Harvey Barnes

[Bimpy474]

1 minute ago, Max Cherry said:

It was mentioned at some point in the near future we will have to sell Bruno/Isak if someone came in with 100 million. 

Are you being a bit pedantic like ?  I'm looking back and i can't find a post that says we will have to sell for no real reason in the near future (apologises if i've missed it). Looks to me like people are describing a plethora of decisions that we might sell in the future, a player wants to move for a new challenge, our manager falls out with a player, or we get an offer we can't refuse, and that money goes back into the team to reinvest, to evolve etc.

 

Personally I'm of the opinion that we're all over thinking things as we see a fantastic future, one rather alien to us for such a long time so we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves. I myself would rather live in the moment and not look too far ahead, it's been so so long waiting to finally enjoy the football club again, I'm going to do that for a bit like.

[Max Cherry]

1 minute ago, Bimpy474 said:

Are you being a bit pedantic like ?  I'm looking back and i can't find a post that says we will have to sell for no real reason in the near future (apologises if i've missed it). Looks to me like people are describing a plethora of decisions that we might sell in the future, a player wants to move for a new challenge, our manager falls out with a player, or we get an offer we can't refuse, and that money goes back into the team to reinvest, to evolve etc.

 

Personally I'm of the opinion that we're all over thinking things as we see a fantastic future, one rather alien to us for such a long time so we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves. I myself would rather live in the moment and not look too far ahead, it's been so so long waiting to finally enjoy the football club again, I'm going to do that for a bit like.

No mate I'm just saying we should never be in business to sell our top players, unless it's someone who wants to move to Real Madrid as it's lifelong dream etc. It was suggested it's an inevitability that one day we'll have to sell Bruno/Isak for 100 million, I disagreed. 

[Matt1892]

2 minutes ago, Max Cherry said:

You're not going to catch up by selling your top players either, and then gambling on re-investing the money on players that might not work. You keep your best players, try and be smart in the transfer window alongside FFP, invest in youth development and have a well coached team. 

 

 

 

I agree with the likes of Bruno and Isak, the bigger concern with those players is that we don’t push on and they want to leave for a more ambitious club, which will potentially happen if the likes of Chelsea, Spurs and Liverpool overtake us as we have our hands tied.

[Max Cherry]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

I agree with the likes of Bruno and Isak, the bigger concern with those players is that we don’t push on and they want to leave for a more ambitious club, which will potentially happen if the likes of Chelsea, Spurs and Liverpool overtake us as we have our hands tied.

Agreed. Bruno, Isak, Botman etc are off limits in my eyes. 

[Bimpy474]

8 minutes ago, Max Cherry said:

No mate I'm just saying we should never be in business to sell our top players, unless it's someone who wants to move to Real Madrid as it's lifelong dream etc. It was suggested it's an inevitability that one day we'll have to sell Bruno/Isak for 100 million, I disagreed. 

 

Fair point, i don't think we'll be in the business of selling our best players as a tactic say, which seems to be the thrust of the conversation. However at some point we will sell one of our better players, every club does even the biggest. Now if that's because of an offer so good you can't turn it down, as disappointing as that will be you know this club will now put that money back into the team. Or for the players dream move as you've mentioned.

 

I suppose Andy Cole being a good example of where KK saw that opportunity to sell to evolve, obviously things are a tad different now but the crux of it is along those lines for me, selling for a reason, and for us in the coming years that we'll be our evolution imo.

 

 

Edited July 11, 2023 by Bimpy474

[Shearergol]

Liverpool didn't have to sell the likes of Salah because they could sell some random youngsters to Sheff United for £24m. Hopefully in a few years we'll be in the same position.

[Guest]

Bobby Clarke to liverpool £1m 

[TRon]

34 minutes ago, Max Cherry said:

It was mentioned at some point in the near future we will have to sell Bruno/Isak if someone came in with 100 million. 

 

It was one poster @Cookie1892

 

 

[Cookie1892]

30 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Man City, Arsenal, Liverpool, Man Utd and Chelsea have all regularly traded players.  The idea that we’ll not is unlikely.  It’s also likely that due to FFP constraints we would be more willing to offload players for serious profit in the next few years.

 

The problem isn’t selling players - even your current best ones - it’s having an ownership which wouldn’t want to replace them ambitiously.   If Bruno or Isak were sold it would be because everyone at the club think it is the best move for the club, not their bank balance.  This isn’t Ashley’s NUFC.  But sponsorships and commercials will take years to catch up with the current ‘big boys’. 

 

this is what i was trying to say Re Bruno and Isak but you have done it in much better England

[TheBrownBottle]

4 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

It was one poster @Cookie1892

 

 

Tbf Cookie wasn’t saying that we have to sell - more that it’s probable that we will sell at some point.  Which I think is true to an extent - though I think if Isak continues in the same vein as last season we’d be asking for more than double what we paid

[The Prophet]

6 minutes ago, LFEE said:

They did a few posts earlier. I’d also argue Wilson, Almiron and ASM fall in to that category also. Wilson is out top scorer and we missed him badly when “injured/missing for domestic reasons”. Almiron was our second top scorer and again was a big miss when he was out the team. ASM is still our best winger either side. You can argue he had a poor season for fitness last season but when he played he made a big attacking difference.

 

Its far to easy as we sign a few new players to underestimate the importance and quality of these current players. It’s not as if we are discussing shifting the likes of Anderson or Lewis in this window. These guys got us from 19>4 and a Cup Final on teamwork and spirit which is why they will be rewarded by playing in the ECL for their first time.

 

Yes players will be sold in the next few windows as the squad slowly evolves but not that quickly and there is no need to as long as we continue to buy smartly.

 

I guess it depends how tight FFP is and if we see a net gain in trading a player for further wiggle room.

 

Currently, Wilson is an integral part of the squad. A natural goal scorer, who offers a different skill set to Isak and who seems a big personality in the dressing room. With his injury record and a year left on his deal, I can't see us getting a large enough fee to compensate for the goals he contributes.

 

Almiron is an absolute grafter who chipped in with some great goals last year. He's also extremely limited due to being so one-footed. Him and Murphy provide different skill sets, but that position needs upgrading in the not so distant future. He's 29 and in all likelihood won't repeat the goal tally of last season, so if a reasonable bid came in it'd be mad to reject it out of hand.

 

ASM is probably the trickiest one. A unique footballer with great skill and dribbling abilities who carried us for a long time during the dark days. At the same time, whether due to injury or not being compatible with high intensity football, I think it's fair to say he hasn't really kicked on under Howe. I don't think he'll be first choice next season, but he's a fantastic option to have in the squad. Whether he's happy or not with not being an automatic choice isn't really known. It's getting to shit or get off the pot time with his contract too. I think with ASM it'd really depend on the size of the bid, whether we have a replacement lined up (it seems it's Barnes) and what he wants.

[TRon]

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Tbf Cookie wasn’t saying that we have to sell - more that it’s probable that we will sell at some point.  Which I think is true to an extent - though I think if Isak continues in the same vein as last season we’d be asking for more than double what we paid

 

The only way we would sell any of our blue chip players is if they wanted to leave and we got twice what we paid for them. So there's been talk of Barcelona wanting Bruno for example, maybe in a year's time.

 

Any player can move, even Man City have reluctantly let Gundogan go. But there's some players we would consider easier to replace than others, those are the ones we might contemplate selling this season. I would put ASM/Almiron in that bracket. But we'd only do it if we thought we could replace with someone better, so for example, I have a feeling if Howe could swap Maxi for Barnes, he'd do it.

[TheBrownBottle]

2 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

The only way we would sell any of our blue chip players is if they wanted to leave and we got twice what we paid for them. So there's been talk of Barcelona wanting Bruno for example, maybe in a year's time.

 

Any player can move, even Man City have reluctantly let Gundogan go. But there's some players we would consider easier to replace than others, those are the ones we might contemplate selling this season. I would put ASM/Almiron in that bracket. But we'd only do it if we thought we could replace with someone better, so for example, I have a feeling if Howe could swap Maxi for Barnes, he'd do it.

Yeah, I completely agree on all points

[The Prophet]

Back to Barnes. 

 

This is more aimed at Twitter than NO, but I'm finding the whole "you never hear about our deals under Ashworth" or "it's a smokescreen" stuff to be almost a defence mechanism for those that aren't a fan of the player. It was similar with Gordon.

 

The club have definetly locked down leaks and the way they use the local press to spin their narrative is smart, but I don't think they go out of their way to create player specific smokescreens. Barella is the only example of this and was probably a story put to the club that they opportunistically ran with, more than actively planting it.

 

While the club don't talk to reporters anymore, you still have the selling club, the player and numerous third parties involved who may have a vested interest in leaking a story, it's impossible to completely lockdown. Under Ashworth's watch we've had sagas over Botman and Gordon, while we had moves for Ekitike and Maddison made public by Reims and Leicester. It'll vary from transfer to transfer.

 

With Barnes, numerous decent sources have claimed we've agreed terms with the player but not his club. Leicester have an obvious motive for leaking our interest and have previous with Maddison. I'd be amazed if our interest isn't genuine. One thing is for certain though the likes of Downie, Hope, Edwards and Douglas will be the last to find out.

[LFEE]

More of the same…

 

 

[The Prophet]

Rested for the first game of pre-season...

[The College Dropout]

I’ve said it before elsewhere and will say it again. 
 

 

If we are going to fully comply with FFP and not get a bunch of doped sponsors from KSA we will need to sell well. 
 

It’s either going to be loads of promising but not elite youngsters (and you may make mistakes) or top players like Bruno or Isak. I have no problem with that as it will mean we can spend 2-4x the fee received because of FFP. I’ve said it before but Liverpool sold Torres and bought Suarez and later Coutinho with the money. They sold Coutinho and bought Allison and VVD with the money.  Heck we sold Cole and bought Ferdinand with the money. If selling at the right time, at the right place and using our elevated position to sign better younger players I don’t see the problem.  
 

 

I was hoping we would sign more players 18-22 in that Dortmund or RB mould. We might have to sell 1 or 2 wonder kids. But as our revenues and quality increase we can keep the best and sell off those not at the highest level which those clubs don’t do. 

[LFEE]

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I’ve said it before elsewhere and will say it again. 
 

 

If we are going to fully comply with FFP and not get a bunch of doped sponsors from KSA we will need to sell well. 
 

It’s either going to be loads of promising but not elite youngsters (and you may make mistakes) or top players like Bruno or Isak. I have no problem with that as it will mean we can spend 2-4x the fee received because of FFP. I’ve said it before but Liverpool sold Torres and bought Suarez and later Coutinho with the money. They sold Coutinho and bought Allison and VVD with the money.  Heck we sold Cole and bought Ferdinand with the money. If selling at the right time, at the right place and using our elevated position to sign better younger players I don’t see the problem.  
 

 

I was hoping we would sign more players 18-22 in that Dortmund or RB mould. We might have to sell 1 or 2 wonder kids. But as our revenues and quality increase we can keep the best and sell off those not at the highest level which those clubs don’t do. 

I agree with your point overall but let’s be honest the Torres and Coutinho fees/deals were absolute gift horses for LFC. Both players had already peaked and were on the decline physically and in motivation. If we’ve had the best years we feel from these players and decide to sell most will understand but not for another 4 or more seasons. We’ve only just had one full season with them.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Every club sells players eventually, for all sorts of different reasons. 
 

But talking about selling key players who have come off the best season of their careers after we’ve just become the richest club in the world makes very little sense to me. 

[Manxst]

10 minutes ago, LFEE said:

I agree with your point overall but let’s be honest the Torres and Coutinho fees/deals were absolute gift horses for LFC. Both players had already peaked and were on the decline physically and in motivation. If we’ve had the best years we feel from these players and decide to sell most will understand but not for another 4 or more seasons. We’ve only just had one full season with them.

Torres peaked at Liverpool, and was why he joined for a club record fee and then left them for a British record fee and the highest fee for a Spanish player.
 

according to Wiki: “He was also the first player since Robbie Fowler in the 1995–96 season to score more than 20 league goals in a season. The most prolific goalscoring spell of his career, he became the fastest player in Liverpool history to score 50 league goals”. There’s no way he had peaked and was on the decline, either physically or mentally. 

[Skeletor]

The Man City model is the correct one to follow. Either selling youngsters or players who are on the way down. They never sell their best players. At present that would be ASM.

[TRon]

2 minutes ago, Skeletor said:

The Man City model is the correct one to follow. Either selling youngsters or players who are on the way down. They never sell their best players. At present that would be ASM.

 

You only sell a player if you can buy someone better. Hence City sold Gabriel Jesus because they were getting Haaland. So for us to sell ASM we would need to buy someone who Howe considers better.

[LFEE]

21 minutes ago, Manxst said:

Torres peaked at Liverpool, and was why he joined for a club record fee and then left them for a British record fee and the highest fee for a Spanish player.
 

according to Wiki: “He was also the first player since Robbie Fowler in the 1995–96 season to score more than 20 league goals in a season. The most prolific goalscoring spell of his career, he became the fastest player in Liverpool history to score 50 league goals”. There’s no way he had peaked and was on the decline, either physically or mentally. 

I said he peaked at Liverpool. I also said his decline had started. He had trophies aside a very average at best spell at Chelsea. He’d lost a yard of pace just before leaving Liverpool and his physicality was on the decline. Along came the mega money at Chelsea and his motivation started to drop as he showed less effort and fight on the pitch. Probably frustration knowing he couldn’t glide past players like he could when he first joined Liverpool.

 

The reason it was a record fee was partly due to Roman being obsessed with him and Liverpool preferring to not sell to a rival. The fee was also set at £20m + whatever the Carroll fee was going to cost them from us (£35m) as they had Suarez lined up for £20m.
 

Wiki can say what it wants and if you re-read your quote it doesn’t contradict anything I said. I know what I saw. Liverpool absolutely sold him at the right time ?

 

 

Edited July 11, 2023 by LFEE

[cubaricho]

1 hour ago, Skeletor said:

The Man City model is the correct one to follow. Either selling youngsters or players who are on the way down. They never sell their best players. At present that would be ASM.

The part of the Man City model we need to follow first, before we start selling because someone better is coming in, is the part where everyone on their bench walks into any other squad in the Prem. We need a squad. 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2023 by cubaricho

[Viana]

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

I’ve said it before elsewhere and will say it again. 
 

 

If we are going to fully comply with FFP and not get a bunch of doped sponsors from KSA we will need to sell well. 
 

It’s either going to be loads of promising but not elite youngsters (and you may make mistakes) or top players like Bruno or Isak. I have no problem with that as it will mean we can spend 2-4x the fee received because of FFP. I’ve said it before but Liverpool sold Torres and bought Suarez and later Coutinho with the money. They sold Coutinho and bought Allison and VVD with the money.  Heck we sold Cole and bought Ferdinand with the money. If selling at the right time, at the right place and using our elevated position to sign better younger players I don’t see the problem.  
 

 

I was hoping we would sign more players 18-22 in that Dortmund or RB mould. We might have to sell 1 or 2 wonder kids. But as our revenues and quality increase we can keep the best and sell off those not at the highest level which those clubs don’t do. 

It wouldn't surprise me if the club are actively watching Man City's 115 charges with a view to adapting their own approach. If City basically get a slap on the wrist it's one thing, but if there's a genuine threat of demotion/expulsion then they won't want to follow suit.