Andy Carroll - Best Striker in the World

[Nick77]

The problem is we have been seriously ripped off with regards to Carroll & Downing, simply because they're English. Carroll should have cost no more than 20 million & Downing no more than 12 million imo. The problem is we were desperate & needed some English players in the squad. Unfortunately 95% of English players are not good enough for this club imo...

[Lecter]

Also spunking large amounts of cash on **** players will have an impact on future spends. Why weren't we active in the January transfer window when we were badly in need of midfielder and a striker???

How does spending money now affect future budgets

Thats ****ing bollocks

[Kenneth]

How does spending money now affect future budgets

Thats ****ing bollocks

getting a bit technical there.

[cream]

How does spending money now affect future budgets

Thats ****ing bollocks

Aye, you're right. It doesn't matter if the players turn out ****, we'll just buy some more.

[Lecter]

Aye, you're right. It doesn't matter if the players turn out ****, we'll just buy some more.

**** players or not will not decrease the transfer budget available

Better players might increase the budget though (through gaining Champions League revenue)

Its ****ing nonsense to suggest crap players being signed would mean the money will be reduced from the level it is at now

[CJ]

I think he may have been going along the lines of we don't have unlimited money so spunking 55 million on crap is 55 million we don't have to spend because well we have spent it

[kris90210]

**** players or not will not decrease the transfer budget available

Better players might increase the budget though (through gaining Champions League revenue)

Its ****ing nonsense to suggest crap players being signed would mean the money will be reduced from the level it is at now

What about the loss in resale value?

If Dalglish is given 20 million and anything he can raise through sales, the fact that the players have been **** (and subsequently lost value) will directly influence the amount we have to spend. Won't it?

Not to mention the fact that said **** players will have to be replaced, meaning we're effectively treading water instead of progressing.

[el matador]

I think we did very well to get rid of all the crap that rafa and hodgson bought in one transfer window. we shaved an estimated 25 to 30m in wages and we need to do the same again.

there are probably half a dozen players that are surplus requirements. maxi, kuyt, aurelio, jones, aquilani, cole all need to be moved on.

to replace them we need another four or five first team players. commoli said that there would only be a couple of signings but if he came out and said were looking to sign six players people know were flush with cash. the last thing we want is to waste money on players because their clubs know weve got money to burn.

say were skint and then negotiate properly.

[Muddled]

I think we did very well to get rid of all the crap that rafa and hodgson bought in one transfer window. we shaved an estimated 25 to 30m in wages and we need to do the same again.

there are probably half a dozen players that are surplus requirements. maxi, kuyt, aurelio, jones, aquilani, cole all need to be moved on.

to replace them we need another four or five first team players. commoli said that there would only be a couple of signings but if he came out and said were looking to sign six players people know were flush with cash. the last thing we want is to waste money on players because their clubs know weve got money to burn.

say were skint and then negotiate properly.

+1.

Minus the bit about negotiating properly - I have my reservations about Commoli.

[el matador]

I think we all do mate but hes done well in getting suarez. enrique and charlie adam were bought cheaply, bellamy was a free transfer. downing, henderson and especially carroll were all overpriced.

but he did get rid of a lot of deadwood and deserves credit for that.

[Lecter]

What about the loss in resale value?

If Dalglish is given 20 million and anything he can raise through sales, the fact that the players have been **** (and subsequently lost value) will directly influence the amount we have to spend. Won't it?

Not to mention the fact that said **** players will have to be replaced, meaning we're effectively treading water instead of progressing.

Thats a fair point but you dont buy a player to sell him 12 months later at a profit

you only sell when a better offer comes in or that player has no use for you

It still doesnt affect your basic transfer budget

The funny thing is despite spending shedloads last summer I actually think we will spend more this summer

The budget will reflect the revenue increases we will have seen over this year

That IMO will be the major driver of transfer budgets

[little dave hedgehog]

agree with lecter.

[Fredo]

Should I add once and for all that spending is the actual 'net spend' when monies in is taken in consideration. The rest is not relevant.

[kris90210]

Thats a fair point but you dont buy a player to sell him 12 months later at a profit

you only sell when a better offer comes in or that player has no use for you

It still doesnt affect your basic transfer budget

The funny thing is despite spending shedloads last summer I actually think we will spend more this summer

The budget will reflect the revenue increases we will have seen over this year

That IMO will be the major driver of transfer budgets

In the example I gave, players performance clearly does affect the overall transfer budget. Not the basic budget, no. But in generating additional money.

Plus, if we take Stuart Downing as an example. If he'd actually played well this season we wouldn't need a new left winger. He's been **** and so we'll have to take a huge hit (probably £10 million) financially, and we still have a major position to address, as opposed to being able to focus on other positions.

I hope you're right about our spending, because we desperately need it. If we have another summer like last years though... it will be soul destroying.

[Muddled]

agree with lecter.

Is that a subliminal post?