• Liverpool Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • A Yahoo! User Jan 18, 2013 15:01 Flag

    Laughable ............. FSG out!!!

    Hi there Steer,

    I don't know what mel said previously but I think your "Sterling, Skrtel and Agger," example missed the point. I think you need to look outward rather than inward, it's about selling 'Project Liverpool' to potential new signings and convincing them that the club is ambitious and are serious about challenging for top honours as Liverpool used to do. In the current climate where the likes of City, Chelsea and PSG are willing to offer top class players ridiculous wages in order to sign for them, most agents won't even listen to any offer from Liverpool because they know that they can get their clients better financial package elsewhere , and also maximised their own agents fees. We lost RVP, Clichy, Nasri, Toure, Ashley Cole because they were convinced that they can get better offers at other clubs. If Liverpool pursue their basic wage plus performance-related bonus policy, they stand the risk of losing key players in future like Arsenal did when it's time to renegotiate the players expiring deals and their agents have had better package outside the club than Liverpool are offering their clients.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Oh btw, I'm one of those Arsenal fans who still believes that clubs should live within their means but pragmatic enough to realise that the current Arsenal model is doomed to fail unless every club sign up to the FFP charter, I believe that this is only way forward and the most viable way to ensure fair competition and level playing field for all.

    • I take your point that it’s not just about retaining your best players it’s also about attracting the best players from other clubs to join. But I do think it’s a fair barometer of a clubs contracts to consider how players who are in demand react when offered these deals.

      Agger, Skrtel, and Sterling, along with others like Suarez who's recently signed a new deal were all in demand at other clubs, but still re-signed for us which tells me we got it right. On the other hand for comparisons sake, Fabrigas, Nasri, and RVP did not re-sign which suggests Arsenal did not, although maybe the good news for you that Walcott is staying suggests they've changed the contract structure.

      Now time will tell if these contracts will attract additional players, but it seems Sturridge had no issue with it. But it seems obvious to me we're not talking about £1000 per week deals like Mel would have you believe, but competitive base salaries with incentives to make even more.

      But, my final point is to agree with you that competing with the likes of City and Chelsea on money alone is near impossible unless or until FFP really kicks in. So I'd suggest why try. I mean do you really want a Remy who is willing to go to QPR just for a payday and an escape clause in case they go down, or would you prefer someone who has a vested interest in the clubs success. Now maybe that means we can't have a squad of 20 mercenaries all on £150K plus a week, but then the more players who are fighting hard for the club on £75K or less means more room for one or two who really do command the pay-packets north of £100K.

    • Oh btw, I'm one of those Arsenal fans who still believes that clubs should live within their means but pragmatic enough to realise that the current Arsenal model is doomed to fail unless every club sign up to the FFP charter, I believe that this is only way forward and the most viable way to ensure fair competition and level playing field for all.

      • 1 Reply to A Yahoo! User
      • I actually agree with you on both points here. I do think clubs do need to live within their means, not because of FFP or just to create a more level competitive playing field, but because is should prevent the collapses we've seen at the likes of Leeds, Pompy or Rangers which is bad not just for those clubs, but imo bad for football generally. The fact it also prevents someone just buying a toy and purchasing the league is a nice byproduct.

        But I also think Arsenal have been getting it wrong because they've been looking to short term and not taken the longer strategic view. It seems to me to be more than just living by your means but a philosophy of not paying what players are worth. Now maybe the gunners could not afford to keep all the players who've left recently, but they've hardly spent the profits they made of them either which suggests it’s not just about not spending what you don't have, but an unwillingness by someone (Wenger or the board who knows) to even spend what you have.

        Now maybe that is about to change with Wenger saying he's willing to spend big, but we've heard that before and not see anything happen. On the other hand while FSG may not have spent as much as what some fans wish, they have done what they said they would do. Since they came in they've have invested, and invested in players we hope will be with the club a long time, but only time will tell if it’s enough or not.