What's new

Painful rebuild

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,385
A recurring theme during our present troubles is criticism of the club for not selling Eriksen sooner. The same probably goes for Toby, Rose and Verts. IMO though, if we'd sold Eriksen 2 years ago there would have been a catastrophic meltdown on here with accusations of 'no ambition' and 'selling club'. In light of the current mood, I'd like to know if people think we should be cashing in on Kane, Dele, Son, Winks etc. now before their contract situations start reducing their values or, are people just being critical now with a huge dollop of hindsight because the situation has bitten us in the arse this time.
 

Johnny J

Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
Aug 18, 2012
18,117
47,878
Our failure to invest for a whole year was a fucking ridiculous decision
 

Gbspurs

Gatekeeper for debates, King of the plonkers
Jan 27, 2011
26,945
61,823
A recurring theme during our present troubles is criticism of the club for not selling Eriksen sooner. The same probably goes for Toby, Rose and Verts. IMO though, if we'd sold Eriksen 2 years ago there would have been a catastrophic meltdown on here with accusations of 'no ambition' and 'selling club'. In light of the current mood, I'd like to know if people think we should be cashing in on Kane, Dele, Son, Winks etc. now before their contract situations start reducing their values or, are people just being critical now with a huge dollop of hindsight because the situation has bitten us in the arse this time.

For me it depends on how early we knew these players wouldn't sign new contacts. There is a differances between losing our best players against our will or selling on our terms. I suspect most fans would understand that it's best for the club to get money for a player than to lose them on a free.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,985
81,902
A recurring theme during our present troubles is criticism of the club for not selling Eriksen sooner. The same probably goes for Toby, Rose and Verts. IMO though, if we'd sold Eriksen 2 years ago there would have been a catastrophic meltdown on here with accusations of 'no ambition' and 'selling club'. In light of the current mood, I'd like to know if people think we should be cashing in on Kane, Dele, Son, Winks etc. now before their contract situations start reducing their values or, are people just being critical now with a huge dollop of hindsight because the situation has bitten us in the arse this time.
I think the key is determining when a player is on the decline.

Many would be against us selling top stars but this wouldn’t make them right.

All I and Winks are nowhere near their decline so should only be sold if the manager seems then not good enough or have an irreversible attitude issue.

Kane is a legend who doesn’t rely on pace so shouldn’t be sold.

Within the next two seasons there might be an argument to sell Son.
 
Last edited:

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,385
For me it depends on how early we knew these players wouldn't sign new contacts. There is a differances between losing our best players against our will or selling on our terms. I suspect most fans would understand that it's best for the club to get money for a player than to lose them on a free.


The problem though is that players hedge their bets by saying they're happy here, want to succeed with us blah blah, but then also have an eye on a lucrative free transfer. Eriksen said he'd probably sign a new contract if the right deal didn't happen in the summer, and, guess what - he lied. We're at the point now with a few of our best players where we were when people are saying we should have cashed in on Eriksen.
 

king26

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2008
1,103
1,490
trouble is eriksen is no longer one of our best players hope he sits in the stands against watford with wanyama and rose
 

rossdapep

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2011
21,904
78,638
He's being tenuously linked to Man Utd, but I cannot fathom how we are expecting to get the right players in without someone like this:

I thought that Steve Hitchen was going to turn out to be taking this sort of role on, so either we're not hearing about it, or it's not happening.


The only issue is that it potentially goes against the "Back the Manager" and "Get who Poch wants" shtick somewhat. I can't really see how the 'Sporting Director' thing works in conjunction with the 'Manager' role - it seems like a paradox, unless they both sing from the same hymn sheet.

I think we need it, though.
Does a club function better when a manager is given total control over things (Wenger, Fergie) or when a club works with a defined role-based system. I personally believe the latter as eventually you get a Wenger situation where his prints are so deeply rooted they are hard to wash out.

Plus I prefer it when a club works under a director of football as they usually find pieces that fit better. Sure, Poch may know what he wants but he won't get the chance to watch countless players making his pool of options smaller.
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2010
54,770
99,327
For those windows were we chose to sit on our heels and not ride the crest of that wave is biting hard now.

If Poch didn't want anything other than unattainable targets thats an oversight on his part.

Or whether Levy felt there was no need, who knows.

The bottom line is a lack of future planning then is coming home to roost now.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,985
81,902
For those windows were we chose to sit on our heels and not ride the crest of that wave is biting hard now.

If Poch didn't want anything other than unattainable targets thats an oversight on his part.

Or whether Levy felt there was no need, who knows.

The bottom line is a lack of future planning then is coming home to roost now.
Think we have to see this as a new beginning. It appears huge focus and time of the club was put onto the stadium.

Completion has come at the time we need a rebuild. The club needs to get this right.
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2010
54,770
99,327
Think we have to see this as a new beginning. It appears huge focus and time of the club was put onto the stadium.

Completion has come at the time we need a rebuild. The club needs to get this right.

Yeah but it's a pity there wasn't a bit more fresh impetus added over the last 18 months, as they would have settled by now.

A rebuild this size could take some time.
 

Gbspurs

Gatekeeper for debates, King of the plonkers
Jan 27, 2011
26,945
61,823
The problem though is that players hedge their bets by saying they're happy here, want to succeed with us blah blah, but then also have an eye on a lucrative free transfer. Eriksen said he'd probably sign a new contract if the right deal didn't happen in the summer, and, guess what - he lied. We're at the point now with a few of our best players where we were when people are saying we should have cashed in on Eriksen.

We should have taken control and offered an ultimatum. Say if he doesn't sign by X time (say 2 years before end of contract) that he will be sold.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,985
81,902
We should have taken control and offered an ultimatum. Say if he doesn't sign by X time (say 2 years before end of contract) that he will be sold.
But we can't force any player to leave. Eriksen wanted to step up to an elite club. If they didn't come in for him then he wouldn't leave.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,985
81,902
Yeah but it's a pity there wasn't a bit more fresh impetus added over the last 18 months, as they would have settled by now.

A rebuild this size could take some time.
I think it is going to be painful. Seeing people's lists and it appears we need a new keeper, a whole new defence, a centre mid, a playmaker and a Kane backup or competition for him.

If we go out and buy 8 new players for the first team then a lot will fail and we will be left with players on long contracts filling up the squad.

It wouldn't be the worst thing if we bought 3 new youngish players next season for the first team then some older players on shorter contracts, stop gap signings essentially, while we look for the right players for the long term.
 
May 17, 2018
11,872
47,993
Does a club function better when a manager is given total control over things (Wenger, Fergie) or when a club works with a defined role-based system. I personally believe the latter as eventually you get a Wenger situation where his prints are so deeply rooted they are hard to wash out.

Plus I prefer it when a club works under a director of football as they usually find pieces that fit better. Sure, Poch may know what he wants but he won't get the chance to watch countless players making his pool of options smaller.

Also, Wenger has rejected pretty much every young player that ever turned out decent it seems, so there's that too!
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,985
81,902
Also, Wenger has rejected pretty much every young player that ever turned out decent it seems, so there's that too!
No idea how true it is but a friend of mine is an Arsenal fan and works as a coach at a low level.

He said years ago the wages went up to youth players which is how they got so many good young players. But the attitude in the club was too relaxed and given their wealth many young players at the club took their eyes off the game and enjoyed the lifestyle more.

This is undoubtedly true to a degree at many clubs but the last several years of Wenger's reign they did appear to stagnate and played with little desire.
 
May 17, 2018
11,872
47,993
No idea how true it is but a friend of mine is an Arsenal fan and works as a coach at a low level.

He said years ago the wages went up to youth players which is how they got so many good young players. But the attitude in the club was too relaxed and given their wealth many young players at the club took their eyes off the game and enjoyed the lifestyle more.

This is undoubtedly true to a degree at many clubs but the last several years of Wenger's reign they did appear to stagnate and played with little desire.

I think that's how most of them go, like Edwards too I read. Too much too young.

I was referring mostly to how he turned down Kane, Messi, Ibra and hundreds of other young players who turned out well though.
 

skaz04nik

Active Member
Oct 14, 2019
124
146
interesting to compare how Liverpool trsnfer strategy evolved under Klopp - something to learn for us

1. Klopp is very selective - he brought almost twice less players vs Rodgers (16 vs 30) in the same # windows

2. Klopp's recruitment for older players is very successful so far - apart from youngsters (age <20), of 13 signings at least 9 I would rate either very successful (Mane, Salah, VVD, Allison, Robertson, maybe Fabinho, maybe Matip) or good (GW, Shakiri); many of those are starting XI now. Keita I think is too early to decide on. Btw that's ~87% of spend (Keita not accounted)

Under Poch we are ok for recruitment efficiency of younger players 21- (some signings great, some poor) - very similar to Rodgers

However we were somewhat poor with older players compared to Klopp . Of our 14 signings aged 22+ (I have dropped TN and GLC as too early to evaluate) I would say only 2 turned very successful (Son, maybe Moura) and 2-3 are good (Toby, Sissoko, maybe Trips); which is btw ~50% of total spend. The remaining 50% poorly spent (Janssen Njie et al)

3. Klopp in Livrpool tends not to invest heavily in relatively young players - the majority of spend goes to age b/w 24-27; no huge sums spent on players aged under 23; no players bought at age 20-22

Rodgers, in comparison, used to target players of all ages; spend spread is not so different per
Our spend pattern per age group per player is very similar to Rodgers
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2004
11,916
16,436
I'm still not sure there was any need for a total rebuild. I think back to the last couple of seasons at the Lane and the overriding feeling was one of "imagine what this lot will be capable of when they hit their collective peak".

The majority of the spine of that team - Hugo, Jan, Toby, Dier, Dele, Eriksen, Kane (plus Son) - are now in the prime years of their careers yet, instead of managing the less than ideal circumstances around a couple of them, a decision seems to have been taken to regress and create much more discord than was necessary. Fair enough, fuck Eriksen off if he can't be arsed anymore, but why disrupt Jan and Toby who were still professionally putting in good performances last season? Why seemingly ostracise Dier? Why try to force Rose out when he was very clearly putting in committed performances at the end of last season? I was in favour of the sale of Walker and accepted that when you sell the best RB in the country any signing will be a downgrade. But why then go on to try to sell the next best RB at the club and his backup when there'd been no indication that either of them wanted to leave (or that we had any replacement(s) lined up)?

What we needed last summer was:
  1. Some well-earned R&R.
  2. A couple of CMs of first XI standard.
  3. 2-3 additional squad options e.g. young full/wing-backs, maybe an AM.
  4. To move on players who were obviously surplus to requirements e.g. Nkoudou, Janssen, arguably Wanyama or who were actively looking to leave (N.B. this is not the same as running down a contract) and keep everyone else together.
Most of that was achieved but "the club" has created the need for much more through some bizarre desire to go back to being a young, hungry, "nearly there" team. That's not the shift in mentality I had expected after moving into the new stadium and reaching a CL final.
 
Top