10 May 2015 10:44:57
Does Brendan Rodgers regret agreeing to the transfer policy brought in by FSG?
In a recent press conference Rodgers defended the transfer policy by saying, "When I came to Liverpool, I knew 100 per cent how the club worked". Therefore, regardless of when the transfer committee was put in place or who is involved, there was a structure right from the start of Rodgers' Liverpool career. The policy was put in place to ensure that money would be better spent in future after the club previously wasted over £50m on the likes of Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing etc.
After analysing the signings made under Rodgers, it's quite clear what the transfer criteria is:
1) Transfer targets must be ideally 25 years old or under.
2) Transfer targets must be cheap (£20m or under)
3) Transfer targets must have potential in order to gain value for money in the long term future
Basically, the process is to take low cost gambles on a lot of young players in hope that they fulfil their potential and become value for money. It remains to be seen whether the whole process is to "cash in" and sell for profit as soon as a players' value is dramatically increased.
You could say that 21 of the 24 transfers (including loans) under Rodgers fit the criteria except for the following 3 players:
Kolo Toure (who was signed as a stop gap after Carragher retired)
Rickie Lambert (who was signed as a squad player to add depth in a champions league season)
Adam Lallana (who had just turned 26 when we payed £25m for him)
We may look at the vast amounts of money spent under Rodgers, but we have to understand that this is a low risk, long term investment by FSG. Coutinho may end up selling for £30m and we might only sell Allen for £5m. That would be approximately £11.5m profit. Emre Can may end up selling for £25m and Balotelli for only £10m. That would be approximately £9m profit. Let's say we unearthed a gem in signing Origi and in 3 years time he is sold for £70m. That profit would cover several losses made on failed signings.
It's a very smart investment plan by FSG, but they need to find a solution to the negative impact all these signings are having on the club. Most aren't yet at the level required to compete and aren't being selected by the manager. Common sense tells you that the manager is bound to be unhappy with the lack of quality he has within the squad, the players who aren't being selected are bound to be frustrated with their lack of game time, and the owners will no doubt be concerned about the development of the players they have invested in. Thus creating stressful and uneasy relationships left right and centre which obviously affects the success that the fans crave.
The best way to resolve these issues would be to find a solution that suits the owners, the manager, the club, the players who have a future at the club and the fans.
1) Get rid of the committee.
2) Sell/Loan the players that have a negative impact in the dressing room.
3) Sell/Loan the players that have no future at the club.
4) Let Rodgers bring in some real quality to strengthen his starting team.
5) Start buying young players less frequently to avoid squad overload. Adapt a sell before buy method.
6) Start getting the academy players involved more often.
Personally, I don't blame Rodgers for the signings made, I blame the rule book created by FSG. If Rodgers had £200m to spend on players of his choice, I guarantee the squad would be much different, there would be little to no resale value and the wage bill would be astronomical. This is the right way to go as a business which will hopefully bring success both on the pitch and financially. The issues I do have with Rodgers are purely coaching and tactical issues. Nothing to do with transfers or money, but that's for another topic.
Red Rum
{Ed002's Note - You have made a number of erroneous assumptions.}
10 May 2015 11:14:51
I've thought pretty much the same as you rum.
I think the model you have explained is what FSG are using.
And I believe this is partly the right way to run the club.
BUT we do need to add some ready now players to the starting 11. I hope FSG continue to back the club in the transfer market and will move away slightly from their model, and purchase maybe 2/3 of these players.
Ed2 can you please elaborate if Iwe are way off the mark?
{Ed002's Note - You are way off the mark. But feel free to carry on - someone is bound to mention "moneyball" soon.}
10 May 2015 11:39:29
So. It's not Rodgers fault that he has spent over 200 million based on a rough transfer guideline and brought in lots of potential and squad players who he then chooses to leave on the bench or play them out of position? He could have brought 10 X 20 mil players most of which could be in our starting 11 but all he's done is waste it. He'd have spent that money on the entire Swansea squad if he had it all upfront with no restrictions.
10 May 2015 12:15:23
Rodgers having control over transfers again?
Benzema at right back it is then.
10 May 2015 14:06:07
Personally i don't think its the purchase price of the players that is the issue, more the wages the club are willing to pay to the players. 2 players might cost say £20 million but the wages of a player with potential and wages of an established "star" could well be significant. It is also quite difficult not to look at Liverpools transfers, be it Rodgers on his own, the committee or even before Rodgers to not think that there is a criteria to be met! Alas we are informed that there isn't but i would guess a neutral looking at all our signings might suggest otherwise. Just my opinion mind.
11 May 2015 01:45:18
The owners are and will never be to blame regardless of how much spin people wanna put on the facts in a bid to absorb BR of any blame for his and our failures and woes.
{Ed001's Note - they did appoint him though, so they have to accept the blame for that stupid decision when Borrell was there if they wanted a coach.}