bobzy Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 26 minutes ago, calcifer said: I will highlight this Liverpool 119 departures and 547M Villa 156 departures and 299M from them (100M of that is prob Grealish so it just shows how awful we have been with selling players) Liverpool can sell their dead wood for a much higher premium than us They've done far better with sales, but a large amount of that income will be Coutinho and Sterling leaving (around £180m?). Fabinho was also sold to Saudi for about £40m wasn't he? Mane £30m to Bayern? That's about half their income across 4 players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, bobzy said: They've done far better with sales, but a large amount of that income will be Coutinho and Sterling leaving (around £180m?). Fabinho was also sold to Saudi for about £40m wasn't he? Mane £30m to Bayern? That's about half their income across 4 players. yeah to be fair to them whoever it was at Liverpool who was selling their youngsters was very good at it, their 4th choice keeper to leicester for £15m, brewster was about £18m wasn't he? solanke, ibe etc all went for decent numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calcifer Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 2 hours ago, bobzy said: They've done far better with sales, but a large amount of that income will be Coutinho and Sterling leaving (around £180m?). Fabinho was also sold to Saudi for about £40m wasn't he? Mane £30m to Bayern? That's about half their income across 4 players. That was vastly over value as well. It is why Chelsea have a higher income as they sold a few off at silly money to the Saudis But we would not have got them prices, we only got 100m for Jack as it was a release clause. If we had Coutinho and Sterling we would have got half the price Liverpool got. That's my argument. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, villa4europe said: yeah to be fair to them whoever it was at Liverpool who was selling their youngsters was very good at it, their 4th choice keeper to leicester for £15m, brewster was about £18m wasn't he? solanke, ibe etc all went for decent numbers I think he left a couple seasons ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, calcifer said: That was vastly over value as well. It is why Chelsea have a higher income as they sold a few off at silly money to the Saudis But we would not have got them prices, we only got 100m for Jack as it was a release clause. If we had Coutinho and Sterling we would have got half the price Liverpool got. That's my argument. I don't think that's right - maybe in the case of Coutinho because he was playing at one of the most well known clubs in the World and moving to another - but Sterling? Yeah, we'd have got a very decent amount for him. Much the same way we did for Grealish and even Benteke who went for just over £30m. Where Liverpool have done really well (or others badly) is as @villa4europe says; selling their younger players for considerable fees. Some worked out for the buyers, though. Solanke to Bournemouth for £19m was seen as a ridiculous purchase but he's now seemingly a formidable Premier League striker. We seem to have managed to do this fairly well with Chukwuemeka, Archer and Ramsey recently so hopefully catching up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 You can't tell these scouse fans anything, talk about being blameless. My pal last night nearly wanted to rip my head off (he's only a small old chap luckly), cause I mentioned how blatent Jota dived. He jumped down my throat telling me the Duran one was more blatent and Jota slipped on the wet grass after his leg being grabbed by the keeper. I tried to show my other pal the video on my phone, an my scouser mate wouldn't let me, when I finally showed it, he said the Duran one was more blatent. Unfortunately for me, I remembered he was also a Blooser, so had a Liverplop fan and Blues ripping me to shreads. Obviously the blooser mentioned if the Villa won the league it would be the worst thing that could ever happen 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 Had to laugh at Klopp whoring himself out to help flog exercise bikes on the telly. Would have thought Liverpool pay their managers a decent salary. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 4 minutes ago, Davkaus said: Had to laugh at Klopp whoring himself out to help flog exercise bikes on the telly. Would have thought Liverpool pay their managers a decent salary. He's probably one of the bigger faces on German TV! You know the snickers advert with the angry guy in the changing room? That was klopp here, does a lot for erdinger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 On 04/01/2024 at 23:57, kurtsimonw said: Like I said, since Klopp took over, their net spend is closer to Bournemouth than it is Spurs. Even if people want to go by just spend, which ignores the need to sell to faciliate purchases in the first place, they're 6th in that time - a good half a billion of the Manchester clubs and Chelsea. We have a higher net spend despite spending 3 years out of the PL. That’s because of the “Liverpool” name. They got massive money for youth players and rejects ( from the likes of Bournemouth), which only maybe City would near. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 9 hours ago, mikeyp102 said: That’s because of the “Liverpool” name. They got massive money for youth players and rejects ( from the likes of Bournemouth), which only maybe City would near. They also have to pay over the odds because of that name too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 44 minutes ago, kurtsimonw said: They also have to pay over the odds because of that name too. That's a good point. More risk of expensive flop same with Manure etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 TAA out for a couple weeks with a knee injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Simon Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 On 06/01/2024 at 17:50, mikeyp102 said: That’s because of the “Liverpool” name. They got massive money for youth players and rejects ( from the likes of Bournemouth), which only maybe City would near. If Solanke can continue this form that signing will look more and more like a brilliant piece of business. On this form, I'd consider him for Villa if / when Ollie leaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osmark86 Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 On 06/01/2024 at 18:21, Davkaus said: Had to laugh at Klopp whoring himself out to help flog exercise bikes on the telly. Would have thought Liverpool pay their managers a decent salary. He's just using the fact that he is a massive name. Kinda like Messi with Pepsi & Zlatan with...well anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJBOB Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 As annoying as they are - they've handled this rebuild about as good as you can to avoid a United-like cleaning of the cupboards. Sure - still big money spent but they flogged off Fabinho, Henderson, Mane, Neco Williams (lol), Minamino for decent returns despite their age or inadequacy at Liverpool. The jury is still out on some of their attackers like Diaz and Gakpo. Nunez, in particular, I'm not sure will be worth what they paid for despite his contributions but landing Konate, Szoboslai, Mac Allister, and Endo as well as slowly increasing the playing time of players like Elliot, Jones, Tsimikas has given them a much more athletic side. Been fortunate with their injuries this year too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 If they can remain challenging without Salah then they could win the league. But city have less absentees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 (edited) so, Impressed with their younger lads yesterday, all seemed fired up and bags of running. Bradley looks a find, and Jones and Elliot, looking established and effective. On that showing, I can't see past them, for the Title. Edited January 22 by TRO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 I'm thinking we aint catching Liverpool they look so good I hate to say, but although Arsenal look back on it, it was only a crap Crystal Palace they beat, so I wouldn't be shaking in my boots just yet, with thinking Arsenal will defo finish above us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 48 minutes ago, TRO said: so, Impressed with their younger lads yesterday, all seemed fired up and bags of running. Bradley looks a find, and Jones and Elliot, looking established and effective. On that showing, I can't see past them, for the Title. Yes looked good but. Can never rule out man city though unless they get punished for breaching ffp 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 With Klopp leaving at the end of the season can they really find a better name? Huge challenge for the next name Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts