The Transfer Committee Thread

Well let's keep doing what we've been doing then fella. Apparently that's the answer in your book? Another 6th, 7th or 8th position finish then? There is an adage that says keep doing the same and you can expect the same results.

For the hundredth time I'm not advocating outspending our petro dollar rivals, why don't you read? I am advocating making exceptions to our transfer model to sign certain players. I have also suggested that we should not be tied down to only buying players of a certain age. I also said we should/could have bought less players but invested more in the transfer fee/wages.

listen, most people on this forum are happy enough to consider the opinion of others, to acknowledge and even soften their opinion at times, maybe even concede that others might have a point. I can't say I have ever seen this from you, you are a broken record that plays the exact same tune over and over.

Don't take things so personally - I've considered your opinion carefully - I just disagree with it; that's fine it's just the internet.

Regarding what you've said - exceptions HAVE been made to our general policy - Toure, Lambert, Milner and so on. Pointing out these these facts isn't a slight against you - just the argument you are proposing.

The question still arises about how you pick the players that are going to succeed versus those who aren't. It's easy to say which players we should have signed with hindsight but how do you do it in advance?

Don't take things so personally - I've considered your opinion carefully - I just disagree with it; that's fine it's just the internet.

Regarding what you've said - exceptions HAVE been made to our general policy - Toure, Lambert, Milner and so on. Pointing out these these facts isn't a slight against you - just the argument you are proposing.

The question still arises about how you pick the players that are going to succeed versus those who aren't. It's easy to say which players we should have signed with hindsight but how do you do it in advance?

Have had a chill pill. You haven't thrown up the best examples of experienced players though, Toure and Lambert, two old pros (one on a free, the other for a small fee) were not what I was getting at. And even Milner, yes he is on a good deal but he is getting those wages because he was a free agent and probably would be commanding a £20 million transfer fee had he been in contract. The example I used earlier was Higuain, he likely would have cost £40 million a couple of summers back, we had the money from the Suarez deal and needed genuine quality. Our transfer policy rules out a big outlay (both fee and wages) for a player like Higuain. I know you say hindsight is a beautiful thing but I was saying exactly the same thing at the time. We needed to invest that money on a couple of quality players with proven track records. We were back in Europe so we had that carrot covered BUT we didn't, they wasted the lot of it, virtually every penny on 2nd rate talent. You worry that the risk is too high to tie it up in the higher echelon players. I say the risk is greater with our current policy.

Have had a chill pill. You haven't thrown up the best examples of experienced players though, Toure and Lambert, two old pros (one on a free, the other for a small fee) were not what I was getting at. And even Milner, yes he is on a good deal but he is getting those wages because he was a free agent and probably would be commanding a £20 million transfer fee had he been in contract. The example I used earlier was Higuain, he likely would have cost £40 million a couple of summers back, we had the money from the Suarez deal and needed genuine quality. Our transfer policy rules out a big outlay (both fee and wages) for a player like Higuain. I know you say hindsight is a beautiful thing but I was saying exactly the same thing at the time. We needed to invest that money on a couple of quality players with proven track records. We were back in Europe so we had that carrot covered BUT we didn't, they wasted the lot of it, virtually every penny on 2nd rate talent. You worry that the risk is too high to tie it up in the higher echelon players. I say the risk is greater with our current policy.

I quoted those examples to show how we would breach the transfer "policy".

Yeah sure Higuain would have been an exciting signing but the problem - as we saw with Willian, Costa, Mkhitayran, Sanchez and so on is that Brendan didn't have the pull to attract them over more established high profile managers which meant he increasingly resorted to Premiership signings that he could persuade.

But the point - that you still haven't answered! - is that nobody can tell which players, higher echelon or not, will be a success and which won't.

Higuain may have been the next Torres but he could equally have been the next Forlan. Or Kezman. Or Adebayor.

Yeah sure Higuain would have been an exciting signing but the problem - as we saw with Willian, Costa, Mkhitayran, Sanchez and so on is that Brendan didn't have the pull to attract them over more established high profile managers which meant he increasingly resorted to Premiership signings that he could persuade.

But Higuiain or a player of his type (ie. 27-28 years old, big fee, big wages) wasn't and isn't on the table under this transfer model is he? You say Brendan didn't have the pulling power, I say he didn't have the opportunity because of the model we/the club are working too. As for Toure and Lambert, those players did NOT breach the transfer policy that I can see? Either low (or no fee) and wages that are fairly respectable (when  compared to other players in the squad) so i'm not sure of the relevance? I would also point out that at the time of bidding for Mickityrian, Willian and Costa we were not in the Champions League. In the case of Willian, was that about gravitas or the because FSG dropped out of the bidding because of price? I'm not sure your reasoning is as water-tight as you present it to be.

But the point - that you still haven't answered! - is that nobody can tell which players, higher echelon or not, will be a success and which won't.

Why repeatedly ask a question that can't be answered? Of course there are no guarantees. I realise that, and think that most do. The club have had their fingers burned on the deals of that summer, Lovren, Markovic, Balotelli, Can, Lambert to name a few. Collectively those players have contributed very little and three of them have either left the club or out on loan. I'd have much preferred to have rolled the dice on 2 proven commodities than spread the butter over a larger piece of bread as was the club's failed approach two summers ago. Given we had £80 million burning the pockets and Champions League qualification it was 100% (in my mind) the right thing to do at the time.

But Higuiain or a player of his type (ie. 27-28 years old, big fee, big wages) wasn't and isn't on the table under this transfer model is he? You say Brendan didn't have the pulling power, I say he didn't have the opportunity because of the model we/the club are working too. As for Toure and Lambert, those players did NOT breach the transfer policy that I can see? Either low (or no fee) and wages that are fairly respectable (when  compared to other players in the squad) so i'm not sure of the relevance? I would also point out that at the time of bidding for Mickityrian, Willian and Costa we were not in the Champions League. In the case of Willian, was that about gravitas or the because FSG dropped out of the bidding because of price? I'm not sure your reasoning is as water-tight as you present it to be.

Why repeatedly ask a question that can't be answered? Of course there are no guarantees. I realise that, and think that most do. The club have had their fingers burned on the deals of that summer, Lovren, Markovic, Balotelli, Can, Lambert to name a few. Collectively those players have contributed very little and three of them have either left the club or out on loan. I'd have much preferred to have rolled the dice on 2 proven commodities than spread the butter over a larger piece of bread as was the club's failed approach two summers ago. Given we had £80 million burning the pockets and Champions League qualification it was 100% (in my mind) the right thing to do at the time.

Eh?

Mkhitaryan age 27 - big fee, big wages
Costa age 27 - big fee, big wages
Willian age 27 - big fee, big wages
Sanchez age 27 big fee, big wages

Toure (current) age 34 - 65k p/w for a substitute
Milner (current) age 30 - 120k p/w


As for qualifying for the Champion's League - we clearly needed to increase the number of players in the squad to deal with the increased number of games rather than splurging on a single player.

Really though - the answer to the question you give in your final paragraph. Your solution of spending big money on fees and wages doesn't guarantee any more transfer "success" than the current method - as United are currently finding to their cost.

It only makes sense to "buy" success if you have more money than your rivals.

There's a lot of dead wood in our ranks as of now, so there is going to be a massive clear out in the summer. I'm sure of it. But can the TC be trusted to bring in the 2 or 3 natural leaders that our team needs that will raise the level of every other player in the squad? Even with Jürgen telling them who to get, I'm very doubtful they will.

Mkhitaryan age 27 - big fee, big wagesCosta age 27 - big fee, big wagesWillian age 27 - big fee, big wagesSanchez age 27 big fee, big wages

Mkhitaryan age 27 - big fee, big wages - Was 24 at the time of our bid and at £21.5 million I would argue he actually fits the mould of player that we have typically gone for in some ways. Yes we lost out to Dortmund but he wasn't a player the big guns appeared to be circling at the time.

Costa age 27 - big fee, big wages - Aged 25 when we agreed to meet the release clause on his contract (I recall it was in the region of £22 million). He elected to sign a new contract with Atletico and then Chelsea met his new release clause of (£32 million according to reports), and paid the lad 150K.

Willian big fee, big wages - Aged 25 when we tried to sign him. We dropped out of the bidding when the price got too high, Spurs were due to sign him and then Chelsea nipped in and took him.

You are presenting the above players as examples of the club going after the best players, "Sure we go for big players, we offer big money and we compete". I am saying we should have done more, clearly we haven't done enough. It feels like token effort. We were in for Willian, then Spurs got involved, we didn't want any part of a bidding war so we dropped out and didn't sign anybody if I recall correctly.

You are saying that the club have no choice but to continue in the same way in terms of transfer policy and that there is no other way to go about it. That has seen us finish 6th to 8th every season under FSG bar one.

It only makes sense to "buy" success if you have more money than your rivals.

I'm not advocating "buying success" in the way a City or a Chelsea have done so, I am saying our transfer policy needs to be a combination of the 2 approaches. We need to find rough diamonds and polish them up, we need to produce more players like Sterling but we also need to offer the manager some flexibility in the transfer approach where he can say I want that player, he can make everybody else in this team better and he is worth the extra money (be it wages or fee).

Yes but my point is that youre not saying anything anyhing different to anyone at the club.

Rough diamonds - big money players - backing the manger - we have seen examples of all of the above in our attempted dealings. Its the same with all top clubs - the important question is HOW we identify the players that will succeed.

As hou said youd prefer to see 2 players coming in on big money - fine - but the question of picking the right two still applies otherwise you just end up with very expensive flops rather than moderately expensive flops.

Yes but my point is that youre not saying anything anyhing different to anyone at the club.

Rough diamonds - big money players - backing the manger - we have seen examples of all of the above in our attempted dealings. Its the same with all top clubs - the important question is HOW we identify the players that will succeed.

As hou said youd prefer to see 2 players coming in on big money - fine - but the question of picking the right two still applies otherwise you just end up with very expensive flops rather than moderately expensive flops.

It's a fair point you're making Hollywood if I'm reading you right.

Basically what you're saying there are no sure things where transfers are concerned.

Whilst we're on the money subject, City have told Pep there is no ceiling limit as to what he can spend to acquire his targets.

Game over that means IMO. With arguably the best club manager in world football, plus a near unlimited transfer fund, and with frankly pathetic TC in place, we'll never catch up, let alone over take. City will more than likely end up the dominant force as we were in our past.

Seriously, what a farce the modern game has become.

Exactly so mate - concentrating on blowing the budget on one player rather than seven isnt the issue - identifying the right players is.

So far there hasnt been much progress on answering the question about how we do that.

The transfer committer is using a combination of scouting, statistical analysis and computing to try and predict which players will work.

We havent so far managed to consistently land our first choice targets to know how well the system works - it would be wortg doing that before we ditch the whole thibg and start from scratch.

It's a fair point you're making Hollywood if I'm reading you right.

Basically what you're saying there are no sure things where transfers are concerned.

Luis Suarez disagrees.

Whilst we're on the money subject, City have told Pep there is no ceiling limit as to what he can spend to acquire his targets.

Game over that means IMO. With arguably the best club manager in world football, plus a near unlimited transfer fund, and with frankly pathetic TC in place, we'll never catch up, let alone over take. City will more than likely end up the dominant force as we were in our past.

This has been the case since 2008 when they had their takeover and they've won barely anything in that time, they were meant to be by far the best team around for a few seasons now. I'm not concerned over who they sign. They've already got the best few players in the league in Kompany, KDB, Silva and Aguero. They wont sign anyone else on that level IMO because the other players on that level are at either Madrid, Barca or Bayern and I can't see them leaving where they are for City, Guardiola being the manager or not.

In terms of our transfers, why is it our big money ones are the worst? Benteke, Carroll, Lovren, Lallana for example, all sh*t for us. Yet Suarez, Torres are the only ones around the 20-25 marker that have been a succcess. The other good buys have been for a low fee; Pepe £6M, Coutinho £8M, Xabi £10M, Sturridge when fit £12M, Agger about £5M? Kuyt £10M. Other than them, I can't really think of any standout signings over the last 10years. Maybe we need to stick to around the £10M marker from now on, instead of wasting so much money on over hyped and priced crap.

This has been the case since 2008 when they had their takeover and they've won barely anything in that time, they were meant to be by far the best team around for a few seasons now. I'm not concerned over who they sign. They've already got the best few players in the league in Kompany, KDB, Silva and Aguero. They wont sign anyone else on that level IMO because the other players on that level are at either Madrid, Barca or Bayern and I can't see them leaving where they are for City, Guardiola being the manager or not.

In terms of our transfers, why is it our big money ones are the worst? Benteke, Carroll, Lovren, Lallana for example, all sh*t for us. Yet Suarez, Torres are the only ones around the 20-25 marker that have been a succcess. The other good buys have been for a low fee; Pepe £6M, Coutinho £8M, Xabi £10M, Sturridge when fit £12M, Agger about £5M? Kuyt £10M. Other than them, I can't really think of any standout signings over the last 10years. Maybe we need to stick to around the £10M marker from now on, instead of wasting so much money on over hyped and priced crap.

All valid points. But they never had Pep in 2008 or since. He will make a massive difference. Plus, we might see the likes of Lewandowski, Müller, etc in tow. Like ourselves, City have a lot of places that can easily be replaced.

I'm not saying we'll never win stuff when Jürgen has got the team HE wants, but it's going to get even tougher...

All valid points. But they never had Pep in 2008 or since. He will make a massive difference. Plus, we might see the likes of Lewandowski, Müller, etc in tow.

Muller, KDB and Silva? No, can't see that at all. I can't see Lewandowski going there either, the attack will be built around Aguero like it is now and Aguero like Torres, can't play alongside somebody.

Guardiola makes no difference to the players they get IMO. They have the money to get whatever player they want essentially. Look at how they got Robinho in a team full of halfwits managed by a halfwit. Throw enough money at a player and the majority of them will sign, that's how they got to where they are now and why their wage has been so high since 2008.

We won't be able to compete with them in the market, we just have to make sure Klopp signs the right players.

It's a fair point you're making Hollywood if I'm reading you right.

Basically what you're saying there are no sure things where transfers are concerned.

Piercing insight once again from HBalls. Who ever would have thought there are risks involved in transfers?

Piercing insight once again from HBalls. Who ever would have thought there are risks involved in transfers?

I think it's a fair point.

There is no guarantee that spending big money will translate to success.

We have to buy the right player for the squad and we only really know if they are right with hindsight.

I think it's a fair point.

There is no guarantee that spending big money will translate to success.

We have to buy the right player for the squad and we only really know if they are right with hindsight.

Yep, I agree mate but it's a banality; if anyone here seriously thinks spending big is itself enough to solve our problems I have yet to read their posts.

If it's "what's the best system/strategy to improve our success rate in the transfer market?" I think it's a bit more interesting. Who decides and how do they decide? What factors need to be taken into consideration?

I tend to think there is no set formula as such and if we overanalyse the problem we could end up adding complexity where it isn't needed.

My feeling has always been that the manager has to be the one who leads it and has the final say, as he's the one who works with the players to implement his vision for how he wants us to play.

We need to be smarter if we don't have the funds to outspend others...fair enough.

But instead of "computers" and "committees" maybe the smart thing to do is actually hire a manager who can spot a player and let him get on with it. In this case that would be Jürgen. I wouldn't have a problem with that.

• Offer 35 mill for a player
  
  Club want 50 mill
  
  We pull out of move
  
  Player is sold for 38 mill.

Transfer Comittee in a nutshell.

Call me old-fashioned but in the old days we'd scout players, scouts would recommend them, the manager would consider whether/how they'd fit the team and we'd dig deep to check out the lad's personality, motivation and team ethic.  That's before anyone even considered money.  I know its a different game now, and a very different transfer market, but the bottom line has to be that the playing considerations take precedent in any potential transfers-in.
Leicester have avoided the mentality of "He's a big name, he's available (or contract is running out/wants a move), we might get him for a good price (we won't), he's played well this season, he's got the media salivating," and look at the team they've built.  Team.  A collection of random stars do not a team make.  But a team can make a collection of stars.
We can't compete with City and Chelsea for money and other reasons, so we need a cleverer, more insightful approach.  I hope Jürgen has that.  It's the thread I cling to.

I think it's a fair point.

There is no guarantee that spending big money will translate to success.

We have to buy the right player for the squad and we only really know if they are right with hindsight.

True, but it's pretty clear that the teams that are spending the big money tend to be the more successful ones.
The premier league, La Liga, The bundesliga, Serie A, The Portuguese League, even the Scottish premier division, are all traditionally won by the teams with the most financial clout. Obviously Leicester would be an exception to the rule if they managed to win it, but that would be an anomaly.
It will be difficult to compete with City, Chelsea and Utd for top players, which is why we need to improve our scouting system and get in there ahead of the competition, and get deals tied up pretty quickly.

We can't compete with City and Chelsea for money and other reasons, so we need a cleverer, more insightful approach.  I hope Jürgen has that.  It's the thread I cling to.

To be fair United and Arsenal are quite a ways ahead of us also on the money front...quite a ways.

• Offer 35 mill for a player
  
  Club want 50 mill
  
  We pull out of move
  
  Player is sold for 38 mill.

Transfer Comittee in a nutshell.

I wasn't aware we ever offered 35m?