Andy Carroll - Best Striker in the World

[Craig_H]

The fee is irrelevant in terms of whether Carroll stays or is sold.

[Lecter]

The fee is relavant because if he doesn't work out, that's a big chunk of money down the ****hole, it will have an impact on future transfers.

Thats ****ing nonsense

The money is spent, its gone

If he doesnt work out we dont get fined or pay a penalty

You can only spend the money once and we have done so whether he works out or not will have no bearing on future budgets

Some people talk an incredible amount of bollocks at times and its quite clear that quite a few are peddling their own little agendas when it comes to Carroll

I find it majorly depressing that fans cant look at the win on Saturday without slagging off Carroll or praise Bellamy without in turn slagging off Carroll

[truefan999]

Actually his price tag has a number of impacts.

1:I has inflated all prices we have paid since (except those at the end of their contract or close to it).
2:It calls into question the ability of those who made the decision to spend that money on him
3:We could have bought 2 or 3 quality players for the same money
4:It clearly impacts upon how much money we have to spend afterwards.
5:if we spend £10m on a player I expect him to be much better than a player who cost £3m. Why else would I spend more than three times the amount?

Anyone who says his transfer fee is irrelevant is deluding themselves.

[cream]

We spent £35m on a striker and still need another striker. Of course the money is relevant, it'd be stupid to suggest otherwise, we may have to do without in other areas.

[~LFCHistory~]

The fee is irrelevant in terms of whether Carroll stays or is sold.

The longer he continues to play poorly the lower his sell on fee will drop. He's currently worth about 15m right now meaning if we sell him in January we've wasted 20 million and that's not taking into account his wages. If he stays until the summer and continues to disappoint he could conceivably go for about 10m which would mean 25m down the drain.

The fee matters.

[Mostar]

Actually his price tag has a number of impacts.

1:I has inflated all prices we have paid since (except those at the end of their contract or close to it).
2:It calls into question the ability of those who made the decision to spend that money on him
3:We could have bought 2 or 3 quality players for the same money
4:It clearly impacts upon how much money we have to spend afterwards.
5:if we spend £10m on a player I expect him to be much better than a player who cost £3m. Why else would I spend more than three times the amount?

Anyone who says his transfer fee is irrelevant is deluding themselves.

It doesn't matter any longer.

At the end of the day, as I said it before, the money is gone and there is no point of dwelling on it.

Water under the bridge. Nothing can be done about it and we really shouldn't be going back and discussing it about his fee.

What happens with Carroll, his performance on the pitch and Kenny's future plan for him are the only relevant things going forward.

[Lecter]

It doesn't matter any longer.

At the end of the day, as I said it before, the money is gone and there is no point of dwelling on it.

Water under the bridge. Nothing can be done about it and we really shouldn't be going back and discussing it about his fee.

What happens with Carroll, his performance on the pitch and Kenny's future plan for him are the only relevant things going forward.

[Lecter]

The longer he continues to play poorly the lower his sell on fee will drop. He's currently worth about 15m right now meaning if we sell him in January we've wasted 20 million and that's not taking into account his wages. If he stays until the summer and continues to disappoint he could conceivably go for about 10m which would mean 25m down the drain.

The fee matters.

Thanks for all the valuations plucked from thin air to back up your argument

It really helps

[~LFCHistory~]

Thanks for all the valuations plucked from thin air to back up your argument

It really helps

True. But the point I was trying to make is still valid - the longer AC continues his current form the larger the loss we will make when he's sold.

[Lecter]

Actually his price tag has a number of impacts.

1:I has inflated all prices we have paid since (except those at the end of their contract or close to it).
2:It calls into question the ability of those who made the decision to spend that money on him
3:We could have bought 2 or 3 quality players for the same money
4:It clearly impacts upon how much money we have to spend afterwards.
5:if we spend £10m on a player I expect him to be much better than a player who cost £3m. Why else would I spend more than three times the amount?

Anyone who says his transfer fee is irrelevant is deluding themselves.

1) it hasnt inflated all the prices we have paid, we got Coates pretty cheap and Adam & Enrique. Henderson and downing we paid about the going rate for especially when you consider Young & Jones deals that happened around the same time

2) In your opinion (which frankly counts for nothing). ALL managers make mistakes Fergie spunked £25 million each on Veron & Hargreaves amongst others and it hasnt significantly caused people to overly question him.

3) Torres asked for a transfer with a couple of days of the transfer window left to go. I'm surprised we managed one deal never mind completing 2 or 3

4) Last January was our last window before FFPR. I've yet to see ANYBODY confirm whether transfer profits from previous years could be carried over into an assessment period for FFPR, so maybe the money HAD to be spent and with 24-48 hours remaining we did the best that we could in that time

5) the most pointless point you make. Lots of things go into factoring a players price. Namely age, ability, position etc.. What you are suggesting is far too simplistic

[Craig_H]

I may be guilty of not expressing this clearly enough, so i'll give it one last go...

If Andy Carroll is sold it's because Kenny Dalglish doesnt think it's to the benefit of the club to keep him. It will not be because we paid £35m for him.

If Andy Carroll is kept it's because Kenny Dalglish thinks it's to the benefit of the club to keep him. It will not be because we paid £35m for him.

Hence, in terms of whether or not we sell Carroll, the transfer fee we paid to sign him does not matter in the slightest.

Hope that clears things up.

[Lecter]

True. But the point I was trying to make is still valid - the longer AC continues his current form the larger the loss we will make when he's sold.

If hes sold

People are assuming we are going to cut our losses and sell him

That isnt a given

On current form we wouldnt recoup the full amount

However who knows what will happen

The lad has played for LFC less than 20 times and people have already called time on his career and many of the same people stated we have wasted money on Adam and Henderson which appears to be looking rather unfounded

[Vermilion]

I may be guilty of not expressing this clearly enough, so i'll give it one last go...

If Andy Carroll is sold it's because Kenny Dalglish doesnt think it's to the benefit of the club to keep him. It will not be because we paid £35m for him.

If Andy Carroll is kept it's because Kenny Dalglish thinks it's to the benefit of the club to keep him. It will not be because we paid £35m for him.

Hence, in terms of whether or not we sell Carroll, the transfer fee we paid to sign him does not matter in the slightest.

Hope that clears things up.

That should be 'want to' sell AC, because if we decide to sell him, what we paid will surely have an effect on what we want for him, so clubs may not pay it.

Just trying to complicate matters.

[Craig_H]

The lad has played for LFC less than 20 times and people have already called time on his career and many of the same people stated we have wasted money on Adam and Henderson which appears to be looking rather unfounded

It's staggering.

[Roboklopp]

It simply comes down to value as us the mindset of FSG. If Kenny thinks Carroll has a high enough level of value to the team in terms of what he offers as a player then he'll stay. You can talk of wages etc but Carra's meant to have had a new deal on his high wages based on what's essentially gonna be a bit-part contribution. Clearly though Kenny wants him as part of the squad so that's gonna be the deciding factor, inspite of his salary costs.

Ultimately Kenny will decide but as I've said, he will decide based on what he thinks of Carroll's contribution to the team. The transfer fee has been & gone and has no real relevance now.

Makes sense aye, however there isnt the possiblity of getting a significant chunk of the outlay for Carra, whereas someone might offer £17m for Carroll. Now, I am in no way advocating this, I'm just saying that Kenny is answerable to the board/FSG & one of the criteria they judge him on will be how well he has spent the money at his disposal. To rule that out completely in terms of judging the decision to buy the player is not to look at the bigger picture. AC himself cannot help the fee & shouldnt be held accountable for it I fully agree. But the board will look at & evaluate his purchase in that light & there's no reason for the fans not to look at the wider picture too.

Pretty sure there are some here that laughed at Scum for the amount the spunked on Berbatov, but are getting all defensive when we evaluate our own players on a cost/value basis.

Lec, I know you're playing devil's advocate to some extent cos we've already been though it but FFS: the people here who have an agenda against Carroll are a lunatic fringe, most want him to suceed. However, just cos we won on Sunday doesnt mean we should boycott this thread. (In fact havent you argued we shouldnt blame him when we lose either?) People are entitled to ask questions about our players on a forum -it doesnt mean they wont support them on the pitch.