Would you be happy to see us...

[Jayesh87]

pay over the odds for top players (Chelsea & Man U esque!)

I know we probably paid to much for players in the past like Pennant, Crouch, Cisse (to name a few) but i mean if we went out and spent 40million on David Villa when his value is probably around 25million or if we went and got Dani Alves for 22million when he is worth around 12million. Anyways you can see what i am getting at.....

[John_Gotti]

pay over the odds for top players (Chelsea & Man U esque!)

I know we probably paid to much for players in the past like Pennant, Crouch, Cisse (to name a few) but i mean if we went out and spent 40million on David Villa when his value is probably around 25million or if we went and got Dani Alves for 22million when he is worth around 12million. Anyways you can see what i am getting at.....

No I would not want us to go down that route. I would rather buy the ManUre way than the Chelski way.

[AFII]

The best players already plays for the best clubs and they don't need to sell. Rafa will have to pay over the odds if he want to sign the best players. I don't like it and a guess is that Rafa doesn't like it but he doesn't have any choice if he want to sign a very good player.

[Jayesh87]

No I would not want us to go down that route. I would rather buy the ManUre way than the Chelski way.

So 18million for Carrick, 30miilion for Rio , 20+ or Hargreaves etc. isn't over paying?

[John_Gotti]

So 18million for Carrick, 30miilion for Rio , 20+ or Hargreaves etc. isn't over paying?

The difference is they do it once a season: Chelski do it on average 3 a season.

Also, ManUre do it when needed: Chelski do it just for the sake of someone else not buying the player.

[Armchairkopite]

It has got to the stage now where i dont give a rats arse how much we pay for a player, once its the right player.

[Guest]

So 18million for Carrick, 30miilion for Rio , 20+ or Hargreaves etc. isn't over paying?

But they have a real chance of winning the league.

[NICKZS]

So 18million for Carrick, 30miilion for Rio , 20+ or Hargreaves etc. isn't over paying?

So if Ferguson had refused to pay the £18 mill for Carrick based on principle and then not won the league, which decision would have been the correct one? Ferguson pays over the odds for players that will vastly improve the quality of his side (Rooney, Ronaldo, Ferdinand, Carrick...), with only a couple of them turning out flops (Veron amongst a few others). Sometimes you have to bite the bullet, I'm afraid.

[DannyMan2006]

As long as its not to much over the odds then Id be happy. Of course, this is a worrying time, because if Rafa spends big and they improve very little then he would not be in a very strong position would he?

A £50m spending spree, resulting in us still not being in the title race would not be a good thing.

An £80m spending spree resulting in the title would be fine by me, but any player we spend big on should be in the first team on a regular basis. Either that or a red hot prospect like Augero or Walcott for example.

[CharlieMansonsSquint]

Price is irrelevant.

Performance of said player and how many trophies he helps us win is what counts.

Players are only worth what Rafa is prepared to pay. End of.

[DannyMan2006]

Price is irrelevant.

Performance of said player and how many trophies he helps us win is what counts.

Players are only worth what Rafa is prepared to pay. End of.

Price is relevant because managers live and die by their signings. £2m spent on a flop is easier to forget about than a £10m flop. The writing was on the wall for Ged when he squandered all that cash on Diouf, Diao and Cheyrou. I dont think he ever recovered from that.

People on LFC forums are already questioning Rafas judgement on signings as it is, mentioning Morientes, Josemi, Pennant and Gonzales. Failure this summer will only increase the number of fans moaning.

I actually think Rafa has done well in the transfer market, and I believe that given the cash to get his first choice targets (Alves instead of Pennant) Rafa will do well in the market.

[tomasjj]

I think Rafa does ok in the market. And you say, if he had the money, he would have gone for Alves. And he also tried to sign Villa.

One thing about Rafa is that he moves the dross on when it is clear it was a mistake.

I am, even if he tried to sign Villa, still suspect towards his ability to sign top strikers though...

[DannyMan2006]

I think Rafa does ok in the market. And you say, if he had the money, he would have gone for Alves. And he also tried to sign Villa.

One thing about Rafa is that he moves the dross on when it is clear it was a mistake.

I am, even if he tried to sign Villa, still suspect towards his ability to sign top strikers though...

Rafa on strikers:

Morientes: Flop as he couldnt adapt, but nobody could have forseen that.
Crouch: Hit as his value has increased and he improved LFC when he came.
Bellamy: Jurys still out, but again a profit would be made should we sell him and he has added a new dimension to LFC attack
Kuyt: Jurys still out, he has 9 goals already in the league which aint bad for a first season, as well as being asked to drop deep, and work hard. A so called 20/20 player by Jol, he has shown that this may not be beyond him if he continues to settle. Many top managers stress how good he is such as Van Basten and Jol, so I wouldnt give up on him just yet.

Of course when Owen left Rafa attempted to sign Villa and Etoo, so he does recognise quality too, so I dont see the problem.

[CharlieMansonsSquint]

Price is relevant because managers live and die by their signings. £2m spent on a flop is easier to forget about than a £10m flop. The writing was on the wall for Ged when he squandered all that cash on Diouf, Diao and Cheyrou. I dont think he ever recovered from that.

Agree.

My point was that price only becomes relevant if a player fails. If he succeeds, and in turns helps us succeed, then the cost is always completely forgotten about.

Take Shevchenko for example. The media keep banging on about the fact that he cost £30m, because he was struggling to adapt. If he starts banging in the goals and Chelsea win a few cups, that talk will disappear fast. It's a fine line.

[DannyMan2006]

Agree.

My point was that price only becomes relevant if a player fails. If he succeeds, and in turns helps us succeed, then the cost is always completely forgotten about.

Take Shevchenko for example. The media keep banging on about the fact that he cost £30m, because he was struggling to adapt. If he starts banging in the goals and Chelsea win a few cups, that talk will disappear fast. It's a fine line.

If youve explained it that way I agree!