Carroll`s career so far in Liverpool

[guttierrors 0]

LM is a parody of himself with some of his comments like.

 

quite simply Craig, I don't view hoping NUFC set up their ambitions and try to behave like Liverpool, rather than the likes of Birmingham, Bolton, Blackburn as a parody, a negative or anything of that nature. In fact I think its as positive as its possible to be and if someone tells me to fuck off I'm quite entitled to tell them the same ?

 

Shame this thread has gone in this direction, I still think the whole point of it is nothing more than sour grapes and a refusal to accept the truth of the situation. Carroll has made a good career move, which is why he moved, and he's got a winners medal to show for it and he's playing for a club that NUFC ought be aspiring to be like.

 

As for any "overprice" they paid for Carroll, they also got too much for Torres, and simply re-invested the money. If Carroll moves, they will make a loss but they will still back the manager with the money from the sale. Other players they buy will improve the team and increase in value, swings and roundabouts but at the end of the day, they signal their intent and make themselves an attractive club and increase the chances of more success as a result.

 

It's absolutely staggering that NUFC supporters are mocking such an approach.

This post makes a hell of a lot of sense especially the carroll move, investment of torres cash, cant see how anyone can argue with any of that

[Happy Face 29]

His 5 goals in 30 games is a better return than Torres with 3 in 35.

 

Don't think 1 bad year is the end of either.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

The fact that Liverpool reinvested the Torres money means fuck all really. The point that Leazes doesn't get (why am I getting involved in this...) is that you don't have to spend lavishly to be semi-successful.

 

NUFC fans say Liverpool paid over the odds for some of their players because they're simply not value for money. £35m covers just about all of NUFC's better signings since we were promoted, and as such as we've undoubtedly done the better business.

 

We are higher than them in the table, despite spending a lot, lot less and being a division lower only a couple of years ago. If NUFC sell some of the better players during the window then they can spend pennies on new players for all I care, if they happen to decent replacements. Of course a bigger statement of intent would be to hold on to the better players, and spend wisely (and occasionally significantly, like with Cisse). We'll see what happens in the summer.

 

At the moment we're over-achieving, considering where we were not too long ago. At the start of the season at least we did not share the same aspirations and aims as the likes of Liverpool. So we should not be compared to them so much.

 

 

 

edit; reading that post again, I get the impression Leazes wants us to believe that Carroll left NUFC because we're not as ambitious as they are. As opposed to being offered a silly sum of money that we couldn't really refuse. I can't speak for the guy but I don't believe he was ever forcing a move, before or after Liverpool became interested in him.

Edited February 29, 2012 by Monroe Transfer

[LeazesMag 0]

The fact that Liverpool reinvested the Torres money means fuck all really. The point that Leazes doesn't get (why am I getting involved in this...) is that you don't have to spend lavishly to be semi-successful.

 

NUFC fans say Liverpool paid over the odds for some of their players because they're simply not value for money. £35m covers just about all of NUFC's better signings since we were promoted, and as such as we've undoubtedly done the better business.

 

We are higher than them in the table, despite spending a lot, lot less and being a division lower only a couple of years ago. If NUFC sell some of the better players during the window then they can spend pennies on new players for all I care, if they happen to decent replacements. Of course a bigger statement of intent would be to hold on to the better players, and spend wisely (and occasionally significantly, like with Cisse). We'll see what happens in the summer.

 

At the moment we're over-achieving, considering where we were not too long ago. At the start of the season at least we did not share the same aspirations and aims as the likes of Liverpool. So we should not be compared to them so much.

 

well, as we [or others, not me] thought we had a chance of a champions league place, do you think it could have been achieved if we HAD backed the manager with the entire proceeds of the carroll sale ?

 

Opportunity missed, perhaps ? Will it come again ? Never mind, the money is safe in Mike Ashleys back pocket, hypothetically speaking of course, as it certainly hasn't been available to the manager ?

 

Your first sentence ie the bit in bold, is everything, it says everything about the clubs. I'm not explaining this again.

[LeazesMag 0]

His 5 goals in 30 games is a better return than Torres with 3 in 35.

 

Don't think 1 bad year is the end of either.

 

absolutely not.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Why are you talking in the past tense? We're 3 points off fourth at the moment.

 

I don't understand why you're finding it hard to understand that the club did not set out to get into the top four at the start of the season. It was not a realistic aim back then, so you'd presume they financed things accordingly. The fact that we're in the top six is a credit to the team and staff.

Edited February 29, 2012 by Monroe Transfer

[LeazesMag 0]

Why are talking in the past tense? We're 3 points off fourth at the moment.

 

I don't understand why you're finding it hard to understand that the club did not set out to get into the top four at the start of the season. It was not a realistic aim back then, so you'd presume they financed things accordingly. The fact that we're in the top 6 is a credit to the team and staff.

 

so where is the rest of the cash, and why have they not backed the manager to do even better ?

[Happy Face 29]

i've been saying we are moving in the right direction for 18 months with the respective positions of us and Liverpool currently suggesting this may be the case. I keep coming on here and reading i was wrong though.

 

We are higher than them in the table.

 

 

So being above Liverpool is proof that we're moving in the right direction and you don't have to spend much money to succeed.

 

If we finish below them will it conversely prove that reinvestment pays dividends?

[ewerk 30169]

You don't think that we're moving in the right direction?

[Happy Face 29]

Just looking at who spent what over the summer.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/8691420/Premier-League-ins-and-outs-summer-transfers-2011.html

 

We come in 9th on there with £13.3m. Teams that spent more than us who we're currently outperforming?

 

 

Liverpool £58.1m

Mackems £26.35m

Fulham £16.7m

QPR £13.45m

 

I think it's likely that Liverpool will finish above us.

 

If that happens, the brilliant business we've done, creating a whole new model for transfer dealings, will be predicated on outperforming 3 clubs, only one of which actually spent over £3m more than us.

[ewerk 30169]

Looking at last summer in isolation doesn't make much sense.

[Happy Face 29]

You don't think that we're moving in the right direction?

 

I do.

 

I don't think Liverpools terrible performance up to this point in the season for what they've spent says anything about us though.

[Happy Face 29]

Looking at last summer in isolation doesn't make much sense.

 

Course not, there's much more to it than that, but it's interesting, in a discussion on what spending power can do for you to look at the short term results.

 

Of the ten biggest spending clubs, only 3 remain in the bottom half, Fulham can probably get out of that so only QPR and Villa are bucking the "money makes all the difference" trend.

 

Conversely, from the bottom ten spenders, only Everton, Spurs and Norwich are in the top half. The first 2 had top class squads to start with, so the only one club making a go of it for spending nowt, are Norwich.

[ewerk 30169]

You don't think that we're moving in the right direction?

 

I do.

 

I don't think Liverpools terrible performance up to this point in the season for what they've spent says anything about us though.

 

The initial point about Liverpool was that Leazes claimed that they were progressing simply because they spent a shitload of money, my point was that we have progressed further than they have.

[Happy Face 29]

You don't think that we're moving in the right direction?

 

I do.

 

I don't think Liverpools terrible performance up to this point in the season for what they've spent says anything about us though.

 

The initial point about Liverpool was that Leazes claimed that they were progressing simply because they spent a shitload of money, my point was that we have progressed further than they have.

 

We've progressed and they've regressed. So we've progressed better than them. Whether we progressed 'further' than them remains to be seen. I don't think we will manage it.

 

I was more being a Dick about what liverpools position proves though. Whether we finish above or below them, we've improved on ourselves. They can't say the same. But they are in the position where improving is much harder. Improving on 12th isn't as difficult.

[brummiemag1 0]

The point is that Liverpools approach and ambition will in the long term ensure that they remain a sucessful and trophy winning club. Ashleys zero ambition up until now, will ensure that we don't build on the good season we are having and we don't try and push for the top 4.

 

They may well have overpaid for Carroll and we may finish higher than them this season, but Liverpool's ambition and approach will ensure that that in the longer term they will once again be qualifying for the Champions League and they will continue to win trophies.

 

Our approach of not backing our manager, making a net profit on transfers of over £30 million in 4 years, selling our best players and replacing them with less costly alternatives, (and no doubt we have we have made some shrewd purchases) cannot be sustainable in the long term and it shows Ashley's policy for what it is - don't try to compete at the highest level and realise the massive potential of the club, but do enough to stay in the premier league and recoup as money as possible in the process.

 

If Ashley continues with his current policy and Liverpool with theirs, then in a couple of years time we will be the mid table team and they will be playing Champions League football.

[Tooj 17]

There's fuck all ambitious about spending £16 million on Jordan Henderson. It's sheer lunacy.

[brummiemag1 0]

There's fuck all ambitious about spending £16 million on Jordan Henderson. It's sheer lunacy.

 

Of course it shows ambition - it may well be a poor decision, they have probably paid over the odds and the money could and should have been better spent, but it does without question show ambition

[JawD 99]

What equates to backing your manager? Only if you spend more than you recoup from sales? Just wondering what people think is acceptable and when "backing the manager" starts.

 

For me, I think we have backed Pardew, only not to the amount we would have liked. I think most fans would like to see all money we have spent at once rather than their approach of watching a player for a length of time and waiting longer to get who they want.

 

While they will wait from one window to the next we would rather they swapped target. While I understand their approach, as a fan it is frustrating. Especially considering the approach we grew accustomed to.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

The point is that Liverpools approach and ambition will in the long term ensure that they remain a sucessful and trophy winning club. Ashleys zero ambition up until now, will ensure that we don't build on the good season we are having and we don't try and push for the top 4.

 

You may well be right, but why put so much faith in presumptions?

 

Who knows what the future may bring. Basically giving Ashley stick based on future events that may or or may not happen.

 

For one I didn't see us spending £10m on a player during January. That's certainly a bold, positive move. Of course it's all about building on what you've got though, but I'll worry about that when the season is over.

Edited February 29, 2012 by Monroe Transfer

[ewerk 30169]

There's fuck all ambitious about spending £16 million on Jordan Henderson. It's sheer lunacy.

 

Of course it shows ambition - it may well be a poor decision, they have probably paid over the odds and the money could and should have been better spent, but it does without question show ambition

 

Would you be happy if it were us spending that sort of money on the likes of Henderson?

[JawD 99]

So are we saying there is a fine line between ambition and stupidity?

 

I remember when Shepherd was slated in the papers for saying he paid £13 a shirt and sold them for a huge mark up. I didn't see the issue. Made good business sense for the club. Much like spending fuck all on a £10m rated player, surely it's good business?

[Happy Face 29]

The point is that Liverpools approach and ambition will in the long term ensure that they remain a sucessful and trophy winning club. Ashleys zero ambition up until now, will ensure that we don't build on the good season we are having and we don't try and push for the top 4.

 

You may well be right, but why put so much faith in presumptions?

 

Who knows what the future may bring. Basically giving Ashley stick based on future events that may or or may not happen.

 

For one I didn't see us spending £10m on a player during January. That's certainly a bold, positive move. Of course it's all about building on what you've got though, but I'll worry about that when the season is over.

. Matching stoke by spending £10m on a striker. Surely that should be the minimum we do.

[JawD 99]

Its all circumstantial though tbf. Man Utd paid £8M for Herndandez, that doesnt mean they were being tight.

[Tooj 17]

The point is that Liverpools approach and ambition will in the long term ensure that they remain a sucessful and trophy winning club. Ashleys zero ambition up until now, will ensure that we don't build on the good season we are having and we don't try and push for the top 4.

 

You may well be right, but why put so much faith in presumptions?

 

Who knows what the future may bring. Basically giving Ashley stick based on future events that may or or may not happen.

 

For one I didn't see us spending £10m on a player during January. That's certainly a bold, positive move. Of course it's all about building on what you've got though, but I'll worry about that when the season is over.

. Matching stoke by spending £10m on a striker. Surely that should be the minimum we do.

 

Not if you're spending money for the sake of it.