Deuce Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2216988/Liverpool-want-7m-Newcastle-hitman-Demba-Ba-attack.html Wahey! Ahhhh. Now I feel coordinated and everything makes sense again! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 We were linked to Son in the summer but hamburg wanted 15m or something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Why would he go there now Well they pay better, regardless of their prospects. Liverpool are short of a striker, so there could be something in this. If so, don't expect Demba to be putting his body on the line for us between now and January. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Away Toon Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Linked with Hooper in the Sunday rags. Liverpool as well. Maybe Hooper could play with Cisse, we know Ba can't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Linked with Hooper in the Sunday rags. Liverpool as well. Maybe Hooper could play with Cisse, we know Ba can't. Maybe Hooper could play with Ba? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Would take Hooper, provided we don't pay an absolutely mental fee for him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcQuillan Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Would take Hooper, provided we don't pay an absolutely mental fee for him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Not sure about Hooper. Seems like a gamble on a cheaper striker in the hope he can step up rather spending a bit extra on the real McCoy. We had a good run of buying cheap and getting gems but when I look at our recent purchases (Cisse aside) I just wonder if its beginning to see saw back the other way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Not sure about Hooper. Seems like a gamble on a cheaper striker in the hope he can step up rather spending a bit extra on the real McCoy. We had a good run of buying cheap and getting gems but when I look at our recent purchases (Cisse aside) I just wonder if its beginning to see saw back the other way. Who? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Not sure about Hooper. Seems like a gamble on a cheaper striker in the hope he can step up rather spending a bit extra on the real McCoy. We had a good run of buying cheap and getting gems but when I look at our recent purchases (Cisse aside) I just wonder if its beginning to see saw back the other way. Who? Huh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Sorry maybe I misunderstood, you said 'We had a good run of buying cheap and getting gems but when I look at our recent purchases (Cisse aside) I just wonder if its beginning to see saw back the other way. ' I assumed you meant we had bought some poor players/weren't getting value for money so was wondering who you meant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Doubt it's even true, we don't buy english. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I just think that our run of spending relative pennies on players or exploiitng contract loopholes and them coming good was great but it's difficult to see it lasting. I see Ba, Cabaye, Tiote, HBA and Cisse as examples of that. However I also consider the likes of Gosling, Marveaux and maybe even Anita (early days) to show that's its not the wonderful transfer system we sometimes think it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 We need a target man anyway, I don't think that is Hooper. I wasn't in favour of bringing Carroll back in the summer, but with Pardews style it has become obvious we need someone like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I just think that our run of spending relative pennies on players or exploiitng contract loopholes and them coming good was great but it's difficult to see it lasting. I see Ba, Cabaye, Tiote, HBA and Cisse as examples of that. However I also consider the likes of Gosling, Marveaux and maybe even Anita (early days) to show that's its not the wonderful transfer system we sometimes think it is. Still think it's early days for all 3 who must have less than 50 games (?) between them. It's not infallible though and does hold us back I agree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I advocated bringing AC back. Our forward line is talented but there's very little muscle up there and if we insist on playing the way we are, then someone with strength is required. I've mentioned it in another thread, but I'm concerned that Cisse and Ba will get bashed by Sunderland's brawny defenders on Sunday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I just think that our run of spending relative pennies on players or exploiitng contract loopholes and them coming good was great but it's difficult to see it lasting. I see Ba, Cabaye, Tiote, HBA and Cisse as examples of that. However I also consider the likes of Gosling, Marveaux and maybe even Anita (early days) to show that's its not the wonderful transfer system we sometimes think it is. Still think it's early days for all 3 who must have less than 50 games (?) between them. It's not infallible though and does hold us back I agree. Gosling looks such a generally limited player, I don't think he'll ever make it. Marveaux has been hit with injuries but has not looked suited to the PL in his granted limited showings. Anita meanwhile, I'm convinced we signed him due to his jack-of-all-trades nature. We thought we were getting 3 players for the price of 1. Will he excel in any position? I'm not sure and again looks a neat and tidy rather than a player who will take us forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I just think that our run of spending relative pennies on players or exploiitng contract loopholes and them coming good was great but it's difficult to see it lasting. I see Ba, Cabaye, Tiote, HBA and Cisse as examples of that. However I also consider the likes of Gosling, Marveaux and maybe even Anita (early days) to show that's its not the wonderful transfer system we sometimes think it is. Anita isn't spending pennies or exploiting loopholes. He was under contract for a good amount of time at Ajax and cost the club seven million pounds. Unless, I am forgetting someone, he is the third most expensive player in our squad. As with Cisse, we spent a relatively high amount for a player they truly coveted. It's far too early to be writing Anita off anyway, and even Marveaux hasn't had any sort of chance to prove himself (assuming the injury was an isolated incident and he isn't broken). You just can't judge players based on how they "look" their first few games in a new team and especially a new league. For example, I remember laughing at how poor Ramires was during his first season in England. Even Santon was a liability at times for the first half of last season. The transfer philosophy we have isn't going anywhere. It isn't perfect at all, but it has worked better than most, and is very efficient. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I'm not sure it's "very efficient" tbh. Efficiency would have seen us correctly address the squad weaknesses over the summer rather than buying another defensive midfielder. That may have put us in a position where we were not having to rely on players like Mike Williamson week after week. We buy players who represent a safe option and who wont lose value rather than buying the players we actually need to push the club on. I don't think there's anything efficient in such a strategy at all if I'm perfectly honest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I'm not sure it's "very efficient" tbh. Efficiency would have seen us correctly address the squad weaknesses over the summer rather than buying another defensive midfielder. That may have put us in a position where we were not having to rely on players like Mike Williamson week after week. We buy players who represent a safe option and who wont lose value rather than buying the players we actually need to push the club on. I don't think there's anything efficient in such a strategy at all if I'm perfectly honest. We went from the Championship (their fault) to fighting for a champions league place on the last day of the season, leapfrogging a lot of good teams in the process. That is fair progress for me. The policy failed this summer, without doubt, but to claim we haven't progressed is wrong imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 We're fortunate to have a good scout who had a very good run, but my worry is that eventually if we continue to look for cheap or safe options, we'll end up treading water or declining. We already have displayed signs of clearly slipping back this season and for me that's a direct consequence of the transfer policy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 Considering we have brought in 9m more than we have spent over the last 5 years, with Arsenal the only team who have spent less i'd argue what we do is very efficient actually. When you consider our net spend over the last few years we have no right to be contending european spots tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I have concerns but I am far from panicking. I have faith we will continue to improve despite one bad window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 When you consider what we've done with a profit, it's maddening that a little bit more sensible expenditure could have us challenging for the CL. Instead, we have slipped behind Everton. A traditionally selling club who at least this time chose to spend the money they received for their big summer sale. The policy is by no means terrible, yet it remains ultimately unambitious. As a result whilst it took us to the heights of 5th, it will be for the same reason why we don't match or better that season in the immediate years to come. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts