many goals he got in a poor side

This, so just think what he could do with better players around him...

So what is wrong with signing Matip

It's interesting seeing it was a zero risk 24 year old that was named to the Bundesliga starting XI.

It's annoying when you have someone on ignore, their posts still show up when quoted.

Had some time to reflect on this one. And I think I may have been wrong about this.

Honestly, I think I see more sense in this the more I look at it. Still think that the may be games when switching away from a "controller" in midfielder may end up having some pretty frantic performances in certain games and could cost us points. But if Dahoud isn't available then I hope he gets his man next summer because Klopp clearly wanted that lad.

But the more you look at Dahoud, Zielinski and Wijnaldum the more you seem a common strand. Players who carry the ball from deep into the final third at pace. Direct passers into the final third and goals from deep.

Ibe and Allen are leaving from around what we are signing Wijnaldum for and if you look at the situations we used those players in last season then you could see how Wijnaldum offers at least what they gave us plus more goals.

Still don't think we'll see him in a midfield two very often if at all, but can certainly see how he can play as one of a three or cover all the positions behind the striker in a 4-2-3-1.

Must admit haven't seen him play that much he does seem to feature heavily on MOTD highlights though. The one time I did watch him for 90 minutes was against us and he tore us apart.

F**k knows where Jürgen thinks of slotting him but from what I have seen he is an attacking midfielder or a CM who likes to get in and around the box. Where will he slot him having Bobby, Coutinho, Mane and Lallana in those positions?

Has this lad got a tackle in him? Or is he not that type? Seeing people saying he best as a 10.

Money has gone crazy in football so it's hard to directly quantify the value of £25M compared to say £5M 10 years ago.

However, my initial feeling is that Wijnaldum isn't the player to fire us to Premier League glory.  Don't remember Wijnaldum grabbing games by the horns and guiding Newcastle away from relegation in his 38 games for them last season.

Hope I'm wrong.