In Comolli We Trust

[Muddled]

Following on from BrooklynRed's post about Comolli and our summer funds, it got me thinking about our transfer strategy; we seem to put all our eggs in one basket.

Lecter has touched on it before; we are stubborn in our approach, which means we can potentially miss out on players (Wickham (Young maybe))and our transfer negotiations can go on for weeks (Adam, Downing - and to an extent - Henderson) and we appear to concentrate on one transfer, meaning getting all of our business done in a short space of time is impossible.

I keep reading about how we are back to the LFC of old, with everything done behind closed doors - and to an extent, we do - but certainly not our transfer targets. We knew in May who are primary targets were and it's no surprise to see Adam and Downing acquired with Enrique the only surprising absentee (currently).

People have talked about a deal being typical Comolli. Well, as a starter for ten, that worries me; we should not be obvious in our negotiations and other teams should not know what to expect when we approach a player. Secondly, we tend to focus on our target, losing sight of other objectives. Thirdly, we put an offer in that is borderline insulting, which then means the seller puts a ridiculous price tag on the player. As we work our way up to this price, this is were it goes one of two ways; we keep on going up till we are at their valuation anyway, or we realise that we are paying over the odds and refuse to budge.

Yes, I understand how negotiations work, but we are so obvious in our strategy, we either meet the high valuation or have spent so much time on the transfer, we lose out on the initial target and maybe someone else too. I also realise that I am not privy to the transfer dealings of Liverpool Football Club, but hell - if we can't discuss it on here, what's the point of a forum?

The commmon consensus is that we are building a squad to challenge the top four, get a place in the Champions League and approach a higher standard of players next season. I ask you, do you trust Comolli do secure the services of footballers of a higher calibre next year? Are you happy with a 50/50 (exaggerated) approach to transfers? Do you think we operate differently?

[RedReet]

Following on from BrooklynRed's post about Comolli and our summer funds, it got me thinking about our transfer strategy; we seem to put all our eggs in one basket.

Lecter has touched on it before; we are stubborn in our approach, which means we can potentially miss out on players (Wickham (Young maybe))and our transfer negotiations can go on for weeks (Adam, Downing - and to an extent - Henderson) and we appear to concentrate on one transfer, meaning getting all of our business done in a short space of time is impossible.

I keep reading about how we are back to the LFC of old, with everything done behind closed doors - and to an extent, we do - but certainly not our transfer targets. We knew in May who are primary targets were and it's no surprise to see Adam and Downing acquired with Enrique the only surprising absentee (currently).

People have talked about a deal being typical Comolli. Well, as a starter for ten, that worries me; we should not be obvious in our negotiations and other teams should not know what to expect when we approach a player. Secondly, we tend to focus on our target, losing sight of other objectives. Thirdly, we put an offer in that is borderline insulting, which then means the seller puts a ridiculous price tag on the player. As we work our way up to this price, this is were it goes one of two ways; we keep on going up till we are at their valuation anyway, or we realise that we are paying over the odds and refuse to budge.

Yes, I understand how negotiations work, but we are so obvious in our strategy, we either meet the high valuation or have spent so much time on the transfer, we lose out on the initial target and maybe someone else too. I also realise that I am not privy to the transfer dealings of Liverpool Football Club, but hell - if we can't discuss it on here, what's the point of a forum?

The commmon consensus is that we are building a squad to challenge the top four, get a place in the Champions League and approach a higher standard of players next season. I ask you, do you trust Comolli do secure the services of footballers of a higher calibre next year? Are you happy with a 50/50 (exaggerated) approach to transfers? Do you think we operate differently?

You are making an awful lot of assumptions on information you admit to ‘not being privy’ to. For that reason, I find it hard to answer your questions, but I am confident that the club as a whole will move successfully forward and get the right players when available.

[dww]

I'm not sure that the accusation we are somehow slower/less decisive/more concentrated on single deals stacks up given that we have been one of the most active players in the market.

In most cases we have secured our seeming first choices. Given our current position - i.e. no European football - I think we have done a good job attracting players and getting them from teams who have in recent seasons had ambitions of finishing in or above the position in the league we finished last year.

All the talk of how we do our negotiations seems to have no basis except internet and paper talk. Even if it is true do we have any idea how it compares with other teams negotiating tactics?

The only way we can judge things is how these signings pan out over time. A lot of people criticised Comollis work at Spurs but he bought the majority of the team/squad that got them into the Champions League.

[Chrono]

The essence I got from the original post is that we identify targets, concentrate on them and seemingly get them. Sounds ok to me.

I'll worry when these players turn out to be duds next season, until then I'm happy with how things are panning out. At least we have a pot to piss in.

[Muddled]

You are making an awful lot of assumptions on information you admit to ‘not being privy’ to. For that reason, I find it hard to answer your questions, but I am confident that the club as a whole will move successfully forward and get the right players when available.

True, there is a lot of assumption in there! From what you have seen, would you be confident in us approaching - for example - Hazard next season, with Champions League football secured? Do you think Comolli would stick in a bid of £10m, then sit on it and play hard-ball? What's your gut feeling about the way our transfer dealings have happpened so far?

Next year we could be battling with the big-guns to secure a signature, meaning we have to juggling many deals and move swiftly, I'm not confident Comolli can do that.

I suppose another thing to question, would be Comolli's hit and miss ratio in the transfer market. He's been stuck on this pedestal and I'm not quite sure why.

[Muddled]

I'm not sure that the accusation we are somehow slower/less decisive/more concentrated on single deals stacks up given that we have been one of the most active players in the market.

In most cases we have secured our seeming first choices. Given our current position - i.e. no European football - I think we have done a good job attracting players and getting them from teams who have in recent seasons had ambitions of finishing in or above the position in the league we finished last year.

All the talk of how we do our negotiations seems to have no basis except internet and paper talk. Even if it is true do we have any idea how it compares with other teams negotiating tactics?

The only way we can judge things is how these signings pan out over time. A lot of people criticised Comollis work at Spurs but he bought the majority of the team/squad that got them into the Champions League.

I couldn't even guess at how other foootball teams transfer strategies compare, but if you compared it to Barcelona, they are in a position to play hard-ball and sit it out, safe in the knowledge that they have the pull of saying, where else can you? Fabregas is not the best example because of his previous connections, but it can be argued they can sit on that deal until Arsenal cave; Sanchez is another example.

I realise it's early days to be talking about the success of our transfer dealings, but it's more to guage people's thoughts on *how* we've acquired those players and - it seems that we replicate the same approach for every transfer - whether this would be sufficient when we are battling for a signature.

The accusation of being slow, is more so the dragged out nature of the transfer. It's never a breaking story that we've agreed a fee and they are coming in for negotiations (other than Carroll, but I think that's an exception to the rule), it's always we've bid and two weeks later we are haggling and three weeks later, we've scheduled a medical. Whilst it's great that we seem to be doing things properly (agreeing a fee, medical, discuss terms with a few photo's to boot), we do seem to dwindle.

[Muddled]

The essence I got from the original post is that we identify targets, concentrate on them and seemingly get them. Sounds ok to me.

I'll worry when these players turn out to be duds next season, until then I'm happy with how things are panning out. At least we have a pot to piss in.

It sounds ok when it's said like that .

But if we take the Wickham transfer, we didn't get our man. What if that happens next year on a grander scale - all because we were slow and or stubborn?

I'm not attacking the players we've bought, I'm happy with our summer so far. Neither am I attacking FSG, I think it's great to see money being splashed about, but in a controlled way - it's more about how we operate in the transfer market and people's take on Comolli.

[Exiled_red]

The essence I got from the original post is that we identify targets, concentrate on them and seemingly get them. Sounds ok to me.

I'll worry when these players turn out to be duds next season, until then I'm happy with how things are panning out. At least we have a pot to piss in.

[Exiled_red]

It sounds ok when it's said like that .

But if we take the Wickham transfer, we didn't get our man. What if that happens next year on a grander scale - all because we were slow and or stubborn?

I'm not attacking the players we've bought, I'm happy with our summer so far. Neither am I attacking FSG, I think it's great to see money being splashed about, but in a controlled way - it's more about how we operate in the transfer market and people's take on Comolli.

The key thing in negotiations is being prepared to walk away. The skill is in knowing at what point you are prepared to walk away. The reason we walked away from the Wickham deal presumably is beacuse we didn't believe that it represented value for money, it was too much of a risk. I don't believe this was because we were too slow, and personally I don't believe that it's stubborn not to go over your limits.

[Chrono]

It sounds ok when it's said like that .

But if we take the Wickham transfer, we didn't get our man. What if that happens next year on a grander scale - all because we were slow and or stubborn?

I'm not attacking the players we've bought, I'm happy with our summer so far. Neither am I attacking FSG, I think it's great to see money being splashed about, but in a controlled way - it's more about how we operate in the transfer market and people's take on Comolli.

I think it very much depends on Comolli's project.

Harry: I want you to monitor rivals and put a bid in for all their targets without really concetrating on any particular player and I want 18 players by the end of the week.

Current: Ok, no CL and rivals strengthening, cut out the fanciful signings and get me X, Y and Z whilst monitoring A, B and C and keep the youth recruitment going.

Next: Right, we got in the CL and we now have a strong squad with a good core so let's start putting the icing on the cake. I want anyone that only has one name, comes from South America or Est1892 recommend as a good Football Manager signing.

[Exiled_red]

I think it very much depends on Comolli's project.

Harry: I want you to monitor rivals and put a bid in for all their targets without really concetrating on any particular player and I want 18 players by the end of the week.

Current: Ok, no CL and rivals strengthening, cut out the fanciful signings and get me X, Y and Z whilst monitoring A, B and C and keep the youth recruitment going.

Next: Right, we got in the CL and we now have a strong squad with a good core so let's start putting the icing on the cake. I want anyone that only has one name, comes from South America or Est1892 recommend as a good Football Manager signing.

[Chrono]

And by god someone put £10m in to the women's team!

[RedReet]

True, there is a lot of assumption in there! From what you have seen, would you be confident in us approaching - for example - Hazard next season, with Champions League football secured? Do you think Comolli would stick in a bid of £10m, then sit on it and play hard-ball? What's your gut feeling about the way our transfer dealings have happpened so far?

Next year we could be battling with the big-guns to secure a signature, meaning we have to juggling many deals and move swiftly, I'm not confident Comolli can do that.

I suppose another thing to question, would be Comolli's hit and miss ratio in the transfer market. He's been stuck on this pedestal and I'm not quite sure why.

I have absolutely no idea how Comolli would enter negotiations for any player next year and have no idea if he just has carte blanche to negotiate how he feels fit or if it’s discussed at length with the board and Kenny.

My gut feeling about the transfers so far is that they’ve been a success. As has already been mentioned, we seemed to have identified our targets and by and large got them. If you believe the press and think we lost out on Young and Jones, can the club (or Comolli) really be blamed when in competition with United? If that’s the case then they deserve great credit for getting Henderson ahead of them and to a lesser extent Adam. There was also major interest in Carroll and our decisiveness there brought him to Anfield. Of our other perceived missed targets, Clichy said he wanted CL football (and more money) and the club were right to walk away from Wickham at £10m when he hasn’t kicked a football in the PL and hardly set the Championship alight, despite a few flashes of brilliance.

The obsession with our transfer activity this summer has been mind boggling. Fans were moaning before the window was even officially opened and that was despite us being one of the few clubs to make a signing. I admit the players signed probably wouldn’t have been my first choice, but I don’t see how the club (or Comolli) can basically be accused of incompetence before we’ve even finished our dealings and before a ball has even been kicked by any of our signings.

[Muddled]

The key thing in negotiations is being prepared to walk away. The skill is in knowing at what point you are prepared to walk away. The reason we walked away from the Wickham deal presumably is beacuse we didn't believe that it represented value for money, it was too much of a risk. I don't believe this was because we were too slow, and personally I don't believe that it's stubborn not to go over your limits.

Yeah, I can accept we might have a ceiling price - an amount we won't go over, but my take on the Wickham transfer is that we would have gone that little bit extra if we didn't get so cocky. I don't think we were too far from agreeing a fee, from memory, maybe £1m off - if the fee was poles apart, than yeah, I agree, you have to limits and stick to them, but I think when it comes down to a little bit extra to secure a player we had identified as the future of this club, then we would have paid it.

I think the transfer failed because we got too big for our boots; we belived Wickham wanted to come to Liverpool. However, Wickham got cold feet and when we didn't seem to value him, he got worried he was going to be left in limbo.

This tactic worked with Adam, we knew he wouldn't go anywhere else, so we dragged our feet, but we were playing with a teenagers future here and Wickham made the decision to go to Sunderland. We can't take that risk with another upcoming player next year, I just hope we learn from these lessons and not become rigid in our approach.

[RedReet]

Yeah, I can accept we might have a ceiling price - an amount we won't go over, but my take on the Wickham transfer is that we would have gone that little bit extra if we didn't get so cocky. I don't think we were too far from agreeing a fee, from memory, maybe £1m off - if the fee was poles apart, than yeah, I agree, you have to limits and stick to them, but I think when it comes down to a little bit extra to secure a player we had identified as the future of this club, then we would have paid it.

I think the transfer failed because we got too big for our boots; we belived Wickham wanted to come to Liverpool. However, Wickham got cold feet and when we didn't seem to value him, he got worried he was going to be left in limbo.

This tactic worked with Adam, we knew he wouldn't go anywhere else, so we dragged our feet, but we were playing with a teenagers future here and Wickham made the decision to go to Sunderland. We can't take that risk with another upcoming player next year, I just hope we learn from these lessons and not become rigid in our approach.

Who’s to say that isn’t what we did for Henderson and Downing which has also drawn criticism from all quarters?