• Liverpool Message Board

  • Loki Loki May 7, 2012 23:25 Flag

    FSG need to prove themselves

    I don't think they have as yet. Yes the club is more stable than the last lot, and the commercial department is actually starting to look the business, but it is an irrefutable truth that they have only spent a net £34 mil, and if we are not gonna end up in the doldrums of 30 odd points behind the champions every season then they need to seriously up the ante to the tune of 50 mil plus sales (at least) so we can get the quality of player required to break back in to the top four and then compete for the title.

    Sabermetrics does not work for football, every team buys the title.

    Lets not forget the stadium issue either.

    It's my opinion that come August, we are going to know whether FSG are serious about success at LFC, or its just more bullsh*t.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I too would like to see them spending big..

      I just hope we've not swapped one american owner who spent little for another..

      Spending £100m isn't such a huge sum when it comes to buying good players.. We could buy 2 class players at £50m each and thats the money spent.

      Clubs like Man Utd / City, Chelsea think spending £50m on a player then buying a £30m player is no big deal.

      Yet when it comes to us we're sweating if we spend large sums.

      We spent £35m on Carroll and that was seen as such a big fuss.. Had it been at another club I'd previously mentioned. They'd be very little made of it..

      It's ironic.. had I made this thread I'd have been pounced on..

    • I suspect the thrust of this message is upside-down. Instead of FSG being the servants of the club, the club are the servants of FSG. It is more that LFC needs to prove itself to FSG.

      There are owners who are willing to throw in huge sums for players just for the fun of it. Obviously making a profit is not the main motivation. City have owners like this. There's another club too - I forget who temporarily.

      And then there are owners who buy a club as in investment. Typically the American owners of the big clubs are like this. Their purpose is not to win trophies for the glory, it's to extract income from the various operations, or to make a big capital gain. These investors won't just carry on throwing money in for the hell of it. They will only carry on putting money in if they believe that extra money is a good investment.

      There is certainly an argument that big investments upfront are needed to lift a club into higher income brackets. Chelsea have been making it for years (and no-one much has been listening). But when hard-earned money is being asked for from investors who have finance rather than footie in the blood stream, these dragons need to be persuaded that extra financing won't turn out to be throwing good money after bad.

      It's early days to know how FSG will see it. But I would expect them to be asking some very hard questions before, in your words, "proving themselves".


      Robert

      • 2 Replies to Robert M
      • The owners dont need to prove anything, they have been brilliant and this is a learning curve for them. They came in, unsaddled our debt and then within 18 months have trimmed away £500k a week of our wage bill whilst reducing the average age of our squad by monstrous amounts and in keeping with the homegrown rules and prepared us for FFP. Other then the players we bought in the summer, we also went for Phil Jones and Ashley Young, just that we know of as well as not planning to sell Meireles till he showed his late hand.

        The only reason we didnt buy in January was because they had learned their lesson with over priced January signings, showing they are quickly learning the football 'game'. Comolli was sacked as they have developed a new plan, the new stadium plan is being developed and we have a kit deal worth around £300m! What do some people want?! We were 1 day away from administration and now people want to be competing in the shop window with Madrid and City! Even though results have been average this year, we are moving forward as a club, if patience is really so low, there is other clubs you can support!

      • too true! only the Ceteh Sheiks and Abramovitch are in it for fun these days. we need to start proving we have an eye for players and can spend wisely (at least 60% of the time) before they start throwing more bread on the water

    • All this talk about the need to spend really big in order to succeed doesnt really stack up does it? OK, so Citeh have effectively bought themselves the league and that of course is success. Manure will take second it seems but with a team that needs massive rebuilding.

      But what about Newcastle and Tottenham? The following is illuminating I think in terms of success achieved relative to money spent.

      http://footballspeak.com/post/2012/02/03/Premier-League-Transfer-Spend-201112.aspx

      Its about skilful management of resources as much as anything surely?

    • .........and I did not include Everton in the above!

    • Newcastle have done remarkably well. Huge credit to their scouts, Pardew etc. Totally unexpected.

      For me Tottenham and Harry have built a house of straw. Take Modric out of the side and they struggle. Their back 4 consists of too many players that are crocked, getting to the end of their careers or both. The front line consists of players on loan. It cant last without some more investment. Big investment but chances are they will have European money and fixtures to attract new players with. They've hit the top 4 target but their journey on hitting that target regularly has only just begun and still needs considerable investment.

    • But Miguel this type of analysis has 2 major flaws.

      First it assumes when you compare one seasons spend between clubs that each club starts from the same place. That obviously is not the case. When a club already has a quality deep squad and spends a modest amount for 1 or 2 additional players they are still likely to have a stronger squad, and therefore a stronger chance of success that a club who may have spent significantly but whose squad was rather barren of real quality prior to investment.

      Second, this takes into account just one expense, the transfer fee. Now a transfer fee may have some correlation to the quality of the player being purchase, but it also has a strong correlation to the number of years left on a players deal at his existing club. A better and more consistent metric that correlates with a player’s quality is wages, and none of this is discussed here. Case in point Yaya Toure cost City 24M, not cheap, but in the range of ourselves and quite a few other clubs. However he's on 200k a week, which means only a limited number of clubs, would be able to afford his services. But additionally wages would show up for many players who are on loan deals (at least the unsubsidized portion), yet in terms of transfer fee's these players cost nothing. So for instance Spurs have to pay significant wages (even with City subsidizing) for Adebayor’s services, yet your analysis looks like they have him for nothing.

      Finding wage tables are a little harder and often out of date as obviously clubs like most businesses are not keen on publishing them unless they have to. But from what I've seen historical data suggests there is a very strong correlation between what a club pays its players, and where they end up ranked in the league table.

    • ....what are your true and acceptable expectations from them Loki, this summer and the next.......thereafter its all conjecture...????

    • I'm not sure about Reina going as he's still relatively young for a keeper, and unless he wants out, I'm not sure why we'd want him gone. Carragher I also expect to stay, but as our 4th choice CB behind Coates. The rest though I think will be gone, and while they won't raise a kings ransom will add to the transfer kitty.

      I also agree with you on the long game approach, so I think we all need to patient. Top 4 may not be unrealistic next term, but not a shoe in as I just see us spending at the levels required to buy our way back into the CL. It’s as much about what the other clubs there or there about do in terms of investment. I'm sure Chelsea will look to buy their way back into the CL club, so the competition is yet again Spurs, Arsenal, and now potentially Newcastle.

    • Well Sean, my expectations are that they will provide sufficient funds the club to be able for us to properly compete for a top four spot. I believe we have to take small steps instead of trying to rule the world in one season (which a lot of the posters on here seem to think we should).

      I accept they allowed us to spend over a hundred mil before we got rid of the driftwood (I was very impressed with that), but the net spend was a modest 34 mil. In order for us to compete for that top four, the net spend this summer has to be another 20 mil on top of that, I really believe that. The following season a similar investment depending on how we do next year.

      Look at the way City have progressed. From nowhere to probable champs in what - 3 or 4 seasons? They've substantially invested every season and shown superb patience in the manager, and I think everyone would agree our starting point is nowhere as low as City's was.

      As you say it's all conjecture. I don't usually listen to rumours but I was in a cab the other day and the driver said the owners were unhappy with some players and said to Kenny 'Get rid of the underperformers, and you'll only be getting the money from sales.' Probably a load of sh*t (you know Liverpool cabbies!) but that is my worst nightmare.

      When Tom Werner comes out and says they can compete with financially with any club in the world.....I want that demonstrated - EMPHATICALLY! Otherwise its just another mistake by the club in owner selection.

    • Whoa Robert !! Your words like "we, us" suggests you're turning to the red side ;).. if so welcome aboard lol.. you it makes sense..

    • View More Messages