Author Topic: Liverpool's transfer policy  (Read 15475 times)

Offline guest

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,708
Liverpool's transfer policy
« on: December 28, 2012, 08:53:10 pm »
With Christmas not too distant in the rearview mirror, it is easy to recoil in horror at those stressful hours spent searching for presents. Endless rows of toys, clothes and gadgets; each item bringing varying degrees of unbridled joy, acute disappointment or vague disinterest.

But imagine if the search was narrowed down and the clothes simply had to be blue. The search would be far less strenuous, but while the best blue clothes would be placed under the Christmas tree, perhaps there were better items in red, yellow or green left in the store.

This is essentially the dilemma Liverpool face as they prepare for the January transfer window. A simplistic analogy, yes, but then it appears to be a fairly simple transfer policy. Ignore the hand-wringing and brow-furrowing over Moneyball and Soccernomics, it is far simpler than that: Liverpool want young players with potential, and they won’t pay a penny more – to club or player – than they think the deal warrants.

That policy explains their January targets. Daniel Sturridge (pictured), 23, is out of favour at Chelsea, and would not command a massive fee; 20-year-old Tom Ince left Liverpool in 2011, and, due to the sell-on clause the Reds agreed with Blackpool, is available to them with a 30 per cent discount; Theo Walcott has six months remaining on his contract, making him an attractive prospect, especially at 23.

On the surface it is a noble thought, and one that could benefit the club; it is also one that would have saved the club the shattering summer of 2011, when Stewart Downing and Jordan Henderson followed the lead of Andy Carroll by arriving for grossly inflated fees.

By buying youngsters, Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers can mould them into the type of player he wants. It also means any failures can be sold for a minimal loss, while successes can be sold for profit to be reinvested into the team.

It is a policy that has served a number of clubs well. Fenway Sports Group were interested in Barcelona’s model of 2003, when the club removed the old guard and replaced them with purchases such as Ronaldinho, Deco, Ricardo Quaresma, Rafael Márquez and Ludovic Giuly – all of whom either came with much-hyped potential or their best years rapidly approaching. Youngsters such as Andrés Iniesta, Xavi and Victor Valdes were also promoted.

It has worked in England, too. Though Arsène Wenger has recently faced criticism for Arsenal’s performances, how Liverpool fans wish they were three points from Champions League qualification with a game in hand, watching football in a 60,000-seater stadium with money to reinvest into the squad.

But as Liverpool line up Sturridge and Ince in January, a lingering feeling persists: is this the best the club can do? In theory, both players are what the club need: they exude confidence, have an eye for goal and possess the skill to make darting runs into the penalty area. For a team whose wide options include one-goal Raheem Sterling, defender-by-trade José Enrique and missing-in-action Oussama Assaidi, the arrival of the duo would be welcome.

They tick the boxes put in place by the club, no doubt. But this narrow-minded recruitment policy means there could be better elsewhere. The notion of buying young and finding value is one to be applauded, but Liverpool are currently 10th in the Premier League. Their platform is not a strong one to build upon. That is not to say a side containing Luis Suárez, Daniel Agger and Glen Johnson is a poor one, but players of that quality may get restless if short-to-mid-term plans do not match long-term promises.

The majority of Liverpool’s best players are either hitting their peak or waving it goodbye in the distance. The fact Suárez has never truly covered the Champions League in his magic dust is borderline criminal; Ince and Sturridge may help take Liverpool there eventually, but Suárez could be 28 by that time. He could also be playing in Spain or Italy.

The calls for patience surrounding Rodgers’ rebuilding of Liverpool are correct; whether the players listen to it as intently as the fans is another matter. The club should keep that close to their minds when recruiting. Liverpool are in a strange position, as their history gives them a pulling power that overrides their current midtable status. They need every advantage possible right now. To focus on one particular group of players will hinder as much as help.

History says this is so. For example, at 26 Willem II’s Sami Hyypia may have been regarded as too old for the new Liverpool; ditto Barcelona forward Luis Garcia. Both improved the club’s immediately, Hyypia’s defensive qualities and Garcia’s goals bringing Liverpool success home and abroad.

This current Liverpool team needs that injection of quality more than most. While Sturridge and Ince could improve the team, there should be efforts to find players who can do much more, much sooner. Rodgers, the squad’s star performers and the supporters deserve it.

The transfer policy is a risk, and it is being taken at a club where risks very rarely pay off. They should hope the trend breaks and it does work, otherwise midtable purgatory – or worse – could be a reality for some time.

Link: http://www.lifesapitch.co.uk/opinions/is-liverpools-single-minded-recruitment-policy-a-mistake/
« Last Edit: December 28, 2012, 09:10:31 pm by ho-ho-hendo »

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2012, 09:10:02 pm »
Great again mate :)

Offline Tony19:6

  • Begets John 3:16
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,308
  • Born and Bred
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2012, 09:13:59 pm »
Good post.
A Great man once said...
"Football is a simple game based on the giving and taking of passes, of controlling the ball and of making yourself available to receive a pass.
It is terribly simple."

http://twitter.com/Tony19_6

Offline Max_powers

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,758
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2012, 09:33:34 pm »
I think our transfer policy is comparable to policy used by many american sports team where when a team full of old players is underperforming the owners would dismantle the team and replace them with prospects, they would slash the wage bill and keep the expectations low for a while and when the players reach close to there prime they will start challenging for titles they make the final push. FSG seem to be doing the same, they want to bring through a generation of players who all prime at the same time and when the time comes they can make the big investment. I don't doubt there intentions but in football you have shite like CL and if a team stays out of it for long the big players just won't go there.

Offline Welshred

  • CBE. To be fair to him, he is a massive twat. Professional Ladies' Arse Fondler. Possibly......we're not sure any more......
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 34,608
  • JFT96
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2012, 09:37:39 pm »
Sums up pretty much how the whole fanbase is feeling right now, it's be great to add potential quality like Sturridge and Ince if we had the quality in front of them for them to learn off.

Offline Fordy

  • Κασσάνδρα. ITK (rubs bridge of nose knowingly)
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 35,059
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2012, 09:44:20 pm »
Great post.

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,229
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2012, 09:44:32 pm »
This current Liverpool team needs that injection of quality more than most.
It's screaming for it mate, I've repeatedly said this.

In terms of the youth policy though, BR said in his meeting this week with RAWK etc that he'll buy anyone at any age if its the right deal.

Offline didi shamone

  • Too old for fighting
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,228
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2012, 09:44:33 pm »
Great read and I agree we need players for the here and now as well as youth. Although youngsters of the 22ish bracket can have an instant impact ala Alonso and Mascharano and Torres. I'd like us to look abroad at players of that age that are performing at a high level for club and country. After this window we'll have a large contingent of young players with potential if all goes to plan, but without short term goals long term plans are doomed to failure.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2012, 09:46:36 pm by didi shamone »

Offline RedHopper

  • Hopping to a mightily lofty position and enjoying the view. If only custom titles could be in proportion to the member's average post length? My, what fun we could have! Imagine the sheer edification to be derived from testing the character limi
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,187
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #8 on: December 28, 2012, 09:46:41 pm »
great post.

The one quibble is about the age restriction. I'm sure that he equivalent of 2.6 million for a 26 year old hyypia would be acceptable for an actual new sami hyypia. but 26 or, turning 27 near the end of the season should be an upper limit. If we had stuck to this limit, lets look at the player we would have avoided signing over the last five years.

2008-9 : Dossena, cavalleri, keane, riera
2009-10: kyrgiakos, rodriguez, jovanovic (signed by rafa before he left)
2010-11: Jones, konchesky, meireles, cole, poulsen
2011-12: doni, downing bellamy.

At best we got one good season out of riera, and a good six months out of bellamy, rodriguez and meireles, but quite frankly...... just look at that list. This summer we missed out on dempsey, who we would have had to give at least 3 years to at top wages, and quite frankly, he hasn't set the world on fire at spurs.

Maybe we should adopt and stick to a strict 25's and under policy only, with 26 year olds having to be carefully justified. I'd be prepared to miss out on a possible luis  garcia (two good seasons, one so-so) to avoid that cavalcade of disaster listed above. a lot of those players never came close to being fit to wear the shirt, and just sucked money out of the club
« Last Edit: December 28, 2012, 09:48:17 pm by RedHopper »

Offline Floydy

  • G is for grumpy. It is modest understatement.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,324
  • Hidden in the shadows, Orchestrating life
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #9 on: December 28, 2012, 09:53:03 pm »
spot on kris
Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.  Albert Einstein.  
Unquestionable trust in authority is the enemy of truth. Albert Einstein
Wake up to the war on for your mind!

Offline CharlieAdamsLeftFoot

  • has gone to Stoke with his right foot.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,060
  • What you achieve in life, echoes an eternity.
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #10 on: December 28, 2012, 09:58:17 pm »
Definitely one of the best and most realistic posts I have read on here.
Above all, I would like to be remembered as a man who was selfless,
who strove and worried so that others could share the glory,
and who built up a family of people who could hold their heads up high and say

'We're Liverpool'

Offline goalrushatgoodison

  • crapinbed
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,317
  • Still waiting for the great leap forward.
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #11 on: December 28, 2012, 10:05:08 pm »
great post.

The one quibble is about the age restriction. I'm sure that he equivalent of 2.6 million for a 26 year old hyypia would be acceptable for an actual new sami hyypia. but 26 or, turning 27 near the end of the season should be an upper limit. If we had stuck to this limit, lets look at the player we would have avoided signing over the last five years.

2008-9 : Dossena, cavalleri, keane, riera
2009-10: kyrgiakos, rodriguez, jovanovic (signed by rafa before he left)
2010-11: Jones, konchesky, meireles, cole, poulsen
2011-12: doni, downing bellamy.

At best we got one good season out of riera, and a good six months out of bellamy, rodriguez and meireles, but quite frankly...... just look at that list. This summer we missed out on dempsey, who we would have had to give at least 3 years to at top wages, and quite frankly, he hasn't set the world on fire at spurs.

Maybe we should adopt and stick to a strict 25's and under policy only, with 26 year olds having to be carefully justified. I'd be prepared to miss out on a possible luis  garcia (two good seasons, one so-so) to avoid that cavalcade of disaster listed above. a lot of those players never came close to being fit to wear the shirt, and just sucked money out of the club

Yes and we would have missed out on Gary MC Allister too.

Most of the guys you named up there were bad buys no matter what age they were. And buying under 25s hasn't exactly been a gold mine for us this past couple of seasons either.

Age should not be the issue. It's value that counts. Obviously value will be better if there is the prospect of longer service or a sell on fee but it will not always be the case.

Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad.

Offline Prof

  • fessor Yaffle. Full tosser.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,034
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
    • The Alternative Premier League Table
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #12 on: December 28, 2012, 10:07:50 pm »
I'd be prepared to miss out on a possible luis  garcia (two good seasons, one so-so) to avoid that cavalcade of disaster listed above. a lot of those players never came close to being fit to wear the shirt, and just sucked money out of the club

Would you pass over a Gary Mac?  (edit: it took me so long to type, I got beaten by the post above  :D)

Great OP as always.  The key is for any signing to be value for money.  An older player on a massive contract is rarely value for money.  A young player on a reasonable salary often makes more sense.

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,229
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #13 on: December 28, 2012, 10:11:24 pm »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaDGGZJonVo&HD=1

23 mins in ................

BR "thats something I'll fight for here, for me it has to be the best player available irrespective of the age".

Offline MobileBayRed

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 818
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #14 on: December 28, 2012, 10:14:14 pm »
How does our courtship of Clint Dempsey fit into this new transfer "Policy"?

I think this is a case of trying to make something out of nothing.  Not wanting to pay a penny more to club or player than they are worth?  Isn't that the transfer policy of every team in every sport?  I'm sure if the right "experienced" player came available for the right price, we absolutely would jump at a deal.

Lets see if we can take our two "rumored" transfers and make a quantum leap to a club policy.
just can't confirm that delivery address and consequently gets non stop pelters off PayPal.

Offline stockdam

  • The sheer loftus-cheek of the man.....
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,502
  • Walk on through the wind, Walk on through the rain
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2012, 10:14:23 pm »
For example, at 26 Willem II’s Sami Hyypia may have been regarded as too old for the new Liverpool; ditto Barcelona forward Luis Garcia. Both improved the club’s immediately, Hyypia’s defensive qualities and Garcia’s goals bringing Liverpool success home and abroad.

This current Liverpool team needs that injection of quality more than most. While Sturridge and Ince could improve the team, there should be efforts to find players who can do much more, much sooner. Rodgers, the squad’s star performers and the supporters deserve it.

I agree 100%.

I'm all for long term improvement but that always also needs to be tempered with the short term.

We could do with a few Hyypiäs or even Gary Macs that can make an immediate impact and improve the first team. I don't think we can risk just planning for the long-term as we need to also keep our better players.

Our recent signings have in general been very wasteful and we must do much better. We don't have the money to buy our way out so we need to be creative and effective. I don't have any faith in our scouting system if all they can do is to buy players who we all know for inflated prices.......where are the bargains or the players who immediately fit into our team. We appear to lack anyone with insight who can bring in good cheap players. Instead we appear to be naive and throw wads of cash around for players who do not make any real impact.

Things need to change and they need to change next month.


(Edit - sorry I see Gary Mac was already mentioned a couple of times already).
« Last Edit: December 28, 2012, 10:17:49 pm by stockdam »
#JFT97

Offline L666KOP

  • Wants everyone to fuck off. Especially you. Yes YOU! Too Tender for Tinder. Would swallow his knob on a genuine fuck up.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,116
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2012, 10:18:04 pm »
Hypothetically of course.

Who thinks the owners would pay 50m, and 250k a week for Ronaldo or Messi ??

There's a big difference between 'value' and price/cost.
13mins - Bournemouth have gone home. Utd kicked off anyway. Still 0-0 as Smalling passes it back to De Gea.

Offline Beav

  • Football is impatient. Loves Vader's Helmet.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,179
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #17 on: December 28, 2012, 10:18:07 pm »
Great stuff again.
Twitter:  http://twitter.com/__Beav

Ah. Another Manchester United fan crashes out from the woodwork like a bemused koala that has taken three hits of crystal meth.

Offline RedHopper

  • Hopping to a mightily lofty position and enjoying the view. If only custom titles could be in proportion to the member's average post length? My, what fun we could have! Imagine the sheer edification to be derived from testing the character limi
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,187
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #18 on: December 28, 2012, 10:23:31 pm »
Yes and we would have missed out on Gary MC Allister too.

Most of the guys you named up there were bad buys no matter what age they were. And buying under 25s hasn't exactly been a gold mine for us this past couple of seasons either.

Age should not be the issue. It's value that counts. Obviously value will be better if there is the prospect of longer service or a sell on fee but it will not always be the case.

perhaps we would have missed out on gary mcAllister, but that was one signing a dozen years ago. virtually ever other signing we've made who was 26 or over when we signed him has been a guaranteed bust. One good season, before being sold at a loss is the best we can manage. It seems to be an almost iron law. 25 seems to be an upper limit at man utd with their  occasional venture into 26-27 years olds not working out for them (yorke, saha, berbatov, veron, hargreaves, young) that's not a list of their unsuccessful buys, that's all of the 26-27 year old outfield players they've signed  between between sheringham, and van persie. They also had laurent blanc who was a nominal fee, and wages. Again not worth making an exception for.   
 
The possible upside of finding a player like gary mac, is massively outweighed by the likelihood that the player is going to be an expensive bust, that we will struggle to get rid of, because their wages will be so high. one telling thing about gary mac, was that we signed him for a free, he was on a two year contract, so we had limited exposure, and he had scored 11 goals the season before.

If we can find a player like that, we should give it a go, but players like that are very rare, we thought we had one in craig bellamy, but we only knocked six good months out of him, and had to let him go after a year. It was a shame, because he showed some impressive signs of life, but it wasn't to be.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2012, 10:27:21 pm by RedHopper »

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #19 on: December 28, 2012, 10:24:42 pm »
Hypothetically of course.

Who thinks the owners would pay 50m, and 250k a week for Ronaldo or Messi ??

There's a big difference between 'value' and price/cost.


If the money were there, I think they would. Could have cashed in on Suarez and gone hunting the next big thing. Instead new contact. Could have cashed in on Agger too. I genuinely do believe that for the right players they will push the boat out. Baseball's baseball, but they've not been shy about the big deals in that sport. I think that same kind of attitude will continue here providing they're convinced it's value. Problem is that they can tell value in baseball from their own perspective, whereas [insert something about whole new ballgame here].

They've got their wise men in place now. They've got to back the decisions which come out.
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline StrikingMidfield

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,146
  • A red and green heart
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2012, 10:27:54 pm »
Fantastic post mate  :thumbup
Agree with pretty much all of that, but I do have big amounts of faith in buying young. Young players give a team a future, also the fact that they can be turned into completely different players if needed is a huge plus. Though sometimes you just have to buy an older player, because planning for the future is great, but you still have to work on the current. BR has said that he's willing to buy any player that's needed and that's a huge relief, as the fact of losing a player like Suarez is terrifying as a Liverpool supporter. I have faith that BR will do what's needed in January.
Liverpool FC - Seattle Sounders FC

Offline L666KOP

  • Wants everyone to fuck off. Especially you. Yes YOU! Too Tender for Tinder. Would swallow his knob on a genuine fuck up.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,116
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #21 on: December 28, 2012, 10:33:12 pm »
If the money were there, I think they would. Could have cashed in on Suarez and gone hunting the next big thing. Instead new contact. Could have cashed in on Agger too. I genuinely do believe that for the right players they will push the boat out. Baseball's baseball, but they've not been shy about the big deals in that sport. I think that same kind of attitude will continue here providing they're convinced it's value. Problem is that they can tell value in baseball from their own perspective, whereas [insert something about whole new ballgame here].

They've got their wise men in place now. They've got to back the decisions which come out.

It wouldn't need to be there though would it, a deal like the ones I mentioned are self funding. I want to be confident that they are open to all deals, not just under 23/rough diamond types.
If Brendan wanted Villa for example, would they spend the rumoured 12m, 150k a week, short term player to help our short term needs?
I'm worried that we only seem to be targetting players from a small pool, and that pool is labelled 'Kids and misfits under 23'
13mins - Bournemouth have gone home. Utd kicked off anyway. Still 0-0 as Smalling passes it back to De Gea.

Offline guest

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,708
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #22 on: December 28, 2012, 10:34:59 pm »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaDGGZJonVo&HD=1

23 mins in ................

BR "thats something I'll fight for here, for me it has to be the best player available irrespective of the age".

Do you not think that points to a bit of an internal battle, John? I actually wrote this before that interview, but I think Rodgers clearly knows he has a battle on his hands to change the 'policy' from above.

Offline SpartanTree. No deccies or lights.

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,304
  • This is ANFIELD !!!
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2012, 10:43:03 pm »
Great post.

Many of the faces who have featured in this years team - Sterling, Suso, Shelvey, Allen, Coates, Henderson, Borini & Kelly (before they were injured) have all yet to reach their peak. 
Suarez & Lucas - both 25? - will arguably improve further & hit that stage in the next year or two. 

Luis in particular would command a massive transfer fee so do we cash in when their value peaks & reinvest in 'potential' or keep them and get their best years from them?
I know which I'd prefer - especially when you look at Arsenal over the last few years.

Personally, I think we need the addition of an experienced, quality player (who is more or less at their peak) up front.  Someone who can hit the ground running and perhaps get the team to click - ala the mad frenchman up the M62 a few years ago.

As already mentioned - lack of Champions League football for a prolonged period will make it more & more difficult to attract the top talent.
'Siempre es posible' - my eyes have seen the glory...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9OHC7lIfvk4

Physical death I do not fear, death of conscience is a sure death.

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,229
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #24 on: December 28, 2012, 10:56:51 pm »
Do you not think that points to a bit of an internal battle, John? I actually wrote this before that interview, but I think Rodgers clearly knows he has a battle on his hands to change the 'policy' from above.
Now you're worrying me Kris.
In that interview he talks about Cazorla not being too old at 27 and he talks about balance which really pleased me. Players peak at different ages and have fantastic periods of their footballing career at different ages. Of course you can't guess when that will be with any individual player but if BR see's a player developing after 25, 26, 27, even 29 and he thinks he can give us thrust for a just season or two then he must be able to buy him. I firmly believe he should be managing a team first and foremost with the development of young players as a parallel project.

If it transpires that there is an internal battle and he is genuinely restricted then I'll be more than perturbed mate. FSG couldn't be more foolish than to run a football club like that. Forgive me for throwing his name in here but Lampard's form for Chelsea in his late 20's is an example of how older players can deliver, and there are many more examples. Focusing on youth is fundamentally wrong.

I'd love a transcript of what was said when VdM, Andy & Ray met them, I'm sure the lads offered invaluable insight. Did they listen? I don't know mate. Managers should be left to manage - that is the rudiments of off-the-pitch football. An age policy would be more damaging than beneficial imo.

Offline kavah

  • the Blacksmith. Definitely NOT from Blackpool!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,696
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #25 on: December 28, 2012, 11:01:34 pm »
Do you not think that points to a bit of an internal battle, John? I actually wrote this before that interview, but I think Rodgers clearly knows he has a battle on his hands to change the 'policy' from above.

very interesting read, and that's a good (and worrying) point.

Offline JackWard33

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 25,955
  • President of the Harry Wilson fanclub
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #26 on: December 28, 2012, 11:01:54 pm »
The question is is it a transfer policy created to achieve footballing success or economic success?
Some of us would argue the two should be interlinked (as they were under Rafa) when actually this just looks like economic motives are the priority

Offline RedHopper

  • Hopping to a mightily lofty position and enjoying the view. If only custom titles could be in proportion to the member's average post length? My, what fun we could have! Imagine the sheer edification to be derived from testing the character limi
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,187
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #27 on: December 28, 2012, 11:05:29 pm »
Now you're worrying me Kris.
In that interview he talks about Cazorla not being too old at 27 and he talks about balance which really pleased me. Players peak at different ages and have fantastic periods of their footballing career at different ages. Of course you can't guess when that will be with any individual player but if BR see's a player developing after 25, 26, 27, even 29 and he thinks he can give us thrust for a just season or two then he must be able to buy him. I firmly believe he should be managing a team first and foremost with the development of young players as a parallel project.

fair enough for the two season or two that they give us a boost for, but what about the rest of their four-five year contract? That;s where we run into problems with value, and that's how you create new deadwood

Quote
If it transpires that there is an internal battle and he is genuinely restricted then I'll be more than perturbed mate. FSG couldn't be more foolish than to run a football club like that. Forgive me for throwing his name in here but Lampard's form for Chelsea in his late 20's is an example of how older players can deliver, and there are many more examples. Focusing on youth is fundamentally wrong.

chelsea bought lampard for 11 million in 2001 as he just turned 23. They made their own key player in the late twenties having benefit from his perfomances all throughout his development. if they'd had to pay 30 million for him at the age of 27 and then had to pay wages on top of that, would he have represented the same value? (not that they would care, because they're plaing to entirely different rules to us.)

Offline DonkeyWan

  • ker. Football Genius, Generously gives Young Jürgen pointers to help him improve.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 13,427
  • I never met a man who wasn't...
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #28 on: December 28, 2012, 11:06:54 pm »
A manager is ultimately judged by the players that he signs. When he signs players and then leaves them out of the side it sends bad messages out; to the team since it suggests that the manager can't improve the aquad, to the senior management team since it suggests the manager can't maximise the funds they provide and also to the fans who now have to face the prospect of the same old same old without the prospect of fresh blood invigrating the team. Rodger's biggest failing fo me to date has been his failure to replace existing members with his own signings - even with injuries only one of the players brought in of five have made an impact. I think the points posed by the OP must also be framed by the realisation that the new management team have so far had a less than stellar success rate at identifying players and incorporating them into the team setup.
Beatings will continue until morale improves...

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,229
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #29 on: December 28, 2012, 11:13:20 pm »
.
I'm not suggesting we should repeat Cole-gate and his ridiculous salary or pay £30m for an ageing player mate, its about 'balance' and another job that we used to be good at - scouting.

Offline Zeb

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,571
  • Justice.
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #30 on: December 28, 2012, 11:21:19 pm »
It wouldn't need to be there though would it, a deal like the ones I mentioned are self funding. I want to be confident that they are open to all deals, not just under 23/rough diamond types.
If Brendan wanted Villa for example, would they spend the rumoured 12m, 150k a week, short term player to help our short term needs?
I'm worried that we only seem to be targetting players from a small pool, and that pool is labelled 'Kids and misfits under 23'


I think it's a fair concern given the summer. I'm not sure about 'self-funding' - they might prove to be that over a period of time, but they don't fund themselves when you pay the first installment into the other club's bank account. And it's never guaranteed. Rodgers has already said that the budget is relatively tight this year but it will loosen as time goes by. Think we're all on the same page with that at the moment. Going forwards, we'll see what happens. Think the key thing for me is that they've set up a model for transfers and the like to get expert opinion. What they can't do is dick about and dicker with those men over what constitutes value or quality; in 10 or 20 years time, maybe, but even then they'd be wise to listen to those whose jobs are on the line for the decisions. Otherwise they end up like Abramovich but without his billions to bail out their mistakes. Give the men a budget and let them work within it.

As far as targets currently, and over the summer, yeah definitely know what you're saying there. Could be a few reasons for it. No idea which would be the right one, or even combination of reasons though. Is it to minimise risk? The gardening leave delaying proper implementation? Players being available and/or affordable? Could be any and all of them so far. Summer should be interesting I guess. Rodgers has already said he's after a number 10 and implied that he'd be able to do the job as soon as he comes in. Goodness knows who he's looking at, but you'd think kids would be unlikely to fit the bill - unless it's one of those which would cost genuinely big money. I've no objection to misfits though. The one up front hasn't turned out too badly. Another few of them and we'd be sorted :)
"And the voices of the standing Kop still whispering in the wind will salute the wee Scots redman and he will still walk on.
And your money will have bought you nothing."

Offline goalrushatgoodison

  • crapinbed
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,317
  • Still waiting for the great leap forward.
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #31 on: December 28, 2012, 11:22:07 pm »
perhaps we would have missed out on gary mcAllister, but that was one signing a dozen years ago. virtually ever other signing we've made who was 26 or over when we signed him has been a guaranteed bust. One good season, before being sold at a loss is the best we can manage. It seems to be an almost iron law. 25 seems to be an upper limit at man utd with their  occasional venture into 26-27 years olds not working out for them (yorke, saha, berbatov, veron, hargreaves, young) that's not a list of their unsuccessful buys, that's all of the 26-27 year old outfield players they've signed  between between sheringham, and van persie. They also had laurent blanc who was a nominal fee, and wages. Again not worth making an exception for.   
 
The possible upside of finding a player like gary mac, is massively outweighed by the likelihood that the player is going to be an expensive bust, that we will struggle to get rid of, because their wages will be so high. one telling thing about gary mac, was that we signed him for a free, he was on a two year contract, so we had limited exposure, and he had scored 11 goals the season before.

If we can find a player like that, we should give it a go, but players like that are very rare, we thought we had one in craig bellamy, but we only knocked six good months out of him, and had to let him go after a year. It was a shame, because he showed some impressive signs of life, but it wasn't to be.

Yep, just think that a rigid no over 26 policy might be counter productive. Take every case on its merits, value wise, and most of our buys will be under 26 anyhow.
Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad.

Offline RedHopper

  • Hopping to a mightily lofty position and enjoying the view. If only custom titles could be in proportion to the member's average post length? My, what fun we could have! Imagine the sheer edification to be derived from testing the character limi
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,187
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #32 on: December 28, 2012, 11:22:28 pm »
I'm not suggesting we should repeat Cole-gate and his ridiculous salary or pay £30m for an ageing player mate, its about 'balance' and another job that we used to be good at - scouting.

but the numbers are against it. The number of success you have is tiny compared to the high proportion of disasters. That is ultimately what makes a policy a good one or a bad one. Sure if you find a great player, and you can protect yourself by paying him fuck all, and give him a short contract, with options to extend, then fine. But our track record is pretty uniformly awful in these areas, so we should stay away.

Offline john_mac

  • The Scouse Confucius
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 11,669
  • Only got 3 bullets and there's 4 of Motley Crew
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #33 on: December 28, 2012, 11:29:00 pm »
Now you're worrying me Kris.
In that interview he talks about Cazorla not being too old at 27 and he talks about balance which really pleased me. Players peak at different ages and have fantastic periods of their footballing career at different ages. Of course you can't guess when that will be with any individual player but if BR see's a player developing after 25, 26, 27, even 29 and he thinks he can give us thrust for a just season or two then he must be able to buy him. I firmly believe he should be managing a team first and foremost with the development of young players as a parallel project.

If it transpires that there is an internal battle and he is genuinely restricted then I'll be more than perturbed mate. FSG couldn't be more foolish than to run a football club like that. Forgive me for throwing his name in here but Lampard's form for Chelsea in his late 20's is an example of how older players can deliver, and there are many more examples. Focusing on youth is fundamentally wrong.

I'd love a transcript of what was said when VdM, Andy & Ray met them, I'm sure the lads offered invaluable insight. Did they listen? I don't know mate. Managers should be left to manage - that is the rudiments of off-the-pitch football. An age policy would be more damaging than beneficial imo.

John, one thing that he never wants to happen again is 31st August debacle, and he has been laying foundations since to ensure that he does not. I am not sure people realise how close we were to actually losing him at that point, and he would have left with his reputation completely in tact, probably enhanced. He was under no illusions about what happened.

I suspect that he knows that he needs a bit more experience about the place, and its about getting the Gary Mac or the Bellamy attitude in and not the Joe Cole. Liverpool is still a massive draw and you only have to look at Dempsey, ignoring all suitors, trying to tie up a move to Anfield to see this. The thing is that so far as the owners are concerned we need to use that draw if we are bringing in older players, I remember Gary Mac talking about his agent negotiating with Liverpool and warning him he was not going to fuck it up by asking for too much.

Its capturing that attitude that Rodgers is aiming for, especially when signing players already moulded, but in reality we had enough people around the club who knew Joe Cole before he signed, or did his attitude change after he signed? I don't buy that a team can be succesful without getting the blend right, it'll never be limited to age groups, but I'm also certain that as weary of them as I am FSG will need to learn from the past and particularly August errors.
We'll See Things They'll Never See

Offline HighSix

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,565
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #34 on: December 28, 2012, 11:32:56 pm »
Its not just us though young players is the trend throughout Europe so the competition in signing the top talents is huge almost leaving a opportunity in signing players 27+ for clubs like us who have no oil money but still aim for the top. Wenger I believe has spotted this as he was at the front of the trend sweeping up talented youth players but now the last 2 summers .... Arteta, Mertesacker & Carzola. A few signing like that adding experience would help bring on our young players I believe.

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,229
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #35 on: December 28, 2012, 11:33:56 pm »
but the numbers are against it. The number of success you have is tiny compared to the high proportion of disasters.
What numbers? The numbers of players we've bought? As a club we've turned over some dross in the last 10 years and if we've bought older players that didn't succeed then that was because they were crap. Older players can be good good.
I tell you what mate, I'm sick to death of reading about Leto, Nemeth and the rest of them being our next fucking Pele, its all bollocks. Buy players on a 3 or 5 year contract depending on their age, temper their wages depending on how desperate we are to obtain them, win football matches.

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #36 on: December 28, 2012, 11:38:37 pm »
Gareth Roberts (robbohuyton) was chatting about this earlier. His timeline is well worth a read.
https://twitter.com/robbohuyton

Suggested that the Dempsey incident wasn't isolated, and that the process isn't as simple as it appears.

Offline iresh

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 81
  • There are monsters, and then there is Sissoko.
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #37 on: December 28, 2012, 11:41:19 pm »
great post.

The one quibble is about the age restriction. I'm sure that he equivalent of 2.6 million for a 26 year old hyypia would be acceptable for an actual new sami hyypia. but 26 or, turning 27 near the end of the season should be an upper limit. If we had stuck to this limit, lets look at the player we would have avoided signing over the last five years.

2008-9 : Dossena, cavalleri, keane, riera
2009-10: kyrgiakos, rodriguez, jovanovic (signed by rafa before he left)
2010-11: Jones, konchesky, meireles, cole, poulsen
2011-12: doni, downing bellamy.

At best we got one good season out of riera, and a good six months out of bellamy, rodriguez and meireles, but quite frankly...... just look at that list. This summer we missed out on dempsey, who we would have had to give at least 3 years to at top wages, and quite frankly, he hasn't set the world on fire at spurs.

Maybe we should adopt and stick to a strict 25's and under policy only, with 26 year olds having to be carefully justified. I'd be prepared to miss out on a possible luis  garcia (two good seasons, one so-so) to avoid that cavalcade of disaster listed above. a lot of those players never came close to being fit to wear the shirt, and just sucked money out of the club

Your only making half the point. Older players can play a vital part in any team, they just need to be the right older players! Remember Gary Mac, he was boss plus Gerrard developed quite a bit during his stay. The problem is that our scouting has been pretty bad under FSG. Whats really scaring me about the players we are signing is that Brendan only seems to want players he's worked with before or something. Plus we seem to be in the market for every single chelsea reject, which is scary.

Offline RedHopper

  • Hopping to a mightily lofty position and enjoying the view. If only custom titles could be in proportion to the member's average post length? My, what fun we could have! Imagine the sheer edification to be derived from testing the character limi
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,187
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #38 on: December 28, 2012, 11:45:21 pm »
What numbers? The numbers of players we've bought? As a club we've turned over some dross in the last 10 years and if we've bought older players that didn't succeed then that was because they were crap. Older players can be good good.
I tell you what mate, I'm sick to death of reading about Leto, Nemeth and the rest of them being our next fucking Pele, its all bollocks. Buy players on a 3 or 5 year contract depending on their age, temper their wages depending on how desperate we are to obtain them, win football matches.

just look at that list of players we have signed over the age of 26. That's just going back to 2008-9, They were all unsuccessful from a small to massive degree. It's just a really really bad idea, and pointing out gary mac, a player signed when raheem sterling was too young to go to school isn't going to change that uncomfortable fact.

I don't want us to sign so many children either. when Rafa couldn't get control of the academy, he went completely insane and built an entire parrallel youth structure to go with the one that we already had, and we pissed away a small fortune in fees and wages on huge numbers of young players who hardly ever played for the club.

I'm not suggesting we have 80 professionals at the club like in 2007-8. If we sign young players from other clubs, let them be like raheem sterlingm, or suso. not another jordy brouwer, or any of the nameless, faceless hordes that have passed through our gates. Focus our spending on 23-25 year olds to give our first team bulk, and on talented 19 to 22 year olds to become our next stars. it will take time, but that is how you minimize the risks you take with your money, and making your own 27 year olds is the only way to get those players. 

The best players rafa signed were in order of arrival Alonso, reina, mascherano, torres, and at a push johnson, agger. and arbeloa These players were all within the limits I suggested. But at least it's a vastly higher hit rate than shopping in the over 26 market. Sure there were a lot of unsuccessful signings in this category as well, but rafa liked to shop and drop and have a huge turnover of players. He was a great manager in many ways, but he wasn't a good judge of players. He'd buy a lot of unsuccessful ones for every genuine hit. The hits fitted a pattern though. Maybe we should focus on that.

Offline iresh

  • Main Stander
  • ***
  • Posts: 81
  • There are monsters, and then there is Sissoko.
Re: Liverpool's transfer policy
« Reply #39 on: December 28, 2012, 11:45:30 pm »
Its not just us though young players is the trend throughout Europe so the competition in signing the top talents is huge almost leaving a opportunity in signing players 27+ for clubs like us who have no oil money but still aim for the top. Wenger I believe has spotted this as he was at the front of the trend sweeping up talented youth players but now the last 2 summers .... Arteta, Mertesacker & Carzola. A few signing like that adding experience would help bring on our young players I believe.

Excellent point, if moneyball aims to reduce expenditure by buying undervalued players we need to see if 20-25 year olds are still undervalued by the market. I would argue that 27+ players are undervalued right now if you consider some of the recent deals around europe.