12 Dec 2023 00:38:15
Klopp when discussing transfer market missing out on players notably lavia and caicedo
'Well now I can see this, my lord we were lucky'

Ugh I hate that guy.

1.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 09:20:43
do you hate him because he is telling the truth?? we got stung badly again.

2.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 10:09:19
Maybe we found ourselves in that situation because other players chose to sign for other clubs. The three DMs I wanted us to sign went to RM, Arsenal and PSG. Good luck to them is what I say.

The two players referred to are our players now. They chose to play for us so it was understandable that a bitter taste was left in some peoples mouth.

As I’ve said in a previous post I hope they are both fit for that game at Anfield.

3.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 11:42:51
This is the thing - People complain that we didn't buy Rice or whoever else, forgetting the fact these players also get to choose where they go.

I also can't believe that after about 16 games - players are being written off. It's basically a whole new squad, little intricacies take time to figure out. Arsenal starting to show that, as are Villa - City and Liverpool have had years together to figure it out.

And before it's said "liverpool have a new midfield too" - apart from Szobozlai, all the others have been introduced gradually, even McAllister, who knows the league. Chelsea haven't had that luxury of allowing some of these players time to adjust.

4.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 13:26:36
I would not take any notice of what Klopp, the tapper upper, says.

This is a guy who thinks he can flash his false yellow teeth and officials and FA will bow to his every whim.

5.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 13:44:21
Poch empire I don't like him because he's classless in my opinion, but I cannot deny he's top top class.

Mu initial opinion when signing caicedo was that we got badly, badly stung and it looks true. I don't see a 40m player let alone a 115m player. The transfer makes 0 sense to me.

Lavia I will reserve judgement, I haven't actually seen him play too much so I will not criticise him at all.

6.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 14:19:49
We have to reserve the judgement on Caicedo too.

While 115 million is a lot, we'll only really know after a couple of years. Remember, Brighton set the price, if the club didn't agree with it, they'd have walked away. Liverpool were also willing to pay that too, so it mustn't be too far off the buying clubs appraisal of him.

7.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 16:02:34
Dihanio all due respect any player of that fee should automatically come in and standout, problem is just like many others in our squad we got absoloutely rinsed by clubs and over paid for average players,
115 million for a fella who played 1 season in the pl
45 million for lavia same thing 1 season in PL
75 on Mudryk he played about 50 professional games in the ukranian league
cucurella another shambolic signing
Sanchez? a horror show error prone keeper
fofana another joke of a signing 80 million ? its clear as day the owners don't no a thing about football and they got absoloutely rinsed in the transfer market,
we went for youth instead of proven players, leaders
No point saying now we should of signed rice, paulinha, maddison etc we didn't and now were in more need of a clear out than any team in world football 1 billion pounds later
I hope im wrong and im sorry to come across so negative but not 1 signing of the boehly era excited me they were all ridicolous fees for potential players someone needs to advise these owners better and back poch in the market and get him players he wants not players who have a potential rating of 90 in 5 years time on fiffa.

8.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 16:11:47
Caicedo was top class last season and the fee is the fee. So far this season he looks far more influential than Enzo who hasn’t impressed me in the slightest so far this year. I think Enzo looks overplayed and needs a few weeks off.

9.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 16:23:09
So, by that thought process - If we get someone on a free - They're all good to go ahead and be awful?

I've explained the price on Caicedo - The same goes for Mudryk, and again is the same in regards to price. 28 games in a new league and you've already started to write him off.

You're questioning Lavia and he hasn't even seen the bench. Fofana looked a cracking buy before the injury, 15 games and he's not good enough in your eyes.

Sanchez is a better shot stopper than we've had in a while. And while crap with the ball at his feet, is an improvement.

I agree that we do need experience in the side. I've said it in previous posts.

You keep crying about fees and needing a clear out - 16 league games into a season. Who cares what they're bought for? Plenty of other clubs have spent big on players who turned out awful, and then there's players bought for pittance who are world beaters!

What does a clearout get us? Nothing again. Time and patience and at least giving some lads an actual chance to play and then we can have an actual constructive conversation on players!

Crying that a 100mil player should be tearing it up does nothing except annoy the person moaning about it.

10.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 17:14:35
There is no doubt in my mind that we overpay for players; other clubs love it when we show interest in one of their players. We also seem to buy players who are injury prone; hopefully that’s just bad luck. If you spend money on players you expect them to perform and if they are all good players then you need to ask questions about the coach and his staff.
I worry about the weight of expectation being put on Nkunku by fans and the manager. Even if he start well there are plenty of other problems; he can’t solve them on his own.
Enzo is being overplayed? It’s not even Xmas yet; if that’s his energy level we are screwed!

11.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 22:31:37
dihanio, so true mate if you get a player for a so called low fee, “he must be crap. ” If we pay what some consider to an inflated fee “his performance doesn’t match the fee. ”

Why bother about it. It only maters that the player is what the club want and if he is a good player.

My point about Enzo is I don’t think he has hand much of a break from season, to World Cup and the season.

If he is not tired, he could just be out of form because he ain’t playing well that’s for sure.

12.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 22:33:17
dihanio, I should have just said I agree with every single point you have made in your post. It would have been easier.

13.) 12 Dec 2023
12 Dec 2023 22:56:04
Tomb enzo is another transgrr that didn't make sense to me. 100m for enzo was also ridiculous and a massive massive overpay. He had one solid world cup, that's it.

I don't think he's tired, he's just not good enough.

Regarding fofana, it did not look like a 'cracking buy' at all that is absurd. He wasn't better than johnny Evans in that Leicester defence so I'm not sure at all what we saw in him so spend 80m

The transfer dealings of this club for nearly a decade have been an utter joke and there's no nice way to say it.

14.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 00:22:42
Standard your criteria of a good player is based on what we have paid as a transfer fee.

Besides your personal dislike of Caicedo and using him ads an example you have said he is worth anything from £10m - £40m. I assume that is a reflection of your judgment of his ability! You have also called him a “donkey. ”

You have now moved on to Enzo again quoting his transfer fee. I haven’t got a clue if he is going to be a top player for our club but I do know he is three to four times the player Casamero or Ambremat are, how much did Utd pay for them? I also think Enzo will prove to a much better investment than his World Cup midfield teammate and how much did the scousers pay for him.

Clubs value players by “need” in my opinion.

I’m not convinced about Fofana but the difference is I want to be wrong! ’.

15.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 00:34:19
Tomb no it isn't mate don't make up rubbish. You act like a transfer fee doesn't matter but it's economics, it's the single most important thing in the game.

If you sign 2 midfeilders for a combined 215m, they need to be among the best miefeulders in the league. I don't think they'd make a team in the top half of the table. That's the truth of it.

Once again, donkey is a poker term and I stand buy it, caicedo looks amateur and rookie which is precisely what donkey means. Furthermore I don't hate him, I just cannot believe we passed on rice to sign him for even more than rice costed, utterly absurd.

16.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 00:57:08
FGS standard, I have never tried to say transfer fee isn’t relevant. What I hve said a is a transfer fee does not equate to a player’s ability.

Just so you understand. We paid diddly for Azpi, Iva and big Pete and they are legends. We have also payed huge fees for players like Lukaku, Morata and Werner and they were duds. The fee is not a reflection of ability.

Your obsession with Caicedo (“a donkey”) and Rice who himself CHOSE to sign for another club is pathetic but a pathetic opinion is still an opinion and therefore worth comment.

17.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 04:40:53
some good insights from all above Tom B and dihanio etc, we are all entitled to different opinions and i do enjoy reading all of yours, we can all agree to disagree on different points, I would like to highlight i don't want to see any player fail even though im saying i think some have been massive dissapointments so far.

18.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 08:07:18
Poch, every club signs “failures”.

19.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 13:29:15
Tom the conversation is about caicedo therefore I'm going to talk about caicedo, that is not an obsession.

Rice went to arsenal but it's been indicated multiple times that chelsea didn't even attempt to go for rice. How can he chose us if we didn't make a bid?

20.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 13:52:50
I think it is perfectly reasonable to discuss the fees spent on players and to hold opinions on them. We have certainly overspent on players in the past regime and under the current and I have no doubt that we will in the future as well. The fees spent on players is also one way of judging the sporting directors.

I don't have a huge problem in the fees spent on Caicedo or Enzo, but I agree that if you are trotting out a midfield that has cost £215m they need to be performing at a high level. Neither has been terrible, but equally neither has been brilliant.

What is more of a problem for me is that we have spent very, very large sums of money to assemble a squad of great individual players seemingly without a coherent plan to integrate them into an 11 that works on the pitch. You could have taken the money we've spent and allocated it very differently and ended up with a far superior squad to what we currently have.

My personal opinion is that if you are going to spend 100m+ on a player, they need to be one who regularly directly contributes to you winning games - i. e. scoring goals. Lukaku, for all his faults, is a goalscorer and while he clearly wanted out virtually as soon as he arrived I think it is also a reflection on Tuchel that that transfer will go down in infamy.

21.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 15:54:40
RBD, of course it’s reasonable to talk about fees. My point is that fees do NOT equate into ability!

We have spent fortunes on lots of players who have proved to be duds. What’s changed?

Spend loads = high expectations.
Spend low = low expectations

I personally don’t care about the fee paid, I just want good players.

Lukaku was a player I didn’t want back at our club and I highlighted early on that TT wasn’t playing to his limited strengths. It was bad news all round.

22.) 13 Dec 2023
13 Dec 2023 16:00:44
Standard, Rice plays for Arsenal, we didn’t bid for him. Maybe we asked and found out he preferred to play for Arsenal. I haven’t got a clue about the circumstances and I don’t care. Good luck to the lad in gooner land.

Your Caicedo obsession/ dislike is well documented. “He is a donkey. ” “He is not worth £115m” “ He is worth between £10m and £40m”

For the life of me can’t work out how he be a better player if we had paid less for him but ho hum!