Liverpool FC Official Thread

That's arguably the best time to have hard games, never understood why people complain about it. You also don't have any European football and with the FA Cup starting in January you'll only have those league games with a few LC games.

You have a patch just before Christmas and one at the end that are runs of about 9 games that are very, very favourable. Again, I'd arguably say those are the best times to get those types of easy games.

If I was a Liverpool fan I'd be pretty pleased with that.

It didn't work out very well for Rodgers last season.

Your start last season was not a hard one. And as the season proved you did badly because you were inherently a shit team, not because the fixtures didn't fall kindly.

It was pretty hard.

Our first 7 away games were Stoke, Arsenal, Man United, Everton, Spurs, Chelsea, Man City.

Those were apart of your first 13 games of the season. That's over a 3rd of the season. Not what you'd class as the "first few games".

Not sure how they were apart of our first 13 games

Your list stretches up until Man City away which was on the 21st of November and was your 13th league game of the season. You didn't just play 7 straight away games, you played home games in-between as well.

Yeah, still doesn't explain how they were apart of our first 13 games.

Analyzing the fixture list is always the most boring thing done every summer.

Scott_LFC wrote:Well, I'm sorry, but Mascherano, Keane and Sturridge all felt like relatively big signings to me when they happened. Benteke didn't. Firmino did (forgot about him). Carroll didn't. Suarez did. Lallana didn't. Balotelli did.

I suspect that hindsight is affecting how you view these players.  I would probably even classify Benteke and Carroll as bigger names than Sturridge when we signed them.

I was definitely hyped about Sturridge at the time and saw it as a pretty big signing compared to Carroll and Benteke, who I'd liken to how signing Lallana made me feel.

I didn't know you back then so this doesn't necessarily apply to you, but a lot of Liverpool fans were very excited/hyped by the Suarez-Carroll combo. It probably came with the territory of that new owners, new players, new era type excitement but I didn't see as much of that with Sturridge.

I remember it the same way.  Carroll was supposed to symbolize a return to the glory days with Dalglish as manager and a core of talented British players.

I have been reflecting and do feel that Suarez does constitute being named a big name signing, regardless of his criminal issues.

I'm pretty excited about Markovic and Luis Alberto coming back. I really hope we don't sell them. Always thought Alberto was super smooth on the ball and was disappointed with the lack of playing time he got and I still have high hopes for Markovic, especially under Klopp. I really hope he impresses him during pre-season.

Best thing ever though, would be Klopp turning Balotelli into a WC forward, but lol.

So, is Mane actually a good signing or not?

I assume he'd replace Lallana in the first 11? Although Lallana seems to be a Klopp favourite? But who else is he gonna replace? Firmino/Coutinho? Surely not.


?

He's expensive and inconsistent, but he'll be one of our best signings in years.

In terms of ability I'd say he's at a similar level to Lallana - ranging from excellent some games, terrible others, then decent in a vast majority but unfairly overlooked/scrutinised. But the key difference is he fits the side far better than Lallana did when he signed. Or still does, for that matter. An absurdly fast, hard-working forward who can score goals.

Mane medical today, apparently. Still not sure how I feel about this one. We're crying out for a quick wide man, but.. eh, idk.

Hopefully he's good.

£34million for Mané would have made our bid for Vardy seem like a complete bargain. Clubs like you are the reason why prices are so inflated for non-elite players. Can't attract the top, top players but you spend big anyway for the sake of it.

I'd honestly prefer Mane to Vardy and there's a huge age difference there too. If Vardy didn't have a release clause, the figure would be similar to Mane, imo, especially when you consider Watford are rejecting £25 million for Deeny.

You paid £30 million for Xhaka and don't even pretend he's a "top, top player". United paid a huge sum for Martial, who Mane has beat on almost every stat for last season (quickly looked at pass success, key passes, goals scored, assists, etc and Mane came out on top on all)

United also spent £30 million on Bailly.

I still don't think Mane is that great a signing, but what you said is rubbish tbh. Other teams are spending similar amounts on similar-tier players.

Scott_LFC wrote:I'd honestly prefer Mane to Vardy and there's a huge age difference there too. If Vardy didn't have a release clause, the figure would be similar to Mane, imo, especially when you consider Watford are rejecting £25 million for Deeny.

You paid £30 million for Xhaka and don't even pretend he's a "top, top player". United paid a huge sum for Martial, who Mane has beat on almost every stat for last season (quickly looked at pass success, key passes, goals scored, assists, etc and Mane came out on top on all)

United also spent £30 million on Bailly.

I still don't think Mane is that great a signing, but what you said is rubbish tbh. Other teams are spending similar amounts on similar-tier players.

Leicester and to an extent Watford are irresponsible retards as well. In a sane world Deeney would be worth £10million and even then people would laugh at how high the price is. If you're actually using Leicester as a measuring stick for pulling power than lol.

I can see positives and negatives for both Mane and Vardy. I actually think/thought the Vardy deal was shit, but at the end of the day for me the Vardy deal still suits our mandate better than the Mane deal suits Liverpool.

Xhaka is not a "top, top player" but cost £25million that will (almost definitely) rise to £30million. (Apparently) Your fee for Mane could rise to £36million but you're still paying £34million upfront regardless. That's a pretty major difference. Xhaka isn't a bargain by any means, but that's definitely market value for a young, CL experienced player that has been consistently ranked amongst the best midfielders in the Bundesliga. Look at it this way, I'd be OK if Xhaka just kept his current level and never improved, that would still make it a good deal. Would you be happy paying £36million if Mane played for you the same way he's played for Southampton?  

Sanchez cost £30million, £6million less than Mane. Ozil cost £42million, £6million more than Mane. Fabregas cost £30million, £6million less than Mane. Costa cost £32million, £4million less than Mane. Mkhitaryan is about to cost United £23million, £13million less than Mane. It's a long list. Good deals are out there, but it looks like these players don't want to come to you so instead you're slinging serious money on inferior players. I personally don't think Mane is a good player and isn't worth anywhere near that amount. But he's got age on his side and maybe Klopp can improve him so I could very well be proven wrong in the future. I thought Ozil would be out of this world and he didn't really turn out like that so I'm not immune from making an incorrect judgement.

Everyone laughed at United when they spent that money on Martial and they are still laughing over the money they spent for Bailly, don't worry. But United are in a completely different bracket of club to you, they are being fleeced because they are rich. You're being fleeced because you're desperate and have nowhere else to turn.

Just as a side you note, I'm not sure if you're saying Mane is better than Martial or what? Your comment was a little ambiguous.

You talk about how good deals are out there. We know. We signed Can, Origi, Sturridge, Coutinho, etc, for good amounts. Firmino was expensive but worth it. Who should we have signed instead of Mane? What other similar players are there out there for a cheaper amount? I'd say we got Mane on market value for his position/type, considering what's out there. It's clear Klopp wants a fast wide player who has goals in him and Mane is that, not to mention he's PL proven too, which adds to the price.

You've spent £30 million on a player you honestly don't really need. Xhaka isn't going to make or break your season. He's not going to get you from 2nd to winning the PL. You'd be fine without him, so you can argue that was a bit of a waste of money. You need a striker. Whereas we are crying out for a fast wide player and are addressing it.

Scott_LFC wrote:You talk about how good deals are out there. We know. We signed Can, Origi, Sturridge, Coutinho, etc, for good amounts. Firmino was expensive but worth it. Who should we have signed instead of Mane? What other similar players are there out there for a cheaper amount? I'd say we got Mane on market value for his position/type, considering what's out there. It's clear Klopp wants a fast wide player who has goals in him and Mane is that, not to mention he's PL proven too, which adds to the price.

You've spent £30 million on a player you honestly don't really need. Xhaka isn't going to make or break your season. He's not going to get you from 2nd to winning the PL. You'd be fine without him, so you can argue that was a bit of a waste of money. You need a striker. Whereas we are crying out for a fast wide player and are addressing it.

Good deals for top players. None of the player you listed were players on the same level as the ones I listed and arguably all of them still aren't.

Looool at the bolded part. You do know we've released Arteta and Flamini, right? We literally had only 1 player that could play in that position. You have a variety of attacking options so I'd actually say that's the complete opposite.

I'm hopeful Xhaka will improve us but I'm also hopeful that he isn't going to be the only player we sign because I do agree that just him isn't going to win us the PL. However if he's an example of the type/calibre of player/deal we are targeting for other areas then (again) hopefully we will improve. If £36million for Mane is level you're aiming for then you're continuing your trend of getting ripped-off and finish outside the top 4 in my opinion.

You seemed mildly realistic a few weeks back but now you seem to have reverted back to type in so much as defending an average player because he's what? Expensive? Your only/1st "big" signing? I don't know. Maybe you do actually think this is a good deal. I'd personally be extremely disappointed if I was a Liverpool fan or if Arsenal made this type of deal.

You still haven't pointed out who we should have signed instead that fits the profile Klopp is after.

Well?

£30m for Mane will look like a bargain by the end of the summer.  A tanking pound and increased TV money are going to inflate prices more than we've ever seen before.

Done deal.




If Mane ends up being really good for us/adds consistency to his game, that's a pretty lethal attacking 4.

Hopefully he'll be the upgrade on Sterling we needed.

Scott_LFC wrote:Well?

It's pointless really. Any player I list you'll just strike off, you've already made up your mind that Mane is the best/only option so fair enough.

Nice excuse.