Jump to content

amar19

Members
  • Posts

    611
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by amar19

  1. SM never went back and gave rises to Kane and Sanchez just that people were too quick to think the sky was falling in before the predictions were finished. You make some good points sometimes but you always seem to ruin it by spouting some nonsense rhetoric.

    I do find this review somewhat unusual to be honest. It's very much a scatter graph approaching without very much direction. In the other reviews you had SM review one team at a time. Now it's very much all over the place. We've had Kane rise after they had reviewed his team mates then Arsenal and then Chelsea players.

    I personally think SM is for once taking our views on board. That can only presumably be a good thing.

  2. Do us all a favour and crawl straight back up your beloved Busquets' ass. After all' date=' it seems as if most of your time is being spent there anyway.[/quote']

    Something we both agree on. The debate of a player jumping from 94 to 95 is an understandable one. Constantly clamouring for a rise from 95 to 96 is a nonsensical one.

    Barring Messi and Ronaldo, debating whether a player is 95 or 96 is pointless. The 95 bracket more or less demonstrates world class ability.

  3. Ozil had been awful ' date=' AWFUL! until a little while ago his WC probably saved him his 94 & Pirlo had a not so amazing season but he wasn't awful and won a double and CL finalist yet Ozil remained 94 as should have Pirlo. Pirlo should have stayed 94 until a few months after his mls move then another drop due to the mls rating cap and quality.[/quote']

    Its probably attributed to the fact that Ozil is not over 30. Very lucky to keep a 94 considering his inconsistency post Real Madrid.

  4. his rating has been "accelerated" because he's performing at a world-class level much quicker than Ribery and Robben did. Robben was an injury-prone bottler for YEARS and when Ribery was Neymar's age he was playing for the likes of Ales' date=' Stade Brestois and Metz.

    he got the 92 for winning & starring in the Confederations Cup, yes.

    [b']HOWEVER he got 93 in NOVEMBER 2013.[/b] he had kicked many balls by then and was in fact playing brilliantly for Barcelona. he had won a trophy with his very first goal for the club (in just his second game), he had scored or assisted in many games, including close wins against Valencia and Sevilla, capping the period off by scoring one and assisting another in his debut Clásico - and those were Barcelona's only goals in a 2-1 win.

    so, yeah, he'd done enough to deserve his 93 given his excellent form for one of the biggest clubs in the world, and the fact he had already won the Copa Libertadores, Confederations Cup and had TWO 40+ goal seasons under his belt. also his 39 goals in Europe last season is a total only 5 guys can better (Messi, Cristiano, Zlatan, Jardel, Van Nistelrooy) in the bigger leagues & modern era. he's underrated at 95. he (& Suárez & Busquets) should be on 96.

    Alexis' had a better debut season for Arsenal than Neymar did for Barcelona? of course he did. he's 26. Neymar was 21.

    Alexis absolutely deserves his 94. I agree. travesty he didn't get it.

    and to make matters worse Hazard is gonna get 95, which is absolutely effing preposterous, but there ya go.

    Alexis rising to 94 has happened and I'm sure it's something that both you and I, and a lot of other people agree with !

    Now drawing reference to Neymar I don't really buy the whole your rating is relative to your age argument.

    Neymar in his first season had an above par season at best, does that warrant a 93 ? Not in my book.

    Alexis Sanchez had a better season in 2013/14 than Neymar scored in El Classico and against Atletico Madrid on the final game of the season. Why didn't he deserve a rise ? Now don't say he's too old now, because the last time I checked he's under 30.

    Griezman had a better first season in Atletico than Neymar had in first season with Barcelona. Why didn't he rise to 93 mirroring a Neymar +2 within a few months ?

    Now don't say he's too old now.

    The paradox of age is just used to accelerated hyped up youngsters and it ultimately stops those players from rising even if they have performed well just because they are 30.

    Case and point why did Pirlo drop after featuring for a team that almost won the treble in securing the double ?

    Because he's old right. That makes sense.

  5. Totally agree and if you look at Neymar he rose to whatever rating then after Copa AMERICA which was a month or two later then rose again after the tournament.

    Neymar has literally been carried to 95 having played only 2 full seasons in Europe. I certainly think he warrants a 95 after winning the treble, but you can't deny his rating had been accelerated considerably when you see the likes of Ribery and Robben busting their backsides season after season to reach 95.

    I remember after the confederations cup he was given a +1 to 92. He was then subsequently given a +1 to 93 without even kicking a ball for Barcelona upon signing for Barcelona. Neymar didn't exactly shine in his first year at Barca like Alexis did at Arsenal in his first season in England.

    And considering how Neymar got a +1 after winning the Confederations cup Alexis certainly deserves a rise for winning the Copa America.

  6. Totally agree and if you look at Neymar he rose to whatever rating then after Copa AMERICA which was a month or two later then rose again after the tournament.
    Neymar has literally been carried to 95 having played only 2 full seasons in Europe. I certainly think he warrants a 95 after winning the treble, but you can't deny his rating had been accelerated considerably when you see the likes of Ribery and Robben busting their backsides season after season to reach 95. I remember after the confederations cup he was given a +1 to 92. He was then subsequently given a +1 to 93 without even kicking a ball for Barcelona upon signing for Barcelona. Neymar didn't exactly shine in his first year at Barca like Alexis did at Arsenal in his first season in England. And considering how Neymar got a +1 after winning the Confederations cup Alexis certainly deserves a rise for winning the Copa America.
  7. If he is not rising to 94 it's because HAZARD is going to 94 if HAZARD goes to 95 and Alexis doesn't rise it's a sham.

    Hazard going to 95 because of the domestic double is understandable and very much warranted.

    If Alexis doesn't rise to 94 after the Copa America win it's the biggest rating sham since Pogba not rising.

    The Copa America is the second biggest honour after the World Cup for a South American.

    I personally think Alexis Sanchez is the better player in comparison to Hazard because he offers a more direct goal presence, something which Hazard hasn't really convinced me with apart from scoring penalties.

    If you switch their respective teams I reckon Alexis can easily reach 95 at Chelsea.

    Hazard should be a 95 and Alexis should be 94. I do however think Alexis would literally have to do a Suarez 30 goal season to get a 95 because he's at Arsenal.

  8. Alexis Sanchez not rising +1 to 94 after winning the Copa America is just beyond me. He won the second most prestigious international honour after a WorldCup and still doesn't warrant a +1.

    Funny how international honours mean something when the mighty Spain win a European Championship but yet when the 'underachieving' Chile win a competition which features Brazil, Argentina, Columbia and Uruguay it's not really worth anything of note.

    Alexis Sanchez should rightly be a 94. But whatever, not like the views of this forum are worth anything when SM makes it's rating changes. Very much like predicting the weather.

  9. Thats my point really Im in the business of picking teams to win stuff. I know there are many managers like me. Im not in to farming risers for extra revenue. We need to move away from this. Sure I can pick up a young Stenhousmuir lad with a 72 rating and watch him go to St Mirren for a 78 rating rise and a tidy profit but I know hed never make first team at my club. Theres far too much of this done on a huge scale and its surely not what the game is about.

    But you do realise this is how the transfer market works in reality which has been done for decades ? Most recent example is Chelsea, you do realise De Bruyne and Lukaku were essentially bought, farmed out and sold out for big profit ?. Farming risers is pretty the only way a smaller team can compete with the bigger teams in regards to financial revenue. Do you really think a small team with a 20k stadium can compete with Manchester United boasting the biggest stadium in England ? Your drive for real life realism will pretty rule out smaller clubs from competing which will ultimately establish a monopoly enjoyed by the big clubs. You need to be able to draw the distinction between reality and fiction. If this game was purely based on reality then would you honestly see a third/fourth division team going through the ranks win the league and boast players such as Messi and Ronaldo ? Furthermore your drive for realism will pretty much destroy the desire to create competitive gameworlds. Would you want to see gameworlds only 10 percent full, with only top teams being managed or does a mixture of small teams with room to grow create a more competitive gameworld ?

  10. Do I think if a real life Barcelona that contained Messi' date=' Ronaldo, Luiz Suarez, Sergio Aguero, Karim Benzema, Wayne Rooney, Alexis Sanchez that say Manolo Gabbiadini would sit happily season after season no impact on his standing in the game? Ye Barcelona B is full of full internationals. Sure they want to set the Spanish second division alight. Imagine the bargaining power at contract renewals having scored 8 goals in the Spanish 2nd division. Life must be a beach rotting in Barcelona fringe. Why would any player move?

    Honestly people who bring in real life to justify 250 player squads. All this fantasy football has made some folk lose track of reality.

    [/quote']

    That's exactly the point .This is a game and it's not meant to be absolutely reflective of real life otherwise the game wouldn't be worthwhile. Do you really think anyone would play the game with a calculator in hand and spend only what you earn mirroring Financial FairPlay ? This is fiction. Yes there needs to be balance between real life simulation and at the moment there is a balance in place by player concerns. You either play a player and if you don't he develops a concern. Yes the concerns can be worked around by paying the players off, but it really puts the club in to dire financial straights. As such it's not sustainable and it provides a suffecient remedy to player hogging.

    Furthermore no manager is entitled to sell you a player. There is plenty of talent in a game world to build a competitive team upon. There's countless accounts of managers on this forum building a team from scratch to building a star studded team. If you can't compete for heavy hitters ala a Suarez then look for players who can become the next Suarez. Case and point I picked up Paul Pogba and James Rodrigues 3 years ago for a combined value of 18 million. James being worth 12 and Pogba being worth 6 million. I knew at the time I could not sign a Kaka or a Ozil so I scouted clever and it's worked out in the long run. Both Pogba and James are on the way to becoming 94s respectively within the comming seasons. The point is just because you can't sign a 95 doesn't mean that your experience on SM will be not worth your while. The most rewarding aspect for me is taking a gamble on a prospect and then rising to the top.

  11. This is absolutely spot on and makes excellent points. I do feel kind of bad for Steven as he's the one at the sharp end trying to defend something that no one likes' date=' and lets be fair, there's quite a lot not to like at the moment other than the forum. But as Amar has pointed out, at some point you have to cut your losses and admit you've made a mistake, and that's what I feel SM need to do before it's too late, if it's not already.[/quote']

    It's a shame that for every step that SM takes forward the product ends up going three steps back. The game has big potential but the lack of proper development and coordination just holds it back from going to the next level. All the tools are there in the sandbox for SM to take the product to the next level but it's severe mismanagement which starts from top which hinders it's potential.

    First and foremost I don't want too sound too critical of SM because I want to see the game grow as it will provide a better experience for us all. SM in all honesty has fumbled the blueprint which made the game successful to this date. Yes I do call the game succesful because it wouldn't be in buissness otherwise with so many users.

    The move towards 'Single' player was never going to be a big hit with the online game world. The whole purpose of playing an interactive game is because of the international internet community which forms the game. The 'Multiplayer' which is now what it's called was the founding blueprint of the game. And it was a market which SM was custom built to thrive in. Don't you think if users want a single player experience they would just play Football Manager instead? Which is a far more expansive and detailed game with over a decade in production. SM would be pretty naive to think it would take over that market. The game engine to make such an online 'Single Player' is no where near developed to produce such a worthwhile experience on an internet browser. Were still not even able to have squad numbers on the multiplayer dispite years of requests from internet community. Even Football Manager on a disc still recieved big criticism for the lack of a coherent game engine !

    As such the amount of investment which was spent on the single player could have been used to develop the Multiplayer which could have given rise to a far more developed expansive gaming experience. There's literally tons of ideas which has been suggested by the community yet it goes deaf on ears. Multiplayer is what this game was founded upon and it's quite surprising that SM is deviating from it.

    Instead of soley improving the multiplayer we have two average sub par products and a forum which is in a mess.

  12. Mate if that's the case then why are forums thriving in other gaming communities and I don't mean gaming communities for ps4 ect where people go to report bugs and complain so no it isn't. This forum made the game and people even left the game and continued to use the forum the forum is a huge part of the SM experience and I don't think optimizing it for mobile use is a well thought idea if there's less and less using it there was really no point. Also if your right and it is a sign of the times and numbers are declining rapidly might i add then why not change it back to what it was for the people who do enjoy it?

    There's no match reports there's barely any player ratings threads there's well basically nothing now and everything has been made more difficult well not difficult but tiresome to navigate and keep in touch with people. It looks good but it's not working and you sort of admitted that yourself so what's the plan? I see no reason why it isn't in the best interest to make it easier to navigate and promote the forum more so than a tab on the main screen. You usually see a influx of new members in the summer so why not revert back or i don't know just fix it before it dies completely as this place has become depressing almost to visit.

    11 MEMBERS ONLINE says it all does it not? :(

    I have come to the conclusion that SM don't really give a toss about the view of the community despite claims saying that views of the community are valued by SM.

    Case and point look at all the criticism this new forum layout has recieved. SM are pretty much burying their head in the sand despite the fact that the majority of the forum members have been driven away by the introduction of the new forum.

    There comes a point where you cut your losses and accept that you have errored and in doing so take steps to correct the problem. SM have shown no willingness to even listen to the community and correct the problem by bringing back the old forum layout.

    Why fix something that isn't broken ?

    The forum was absolutely fine and there was no need for change. I used to access the forum on a regular basis from my mobile and had no problem in doing so. As such, I have no idea where the old forum was not 'mobile user friendly' revolution came from.

    I have tweeted SM asking for a possible explanation about if the old forum would be brought back and I recieved no reply.

    Valuing customer feedback right ?

    It's a crying shame that the game made for the people doesn't not even listen to people.

    Shouldn't you have honestly voted within the forum to see if forumers wanted a change with a brief demonstration of the new layout ?

    Furthermore there is a total lack of leadership and accountability within SM.

    If you tweet to SM discussing a possible rating change. SM replies back with the response 'discuss in the forum.'Then when you say to SM look at the views of the forum SM refuses to even aknolwedge the views of the forum. Got told ratings are 'very much subjective'. Then you have particular responses from SM saying that SM Wiki has control over ratings when that's clearly not the case. Common SM. Get your structure right and be more transparent and accountable to your customers. This is a great product and can grow even further but you have to build on what made this game successful... The people ! The people make this game worthwhile both from an economic standpoint and a gaming standpoint. Listen to us !

  13. You should add financial fairplay and a restriction that only allows your clubs total value to be a maximum of 400m. This is a great way to help stop player hogging and I'll also explain on how it can help other teams in the league to strengthen. The player concerns method should be implemented into this idea and an example of that would be if a clubs total value was 500m' date=' the chairman would transfer list a certain amount of your players in order of their value from cheapest to most expensive and then sell those players until your club value is down to 400m or lower. (He shouldn't transfer list the whole team, just enough players that will put your total club value to 400m or just below once all the players have been sold. And goalkeepers shouldn't be transfer listed when using this method.)[/quote']

    I doubt this would even come in to play. The introduction of player concerns has already been met with fierce criticism on the argument that it ruins their experience of building a empire as they are forced to sell players on a regular basis. I do not understand the fixation with player hogging. No manager is entitled to sell you a player to fullfil your gaming expereince. Do you think in real life Barca and Real are forced to sell players because of 'player hogging' because the last time I have checked both of those teams are packed with the worlds best players. Furthermore what incentive does it achieve to stop managers building the team to the highest value possible ? And before you suggest I am managing a super star studded team, I would like to mention the fact that I manage Charlton Athletic and have managed them close to three years now. I have steadily builded my team from the lower division with clever scouting and I have now built the most valuable team in my game world boasting the likes of Neuer, Suarez, Costa, Sanchez, Robben, Fabregas, Kroos, Pogba, Pique, James,Koke, Hummels, Lahm, Alaba to mention a few.

  14. except it's not. it's about the kid himself.

    Pirlo dropped 1' date=' at the end of the season, to 93. Xavi dropped from 96 to 91 in the space of a year. neither was any worse than the other this season. Pirlo disgraced himself especially in the CL semi-finals. they're not favouring Barcelona for damn sure.

    they do seem to have something against Pogba tho. I dunno what. 92 made sense given Serie A's poor level (but then why was De Rossi 94-now 93? he hasn't been good in years, Vidal was garbage for 80% of the season and would have been worth a drop to 93 tbh) but he was BOSS in the champions league this year, especially in the semi-final despite being half-fit.

    I would say Pogba, Vidal & Marchisio should all be 93 rated, and Pirlo should be 91.[/quote']

    The reason why Pirlo has dropped one is due to the discriminating factor of age. Pirlo despite his age has been a key player for Juventus this season barring the latter stages of the CL. Xavi however in my view has differing circumstances to Pirlo. Xavi's role in Barcelona was more of a sub as his place had been taken by Rakatic. Pirlo to his credit still started more games than Xavi this season as Xavi's influence grew less and less. However there is one point that I will agree with you on. Xavi should not have dropped from 96 to 91 within a year. A gradual drop would have been far better particulary when you taken in to consideration Fernando Torres, Kaka and Ronaldinho took an age to drop to 91 and below. But as stated before, Xavi's age meant that he has been fast tracked to 91. I still however believe there is a Bias towards Barcelona. Neymar who was 92 following the confederations cup was immediatly given a 93 prior to kicking a ball for Barcelona !. Yet Pogba who is a well established double winner this season could not seem to get a 92. There is no doubt in my mind that certain teams will always have more favourable ratings. Higher ratings for particulary teams makes it an attractive proposition for purchasing customers. Pogba however remains a mystery IMO. I still think he is not given due credit for his accomplishments due to the fact that many still view him as a hyped up wonderkid. Hes won his 3rd Seria A title and is starter for both club and country. He has tremendous potential for sure, but to say Pogba is not on level of Vidal and Marchisio is idiotic. Pogba and James Rodrigues another player who should be 93 is just another example of SM holding players back because of age. Weather young or old.

  15. so Morata rises to 90 (good) but Pogba... stays?

    Pogba is rated one less than De Rossi.

    De Rossi hasn't played at an elite level years' date=' Pogba is one of the hottest young prospects in world football and has been stormingly good for Juve the last two seasons, including the World Cup and a run to the Champions League Final.

    SMH.[/quote']

    Pogba not rising is perhaps the biggest blunder in this Seria A review. The player has been a central figure to Juventus achieving a double after missing out on a Treble. The fact that Vidal is +2 higher than Pogba is idiotic. Pogba is not a wonderkid who has been hyped up out of nowhere. He is an established starter for both club and country and who has just won his 3rd Seria A title while reaching the Champions League final. When you consider Neymar is a 94 despite playing fewer seasons than Pogba at Juventus it really just underlines the fact that SM is all about team favouritism.

  16. There are numerous factors that make a good Game World. I'm not going to go into them all now as i'm only going to highlight one - manager activity. I believe if you have active managers in a Game World then it helps make it a good one. I don't think there's anything worse than a manager logging in for example once a month just to keep their teams. I think this damages the Game World as the club becomes dead. You can't buy any of their players' date=' you can't interact with their manager, their team gets NMF etc. Therefore we're looking to change the number of days required to log into to a Game World before you lose your club. I'm thinking of 14 days. What's everyone else's view?[/quote']

    I have always been against the 30 day rule as its far too long and makes a game world prone to inactivity. Regular participation in a gameworld is paramount to achieving a healthy competitive game world. While this can be considered an online game, the idea that one can keep a team by logging in once a month is unbelievable. The 30 day rule also voids the need to respond to transfer bids as bids are automatically rejected after 14 days. 14 days is more than enough time to log in and mirrors the time limit to respond to transfer bids. I feel that far too many gameworlds are stagnating because the lack of activity. And speaking of inactivity, if the lack of activity on the forum is anything to go by, the game runs the risk of losing public interest.

  17. Hey everyone would appreciate your opinoun on the following transfer deals.

    Is Mario Gotze worth keeping ?

    He is undoubtly one of my favourite players but has struggled to recapture his dortmund form of 12-13 at at Bayern. Hes stagnated considerably and has had a poor season imo. When you look at Hazard and Neymar Gotze has been left behind in my opinoun.

    I currently have Sanchez Muller Robben Griezman Sterling in Gotze position. Not to mentiom James Rodriguez Koke and Isco who can play on the wing.

    Finally

    Would you consider selling Courtoius for Manuel Neuer ?

    Anyone think Courtous can reach 96 ? Only thing in favour of courtoius is age.

    Cheers everyone

  18. Re: Help With Deal(s) Thread...

    Hey everyone

    Verratti has just risen to 92 and I was considering wheather its worth swapping my Matic + cash for Verratti. Verratti is at external.

    I know Matic will some point get 93 as he is a fixture at Chelsea under Mourinho. However Verratti is just 22 and hes already rated on par with Pogba.

    Does anyone think its worth giving up Matic for Verratti ?

    Cheers everyone.

  19. Re: Official Liverpool Thread

    I am not going to bother. You're telling me my argument is based on opinion and yours facts.

    "And so what If am not a regular poster on this thread ?" - I never said there's anything wrong with not being a regular poster. There's nothing wrong with not posting at all. What I said was you only show up when we have a bad run of results and dissappear after you get absolutely slaughtered by everyone else.

    "I pointed out pre season that Lallana and Markovic are sub average players and there is nothing to suggest that this has been disapproved as we draw near to the end of the season." Tell me how this statement is not one based on opinion. Tell me. I am dying to know. (Not actually).

    Your disappearance argument carries little weight in regards to anything you say. Doesn't take a genuis to figure out that I said both Markovic and Lallana will be flops for Liverpool before the season had started. The guy with the teddy bear was very confident in rebutting my view that Lallana will not be another flop.

    Now according to your logic' date=' had I gave this criticism midway through the season I would have been criticised on the grounds of ' How can you be so short sighted, give them the benefit of a full season ' I have waited a full season and both have done nothing to prove me wrong. So I am criticised for critiquing the players towards the end of the season yet I would also have been criticised for giving me opinoin midway through the season.

    Which one is it ?

    Talking statistics [ Which the Transfer Committee wets it's pajamas over '] what have these two done for Liverpool this season ?

    You know for a fact that our transfer committee is abysmal and our owners are terrible in regards to player recruitment but your letting your pride get in the way of admiting it.

    And for the record Legends such as Aldridge and Jamie Carragher have been very vocal in their criticism of the transfer committee. I'm more inclined to believe Jame Carragher than you, a person who has been at the club under FSG. His insight in to the club is far greater than our own, yet he is drawing the same criticism I am making.

    FSG's Transfer Commiteee, Yes FSG's Transfer committee is the worst blunder since Andy Carrol.

  20. Re: Official Liverpool Thread

    There's a difference between scrutinising the direction of the club and getting so caught up trying to be opionated that you don't see how silly you look to everybody else.

    May I ask you which owners funded the signing of Suarez. Yes he's gone now' date=' but how much profit did we make on him. Okay so perhaps those funds we made weren't allocated as well as they could've been. Is it the owners choosing which players are bought, or are they the ones funding the deals? You talk about the club heading in the wrong direction, yet since they've come in, as our average age has gone down our average league position is higher than the 7th place finishing we had under Benitez and the abomination Hodgson had us in.

    In your previous post you talk about the moneyball tactic not giving us players many players with potential to be great. Emre Can has been one of our better performers at times this season and he's only 21! Okay so he hasn't always been that consistent, but he hasn't even been playing in his natural position. Markovic has struggled, but surely you witnessed him tear apart Sunderland. If that's not 'potential' then what are you expecting from the owners. He's only 21 as well and I'm more than happy to give him the time to find that form again.

    We can talk all day about the moneyball tactic, but you can't say we haven't tried to sign top quality players. Sanchez chose Arsenal over us. Can you blame him? A team that boasts attractive football, much more consistency when it comes to league position in the league, and a manager vastly more experience than Rodgers. We wanted Diego Costa. He was playing for a team in the champions league (at the time we weren't), and he went on to win the league.

    You keep convincing yourself that FSG is the cause of all our problems. You're never on this thread when results are going our way, but as soon as we stutter a bit you think you've got all the answers. You probably wanted us to sign Falcao before the start of this season because he was 'proven quality'. Yeah he's been fantastic. Di Maria? Can't even get into the team ahead of Ashley Young.

    Howabout you run our club you'd be great.

    Thanks.[/quote']

    Im talking upon the basis of fact. Your speaking on the basis of opinion that bears little foundation when taking in to consideration all the facts.

    Did FSG install the transfer committee ?

    Are FSG responsible for allocating a transfer budget?

    Or did the Transfer Committee just appear out of thin air ?

    Of course let me apologise for appearing blasphemous about our owners particularly when this transfer committee has splurged £200 million on transfers since Rodgers has arrived. Its obvious that you have no idea about the concept of accountability and performance. When you have such a high failure rate of the transfer committee it really is like placing a square peg in a round whole.

    Can granted, but Markovic showing potential upon ripping up the mighty Sunderland, particularly when he cost £20 million? Are you serious ? Thats perhaps the most nonsensical statement I have heard so far. Thats taking in to consideration that both Suarez and Depay cost around £22 Million each with both of those players having far superior pedigree than Markovic.

    I guess our well documented failings in the transfer market is all in my head. I guess our so called legends are also deluded who have time and time again called for this transfer committee to be disbanded.

    But your right, I should just bury my head in the sand and dare not question our failures under FSG. Its considered blasphemous to even suggest that they have failed in regards to player recruitment.:rolleyes:

    And so what If am not a regular poster on this thread ? I pointed out pre season that Lallana and Markovic are sub average players and there is nothing to suggest that this has been disapproved as we draw near to the end of the season.

  21. Re: Official Liverpool Thread

    I wouldn't worry about it you never hear from Amar for months then when something goes wrong or we allegedly miss out on a player it is the same routine Everytime about FSG etc....

    Quite frankly I doubt if even 5% of the support would want to see FSG go. With the introduction of FFP it's no good having a rich oil magnate come in if you can only spend what you generate there millions make not a blind bit of difference.

    Increasing revenues is the keys and they have been doing that' date=' once the stadium is complete that's another key and I'm sure our commercial deals will get better and better I have lost count of the amount of commercial partners we have now.[/quote']

    I am not an FSG fan. I am a Liverpool fan. Just as Manchester United fans are not Glazer fans but are Manchester United Fans. We as fans have the right to hold our owners to account. Just as Arsenal fans have been venting their frustration for years due to a lack of ambition over the last few years.

    Your just one of those fans who thinks its Blasphemous to even scrutinise the direction in which our club is going.

    But in your estimation FSG is not responsible for anything. They are not responsible for allocating a transfer budget. They are not responsible for forming a Transfer Committee. They are not responsible for hiring Brendan Rodgers.

    Whether you like it or not the buck stops with the owners. Just as us Liverpool fans hold Hicks and Gillet responsible for the clubs decline, the owners are just as responsible for achieving success at the club.

    You have not raised a single point that provides any sort of support that their money ball approach is working.

  22. Re: Official Liverpool Thread

    Yes' date=' all these players played well at their clubs, that's why they were bought. That's how transfers work. You buy players that are playing well at other clubs. And the players you mentioned were flops, but that's how transfers work, you win some, you lose some. Look at Henderson, he came in from Sunderland. That's a small club isn't it?

    The thing is, you're exactly the same as the people that criticised these approaches when they were first used in the MLB and to an extent nowadays, the NBA and the NFL. I will be the first to say that statistics in football is not as easy to determine as the American sports, but it is important. It is still a useful indicator of the player's abilities, some of which can escape the eye test.

    You do know that Comolli was the one in charge of bringing Luis Suarez and Jordan Henderson in right? Once again, the point stands that everyone makes transfer mistakes. He had a fine CV beforehand, for Spurs, he signed Berbatov, Modric, and Bale.

    The transfer committee has been poor but there is an idea that there is certain oversight to the work of the manager. Yes, I agree it's been poor and that it needs an overhaul, but you cannot blame all of the faults on the transfer committee. We had the choice of a DoF or a transfer committee and went with the latter. Is it the perfect pick? Probably not.

    Thing is, Rodgers' choice of players has not provided me with huge optimism either. He has wanted players like Mkhitaryan, who has been utterly disappointing for Dortmund, and his own signings have not been exemplary either.

    I cannot believe you're clamoring for FSG to leave. That is just absurd. They've been great owners, injected the team with a good amount of cash, finally got work on Anfield started, and are building a young team that oozes potential and it'll take a few years, but have some faith.[/quote']

    Our owners are financially astute owners but there are several question marks in regards to their ambition to compete at the top. Remember the infamous Tom Werner speech ' We have the resources to compete with anybody'. So far the clubs transfer dealings have suggested the contrary.

    Alexis Sanchez, Diego Costa, Willian, Mkhi, Salah, Dempsey, Konoplayanka is just a handful of examples that disproves Tom Werner's proposition that we have the resources to compete with anyone.

    A young team oozing potential ?

    Granted Coutinho and Sterling have the potential to be great, throw in Henderson [Maybe] I cant think of any other player that has the potential to be potentially a great player.

    Furthermore there is no guarantee that this 'Money Ball approach' of signing young players of high resale value will bear any sort of sustained success at the top of the game.

    Granted Dortmund and Atletico have found recent success with a focus on player development with a hard drive for bargain, neither club however is capable of long term success.

    Dortmund despite all their plaudits have been suspect to losing a star player each year. Sahin, Kagawa, Gotze, Lewandowski. Atletico lost crucial players to chelsea despite winning the title.

    At the end of the day even if you are capable of unearthing and developing gems our wage structure will ultimately see those players leave as soon as they reach their prime.

    And for those fans who are debating whether Depay is worth £22 Million remember that our infamous transfer committee spent £20 Million on a player who hasn't even scored 10 goals in Portugal.

  23. Re: Official Liverpool Thread

    Adam Lallana was fantastic last season. He was by far Southampton's best player' date=' and he was in the team of the season, and is a proven player. We did overspend for Lallana, but he is a good player in every right.

    Of course the owners know nothing about football, they own a bloody baseball team. But look at the success he's had at the Red Sox in the dozen years he's owned the team. They've won three World Series (after suffering a 85 year drought) and been one of the best teams in the MLB. The owners know what they're doing.

    And, who else would we have been able to buy anyway? And would you honestly rather have Hicks and Gillett in charge rather than Henry?[/quote']

    Southampton isn't Liverpool by any standard. Didn't Allen shine for Swansea? Didn't Downing shine for Aston Villa ? Didn't Adam shine for Blackpool ? Didn't Carrol shine for Newcastle ?

    My concern regarding the owners is that the owners have no incline of an idea of what it takes to succeed in this sport. Their statistic driven money ball approach has not succeed at all despite it being successful in baseball. Both sports are not comparable in regards to player recruitment and contracts.

    Yes our owners have improved us commercially but the club is still a mess in regards to player recruitment.

    First they insisted on a DOF Damien Commoli working with Kenny. That backfired stupendously and ever since we have used the infamous transfer committee who have brought us only Coutinho Sturridge for over a £100 million spent on transfers.

    Further more there are some deluded Liverpool fans who blame Rodgers when in reality he only represents 1 vote out of a possible 5-6 in the transfer committee. I could understand if members of the transfer committee are coaches but how could you possibly a member of the committee if you have never coached before ? The fact that Ian Ayre a commercial executive is voting on transfers illustrates the incompetency of the hierarchy of the club.

    Either you hand Rodgers control of transfers or you sack him and get someone more experience such as Klopp.

    Chelsea and Manchester United's model is spot on. Manager identifies target and club works towards signing them. Fsg work in accordance to the model that the club finds the players and the manager works with them.

    Under FSG the only marquee signing we have signed is Luis Suarez. Until something changes at the top our transfers success rate is ultimately a scratch card to winning the jackpot.

×
×
  • Create New...