Topic: Liverpool sign Danny Ings

[exiledinyorkshire]

also from last year you have Can, Markovic and Moreno. I'm happy enough with that as it stands, a gamble where none of them have settled yet, but there is certainly no failure in there yet. Sahko from the year before is another one, you get the feeling that he will be first choice very shortly when eventually he begins to swear in scouse.

The world and his wife consider all of these lot to be terrible transfer business, purely because they are looking at the money spent and the unrealistic returns that they feel we should have had. What 50 mill spent on them? Lets just wait and see. its stupid to look at that monetary figure and say what a waste you could have got Cavani or pogba for that because we could not have.

[Gerrard#1]

This stat says a lot. Those were scored playing for a 'shit' Burnley side, Imagine how he would do with Coutinho,Milner and hendo behind him.

How many were penalties?

[L666KOP]

Let's hope Ings can repeat what Kane did this last season. If he gets close, he'll be a great signing for us. I don't think it's beyond him to get 15 league goals. Just not sure where we see him fit in. Is he the main man? Is he a backup? If we decided to say Ings was our leading man behind Sturridge (and therefore we expect 15 league goals from him), that would be fine with me. At least we'd have a clear idea. My feeling now is we'll instead parade Ings and Origi as great prospects for the future and then we'll say we can't expect too much from they yet. So they'd have safe roles with no expectations. I don't like that. 

The survival of the fittest, that's what I'd like to see myself. Mainly for the first team roles. I think we've been at our best when we've had a fairly set first team. I'm thinking of Alonso-Mascherano behind Kuyt, Gerrard and Torres, plus one more. Or when we had Suarez and Sturridge up front, with Gerrard, Henderson and often Sterling in midfield behind. We don't seem to do too well when we have lots of options where players are asked to play 50% of the games or less. And if we go with Chelsea this last season, they kept playing the same players game after game after game. That's the formula I'd like us to use. So find those players. This concept means I'm less of a fan of having many squad options. I don't think there's anything to suggest it makes us more successful.

Complete and utter meritocracy.
There can be no other way.

I'm a great believer in the fact that all the sports science stuff we rely on now is perhaps taking things too far.

How many former players will trot out the line that "You never get tired if you're winning games."

Play well, you're starting Saturday, and as long as you continue to play well, and do the job we require you'll stay in the side. Any deviation and there's someone waiting to keep you on the bench.

[Gnurglan]

I think that's the point though.

As a club in order to compete at the title challenge end of the season, we need top top notch players. The kind of players that cost in excess of 30-40 million pounds on the market, Suarez like signings that cost 50 mil upwards. That's what we need to compete, where all of the fans players and staff want to be.

We can not afford those players, we simply do not have that kind of money. What we can do though is look at players with a view to them being potentially that kind of player within the contract length that we offer them. Ings and Origi do have that kind of potential. Its a gamble though with a large chance that neither will ever get anywhere near that kind of level, and when its a gamble you have to spread your spend, so its perfectly logical to go for 2 potentials for 15 16 million, because it gives you double the chance of getting and absolute worldie.

And what's more I think we have done well in that regard. Look at Carroll and Suarez, they came in in the same window for what £50 million 55. Carroll flopped, Suarez was by far the best footballer I have seen in the modern era pull on a shirt for Liverpool. Couhtinho and Sturridge both excellent bits of Business. I think actually with these kinds of signings we are doing alright when you pair them up. They are gambles and there needs to be a fair few of them to make it work.

Where we arguably fall down is buying prem proven mid career players. There we generally tend to get decent players at a high price who are never ever going to make it here because the ones that would be able to make it here don't want to come here anymore. I'm happy with Lallana and perhaps Milner will be an excellent bit of business, but in all honesty the likes of Lambert Downing and Adam and allen, well they are what they are Mid table prem players. Good players but not top 4 quality.

Think we have done really well when we have gambled though myself. Ballotelli and Carrollare the two horrendous mistakes, but we could all see the logic couldn't we.

We can't afford those players, because we continue to buy too expensive squad options. It's "buy cheap, buy twice". If we had a tough approach, where players were offloaded asap if they didn't contribute, that would be OK. We haven't got that. Which means we keep adding problems and it makes us slower to act and weaker financially. You can see it everywhere. With Ings and Origi to arrive, we should automatically offload at least two strikers. One in, one out. If we want to add another striker, same process. One in, one out. For me, this is basic. It has to be done.

On the potential, I reckon you buy the Ibe, Sterling, Suso types of players for the future. 1M, maybe 2M, but you get them early. You don't spend 10-20M to get them. For that kind of money, we should get first team players. Or the exceptional talent. I'm talking Messi, Suarez, Aguero level. Potential to be one of the very best in the business. Ings falls somewhere in between. And that's how I see this transfer. It's in between. It's a bit vague what we expect (at this point).

With Ings, let's give him a role. Let's see how he performs. If we dare to do that. Rodgers' future may depend on it, so it's not something we should take lightly.

[plura]

How many were penalties?

1.

[Gnurglan]

So far he does make the squad, Sturridge has to get fit, which may take a while. Ings will see plenty of games as we are. But I surely hope we get a first class striker (and not Benteke).

I hope for that first class player too.

But with Ings' role, if he makes the squad, we need to expect things from him too. What I'm suggesting is that group of 11+7, there you have a tough competition and the demands are high. If you fail to meet them, you are likely to be off next.

It will never be an exact science and I perfer to call it 'guidelines' or 'player roles' and the number of players is 18. Not exact, but it gives a good set of boundaries that forces us to think. Some players, like Sterling, will be both young, for the future and a first team regular. But if we simplify, we choose groups. What is he? I think we'd say first team regular. The rest are a bonus. Ibe on the other hand, would be for the future. He's not one of the 11+7. He's one of the promising players outside of the 18. Here we can have plenty. Because we're talking Academy players.

Ings, if in the 11+7 (which is the only way this transfer makes sense), gets a big role. Lots of players will have to make way for him. That's another consequence with this simple view.

[exiledinyorkshire]

Let's hope Ings can repeat what Kane did this last season. If he gets close, he'll be a great signing for us. I don't think it's beyond him to get 15 league goals. Just not sure where we see him fit in. Is he the main man? Is he a backup? If we decided to say Ings was our leading man behind Sturridge (and therefore we expect 15 league goals from him), that would be fine with me. At least we'd have a clear idea. My feeling now is we'll instead parade Ings and Origi as great prospects for the future and then we'll say we can't expect too much from they yet. So they'd have safe roles with no expectations. I don't like that. 

The survival of the fittest, that's what I'd like to see myself. Mainly for the first team roles. I think we've been at our best when we've had a fairly set first team. I'm thinking of Alonso-Mascherano behind Kuyt, Gerrard and Torres, plus one more. Or when we had Suarez and Sturridge up front, with Gerrard, Henderson and often Sterling in midfield behind. We don't seem to do too well when we have lots of options where players are asked to play 50% of the games or less. And if we go with Chelsea this last season, they kept playing the same players game after game after game. That's the formula I'd like us to use. So find those players. This concept means I'm less of a fan of having many squad options. I don't think there's anything to suggest it makes us more successful.

Yeah but that is survival of the fittest, big squad earn your place in the team. Get the shirt keep the shirt. And Rodgers does it reasonably well. He's happy to bring in kids if they earn it, and happy to leave out all but Gerrard if they aren't up to it. He can only use what he has come September the first. The pool needs to be as big as its allowed and as strong as FSG can afford. And that's what it will be next season, we'll have the numbers plus the odd surprise from the academy.

of course what we really want is 2 full international footballers in the prime of their careers in each and every position, like Chelsea and City. But we cant get that, and its a horrible futile thing to even dream of at Liverpool football club. Arguably we don't do as good a job as say Atletico at making sure we at least have one such player in each position, but the hope is that we uncover the starting eleven of our dreams from the pot of potential that we have to continually keep stirring.

[Phil M]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/liverpool-face-paying-more-for-danny-ings-than-expected-after-tottenham-have-12m-bid-accepted-by-burnley-10306613.html

[plura]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/liverpool-face-paying-more-for-danny-ings-than-expected-after-tottenham-have-12m-bid-accepted-by-burnley-10306613.html

Haha fucking Tottenham!

[David Struhme]

He's a young player with premier league experience on a free transfer, who scored 11 PL goals last season. Don't see how anyone can be dissappointed by this. I'm sure we'll be bringing in another striker this window so as a back-up I think Ings is a great signing

[audioedge]

but the hope is that we uncover the starting eleven of our dreams from the pot of potential that we have to continually keep stirring.

almost poetic statement good work fella! Also its one I agree with. Its a shame we have stepped down from being a top 4 club (and theres a whole other debate on how, who, what, were when that happened) but its where we are right now, and sooner some realise that the better. Will Ings himself fire us back into the top 4, I doubt it, but will he contribute towards that goal more than anyone else we have, very much so.

[exiledinyorkshire]

We can't afford those players, because we continue to buy too expensive squad options. It's "buy cheap, buy twice". If we had a tough approach, where players were offloaded asap if they didn't contribute, that would be OK. We haven't got that. Which means we keep adding problems and it makes us slower to act and weaker financially. You can see it everywhere. With Ings and Origi to arrive, we should automatically offload at least two strikers. One in, one out. If we want to add another striker, same process. One in, one out. For me, this is basic. It has to be done.

On the potential, I reckon you buy the Ibe, Sterling, Suso types of players for the future. 1M, maybe 2M, but you get them early. You don't spend 10-20M to get them. For that kind of money, we should get first team players. Or the exceptional talent. I'm talking Messi, Suarez, Aguero level. Potential to be one of the very best in the business. Ings falls somewhere in between. And that's how I see this transfer. It's in between. It's a bit vague what we expect (at this point).

With Ings, let's give him a role. Let's see how he performs. If we dare to do that. Rodgers' future may depend on it, so it's not something we should take lightly.

I think that's the nub of it right there, and possibly where the two arguments originate. You strongly believe that if we could get all the money back from the last 5 years and start again, that we could would and should have a football team that's miles better than the one we have now. and on paper your absolutely right.

when I say we cant afford these players im not just talking about their transfer fee though. perhaps a better way of saying it is that we cant get these players, regardless of the reasons why. The established world class player isn't going to come to Liverpool. The next rung down haven't ever come to Liverpool in the last 10 years. Even when Rafa was in charge. Torres was a punt, as was Mascherano and Alonso. 

so if they cant or wont come, you have to go for potential, but you caant do what Chelsea do and just buy to loan because you actually do need them to play, so you do have to go for the half and half option, it costs more and exposes your mistakes a lot quicker to the gaze of the world. But the one thing I know for sure iss that we cant get anything from the top table. We wait for the 10 clubs or so above us to eat first, theen we watch the regualar CL clubs have their nibble, then we grab a plate.

[Dave D]

Tottenham want to pay £12m for him. We could get him for £7m. As soon as we close the deal sell him to Spurs for £12m.

£5m profit without beaking a sweat. Repeat a hundred times...we're in the money boys!

[ThePeetmix]

Tottenham want to pay £12m for him. We could get him for £7m. As soon as we close the deal sell him to Spurs for £12m.

£5m profit without beaking a sweat. Repeat a hundred times...we're in the money boys!

They're not actually interested in signing him for that much. It's too late for them now. They're just doing it to spite us.

[exiledinyorkshire]

almost poetic statement good work fella! Also its one I agree with. Its a shame we have stepped down from being a top 4 club (and theres a whole other debate on how, who, what, were when that happened) but its where we are right now, and sooner some realise that the better. Will Ings himself fire us back into the top 4, I doubt it, but will he contribute towards that goal more than anyone else we have, very much so.

thanks pal I was proud of that when I wrote it!!!

personally I would much prefer it to be another way, but I just don't see how. My dream would be to see 1-14 as genuine 24-28 established bordering on world class players and the squad made from the academy. But we couldn't even realistically get anywhere near that number of top notch players even with 200 mil to spend.

and then when you see that little shit sterling playing us, you realise just how difficult the churn can be. I'm mean I get the suarez situation, we uncovered one of the best players in the world. He wanted to move on, we got stupid money for it. Money that in an ideal world you spend on Aguero to replace him, but Aguero wont come, Depay wont even come. And its not just about the money. But fucking Sterling!! what a c*nt chops. 20 years old 100 grand a week, done fuck all but been privileged enough to work alongside Suarez and Sturridge in a rare vintage the likes of which we will never see agaain, and its not good enough for the little fucker.

Ah the churn. Its a hopeless hole in your bucket. Ask Arsenal. But they now look strong, they keep those that they want to keep, they are going out and buying the likes of Ozil, they dine at the higher table, they pay bigger wages. And FSG have always said that arsenal was the model. So lets see if we can get a Willian or a Mickytyrian or a sanchez in two or three years time. But for the time being its Lallana Ings Can Markovic  and the like. And I'm honestly fine with that. Would prefer we got top four in the mean time, but its a gamble.

[L666KOP]

Other than the fact we've turned into a Championship side, lost all our pulling power, and have mediocre stamped on our heads, is there any footballing reason that Ings is unsuitable ?

Can anyone give me a reason why as 3 rd choice he's 'shite' as some eloquently put it ?

[sattapaartridge]

Something deep down inside me thinks of old Rushie when I see Ings signing.. Maybe it's the rugged manlyness and facial hair.

Oddly, I thought the same when comparing to Fowler.

So many idiots with opinions on players nowadays. nocturnalvin made an excellent point on twitter; If John Barnes from Watford was signed today, the glory hunters of today would pooh-pooh the signing, give the player no confidence or welcome and instead want someone Brazilian or Spanish.

[RedHopper]

There's so much wailing and gnashing of teeth here because we're buying a player from burnley. The signing of Danny Ings is a transfer that is happening on its own, and no more reflective of the owners ambitions for the club than any other signing. We're spending about £8 million for an england u-21 striker, one who scored a goal every three games in his first season in the premier league, while playing for a very hard working if limited side.

This season we went into an annoying number of games without a centre forward, and we went into an even more annoying number of Games with Mario Ballotelli as a forward. Which in many respects was worse, because nearly every ball up to him was lost, and he was most notable for his ability to lose possession by just being offside for no good reason. Now there was an expensive marquee signing of a senior international player, from a big italian club, for a lot of fee and wages. That didn't get us anywhere. This instead looks to be a signing of a player based on what he can add to the team.

Burnley this season were most notable for the sheer size of their balls, as they set about trying to stay in the division through hard work, and teamwork. Unfortunately there is a downside to having a team that is primarily defined by their Balls, and that is they get in the way sometimes. But it is precisely what we were lacking in a lot of games this season. Ings worked like a lunatic trying to lead the line for them, and putting himself about in the penalty area. If he can keep that up for us, and then gain the benefit from playing with, and linking up with better players, then he could become a very effective player, and turn out to be worth a lot more than we paid for him. We're due one of those players soon. Having a fairly consistent, injury free line leading forward could bring a lot more out of our attacking midfielders, so if he is able to bring those characteristics that made him a success at burnley, to our team, then we could have a very good player on our hands, who helps the players around him play better.

We should at least give him a chance, rejecting him out of hand because he's coming from burnley is kind of insane.

[Dean Manifest]

I hope we're not planning on him being more than 4th choice..

Weird from him, when he said earlier that he wanted to be 1st choice where he went

I'm sure he's planning to fight for that status. Personally I don't think it's too far-fetched to imagine him in the lineup for the first match of the season.

And while he may or may not succeed at Liverpool, at least he fits the profile we're looking for:

-He's a lot more mobile than Balotelli or Lambert. Equally important, he spends a lot more time in the opposition box than they do, as opposed to lurking on the fringes hoping to be tee'd up (all eleven of Ings' goals last season were bagged inside the box--and well balanced between his head and left/right feet).

-He's got a much silkier first touch and overall ball skills than Borini, while offering comparable levels of energy and hunger.

Add it all up- what he does and where he does it- and Ings stands a far better chance of successfully facilitating the intricate final third play we enjoyed so much in 2013-14, both as an active participant in the clever link-ups and as a decoy who drags apart the seams of the defense to create lanes for others*.

I think he's a player (*shrug*)


*while we're on the topic, James Milner showed his own ability to participate in that kind of attack in his time at City, demonstrating a terrific understanding with David Silva that I hope he can recreate with Coutinho, Henderson and company. Statement of intent or not, I think these signings fit. Last year was unfortunate in that the guys who fell into our lap weren't quite the right types of player for us. That's been less the case so far this summer in my opinion...

[RedHopper]

Oddly, I thought the same when comparing to Fowler.

So many idiots with opinions on players nowadays. nocturnalvin made an excellent point on twitter; If John Barnes from Watford was signed today, the glory hunters of today would pooh-pooh the signing, give the player no confidence or welcome and instead want someone Brazilian or Spanish.

In fairness, watford had come second in 1983, and reached the cup final in 84 and barnes had already scored that goal against brazil, and played well against argentina in the maradona game. The other team chasing barnes at the time was man utd. It's not exactly comparable. I think aldridge and houghton from relegation battlers oxford would be a better analogy.

[exiledinyorkshire]

I'm sure he's planning to fight for that status. Personally I don't think it's too far-fetched to imagine him in the lineup for the first match of the season.

And while he may or may not succeed at Liverpool, at least he fits the profile we're looking for:

-He's a lot more mobile than Balotelli or Lambert. Equally important, he spends a lot more time in the opposition box than they do, as opposed to lurking on the fringes hoping to be tee'd up (all eleven of Ings' goals last season were bagged inside the box--and well balanced between his head and left/right feet).

-He's got a much silkier first touch and overall ball skills than Borini, while offering comparable levels of energy and hunger.

Add it all up- what he does and where he does it- and Ings stands a far better chance of successfully facilitating the intricate final third play we enjoyed so much in 2013-14, both as an active participant in the clever link-ups and as a decoy who drags apart the seams of the defense to create lanes for others*.

I think he's a player (*shrug*)


*while we're on the topic, James Milner showed his own ability to participate in that kind of attack in his time at City, demonstrating a terrific understanding with David Silva that I hope he can recreate with Coutinho, Henderson and company. Statement of intent or not, I think these signings fit. Last year was unfortunate in that the guys who fell into our lap weren't quite the right types of player for us. That's been less the case so far this summer in my opinion...

fucking good call, I like the lad.

[Chakan]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/liverpool-face-paying-more-for-danny-ings-than-expected-after-tottenham-have-12m-bid-accepted-by-burnley-10306613.html

Isn't this what I talked about yesterday?

[newterp]

surely the tribunal isn't stupid enough for the Spurs trick to bid more knowing Ings isn't coming there to drive up the price that Burnley would want from us?

Oh wait....this is a tribunal set up by the FA? Well then - 15M it is.

[L666KOP]

Other than the fact we've turned into a Championship side, lost all our pulling power, and have mediocre stamped on our heads, is there any footballing reason that Ings is unsuitable ?

Can anyone give me a reason why as 3 rd choice he's 'shite' as some eloquently put it ?

That's a 'no' then ?

[slaphead]

One of the things that's happened in modern day football is that signings from lesser teams is deemed to be showing a lack of intent. Regardless of whether it makes good sense from a squad point of view and bringing something the squad is currently missing. The mind of some is made up without even sensibly looking at what we are getting and putting it in its context
That's a shame. Its the way it is, but its a shame.

[keyo]

when I say we cant afford these players im not just talking about their transfer fee though. perhaps a better way of saying it is that we cant get these players, regardless of the reasons why. The established world class player isn't going to come to Liverpool. The next rung down haven't ever come to Liverpool in the last 10 years. Even when Rafa was in charge. Torres was a punt, as was Mascherano and Alonso. 

the transfers you mention were within a significant number of good and bad transfers that rafa made.  he was not a genius at spotting talent, neither was he rubbish.  in terms of ability to spot talent, I would however trust his judgement generally.  however, he was working in a limited environment, whereby he was operating very much alone (well, unsupported from above in terms of footballing advice) and on a budget that was unclear and shifting.  but rafa worked to a plan he devised and did so with a level of success that cannot be sniffed at.  inevitably the lack of support resulted in unlasting success.  the continuing turn over of playing staff resulted in varying standards, which is unfortunately bound to happen when you have to wheel and deal as opposed to plan and build.

we currently have a situation where there is some sort of plan, but it is limited by a number of factors (internal and external) and Rodgers neither has full control nor full support.  the policy is not clear, and consequently trust is not fully there in either Rodgers or fsg (rightly or wrongly). I think that is were we sit currently, and it is not just our standing that is resulting in our transfer policy.  we need greater definition, greater focus and greater direction than what we appear to have.  maybe we do have it, but there is scant evidence of it.  what does ings represent? a part of a plan that includes origi, sterling, ibe, and coutinho developing into a lethal strikeforce to follow sturridge and lallana. or an opportunistic buy to bolster our strikeforce?

last summer did not fit any plan, and as someone else said (gnurglan?) we appear to be shopping in a market where we are playing it safe, but duplicating spending accordingly. we get reasonable priced proven solid talent, and get some more just to make sure.  consequently we have a fairly 'grey' looking midfield set up, and a set of weird options up front that failed last year.

I have not seen enough of ings to say it is good or bad.  his record is decent, and we have swooped early. the price may prove reasonable or not, depending on negotiations and the tribunal. but he is more promise than end product right now.  and we have origi.  and sterling. and lallana. and sturridge. and ibe. and still borini, lambert and balotelli.  does ings improve us?  I think the drop off will nto be so steep when we look to back up, so I suppose yes.  and does he improve us in the future?  hopefully.  unfortunately, clubs improve all the time, and we have to win these battles as you say, ings' and the other young players need to be successful for our value to improve. but are we asking too much?

[ThePeetmix]

you must be blind then

No I'm not. They're saying there is a potential that he could be another player from a smaller club who goes on to make a name for himself us.

Nobody is saying he is just like them.

[rob1408]

No I'm not. They're saying there is a potential that he could be another player from a smaller club who goes on to make a name for himself us.

Nobody is saying he is just like them.

Yeah, but you obviously understand context.

[SP]

This topic has long since ceased to be about welcoming a new player to Anfield, and is retreading familiar transfer policy ground. Feel free to seek out a TWAT if you want to indulge in that.