When are we going to hear news on the Salah, Virg and Trent contracts..

[eggy81]

Love the thinking here. Other clubs financing our big contracts. The reality is that VVD and Salah will need replacing soon. I'm not against giving both a 2 year extension but it only kicks the can down the road for 1 year if we want to recoup any money on them. As you say they'll still be good enough and as importantly it buys Slot some time. But beware, Edwards does not like giving out contracts to players over 30.



Finally someone with a bit of self-awareness. We're all in the same boat, dumb idiots on a forum. I suppose venting at the owners helps some people get through their day.

Problem with trying to replace Salah in particular is that he’s pretty much been a 1 off type of player that is unlikely to be replaced like for like. His skill set is unique. He’s not the most gifted dribbler or the player that can beat a team on his own but his intelligence and movement are phenomenal. I’ve never seen a player so good at moving undetected into goal scoring positions coming from wide areas. That skill is not going to leave him even as he slows down. It’ll be a difficult decision for whoever has to decide he’s not worth paying the wages again. Vvd can probably be replaced with a lesser player and a change in defensive style or personnel in midfield or defence to allow more cover or a less high line etc. mo can’t be replaced. I think we’ll look to keep him well into his 30s if he keeps showing form even if his role is slightly changed.

[eggy81]

That Caicedo fiasco was a total smoke & mirrors job. As if this lot were going to splash £115 on him. Totally laughable to even think so...

Lucky escape in the end. He looks very run of the mill in that Chelsea side.

[Insidious]

Problem with trying to replace Salah in particular is that he’s pretty much been a 1 off type of player that is unlikely to be replaced like for like. His skill set is unique.

He's a bloody brilliant player. He's up to (may need to correct this) 212 goals in 350 appearances now I think, having started his 8th season with us - just a ludicrous record.

As you say, I don't think replacing him like-for-like is probable, or even particularly possible. Given his £350k-per-week wages and given that he will physically decline (I think it will be quite gradual though) he is more likely to be "replaced" by two players. I could quite easily envisage us bringing in a player of the usual profile (100-150 or so appearances under their belt for a good sample size for the data nerds, player aged 23-26) on a much lower wage than Salah's (£150k-£180k-per-week let's say) that has good output for goals+assists and supplement that with another forward at an earlier stage of development for rotation purposes on a lower wage again (£70k-120k-per-week let's say) with a view to having 6 quality attackers for the 3 forward positions without having any single forward having a massive wage packet.

Having two right-sided forwards takes a bit of the pressure off one, whilst keeping competition for places. More opportunities for substitution options to prevent burnout within a season too, given that most players aren't the absolute freaks of Nature (meant as a compliment) that Salah are.

[eggy81]

He's a bloody brilliant player. He's up to (may need to correct this) 212 goals in 350 appearances now I think, having started his 8th season with us - just a ludicrous record.

As you say, I don't think replacing him like-for-like is probable, or even particularly possible. Given his £350k-per-week wages and given that he will physically decline (I think it will be quite gradual though) he is more likely to be "replaced" by two players. I could quite easily envisage us bringing in a player of the usual profile (100-150 or so appearances under their belt for a good sample size for the data nerds, player aged 23-26) on a much lower wage than Salah's (£150k-£180k-per-week let's say) that has good output for goals+assists and supplement that with another forward at an earlier stage of development for rotation purposes on a lower wage again (£70k-120k-per-week let's say) with a view to having 6 quality attackers for the 3 forward positions without having any single forward having a massive wage packet.

Having two right-sided forwards takes a bit of the pressure off one, whilst keeping competition for places. More opportunities for substitution options to prevent burnout within a season too, given that most players aren't the absolute freaks of Nature (meant as a compliment) that Salah are.

In order to allow us to let him go in the near future we need to have found either a cf or a left sided player who can come close to scoring 25 or 30 vodka a season or a midfielder combination which allows all our forwards score 15 or more each or chip in with 10 plus themselves. We aren’t there yet with any of these scenarios. You can’t jettison 20-25 goals without a viable alternative.

[eggy81]

The fact that he’s virtually bullet proof injury wise makes it even more difficult to envisage letting him go.

[eggy81]

Btw I see the vodka typo. Can’t edit on iPhone without deleting so it may stay there 😂😂

[Insidious]

In order to allow us to let him go in the near future we need to have found either a cf or a left sided player who can come close to scoring 25 or 30 vodka a season or a midfielder combination which allows all our forwards score 15 or more each or chip in with 10 plus themselves. We aren’t there yet with any of these scenarios. You can’t jettison 20-25 goals without a viable alternative.

Absolutely - I am certainly in no hurry to see him depart. The club will have to make a call as to the "right" time for him to go and it is a difficult one.

We have to extend his contract first and even that isn't easy - would he be insulted if we offered "just" a two-year extension? Should we look at longer? Will he want £400k-per-week or more? Is he likely to merit his income for the duration of his deal? Do we extend with hope he'll retire here or to ensure one last big bid for him?

I hope he is here for 24/25, 25/26 and 26/27. We would have then seen 10 full seasons from him and he would probably still have plenty in his locker should he want to sample somewhere else. It would also allow time for our current options and any acquisitions (Gordon?) to develop a bit without instantly having the pressure of having to be our top scorer each season. I certainly think anyone who is a confidence player (Núñez and Gakpo potentially examples of this) could wilt if suddenly handed that responsibility come the 25/26 season.

Hypothetically, in both wages and contract duration, what would anyone offer him?

[BOBPAISLEYFAN]

Problem with trying to replace Salah in particular is that he’s pretty much been a 1 off type of player that is unlikely to be replaced like for like. His skill set is unique. He’s not the most gifted dribbler or the player that can beat a team on his own but his intelligence and movement are phenomenal. I’ve never seen a player so good at moving undetected into goal scoring positions coming from wide areas. That skill is not going to leave him even as he slows down. It’ll be a difficult decision for whoever has to decide he’s not worth paying the wages again. Vvd can probably be replaced with a lesser player and a change in defensive style or personnel in midfield or defence to allow more cover or a less high line etc. mo can’t be replaced. I think we’ll look to keep him well into his 30s if he keeps showing form even if his role is slightly changed.

I think they are both very similar in terms of being 1 off’s, Virg is not just a generational defender who reads the game so brilliantly but his ability to marshall the back four whilst at the same time deliver killer passes over 50 yards, is like Salah, an irreplaceable talent.

However, Man City have won all their titles without both Virg and Salah, so as difficult as it will be to say goodbye when their time comes, as it was when Gerrard left, life and LFC will go on and hopefully thrive…

I will have everything crossed when that day finally comes… ☹️

[BOBPAISLEYFAN]

Just a quick couple of things on net spend. I will firstly say that I would have liked us to have spent a bit more at key moments during Jürgen's tenure, lest anyone think otherwise.

Net spend is a decent metric, but it doesn't paint a full picture. We have for example been reasonably good at selling - Ibe, Brewster, Solanke sales as examples. Had we been poorer at selling, our net spend would be bigger, which on paper makes us look more willing to spend. This goes for any side that sells well (Ajax, Porto, Dortmund, Brighton) and it can slightly skew the picture. Equally, sides that are shite at selling look like they spend more, because their net spend is that much greater.

Next is wages. Boring as it is (compared to transfers) we have kept players well. Now, I suspect this may be an age/generation thing, but I am informed by having watched Liverpool in the 90s and 00s up until now. I never witnessed us as a Colossus in the 70s+80s that hoovered up trophies. Prior to Klopp, Rafa's tenure was the pinnacle. I am not used to us having top players and giving out competitive wages to keep them here, or stars staying for long. Two of our best foreign players in my time as a fan were Torres and Suarez and I didn't get to see them stay at the club for more than 3 and a half seasons, because other clubs had more to offer. Compare that to how long we have kept some lads who are some of the World's best in their positions (Van Dijk, Alisson, Salah in particular) and it's a joy to see players stay here. Perhaps I am just too easily pleased on that front (probably am, probably fair criticism of me as a fan) but the boring "paying the bills" aspect is something I don't take for granted as we got to keep a quality side together, versus how quickly our best sides got dismantled previously via departures.

Net spend also doesn't factor in agent fees. Do you know how much we spent on these in the 23/24 season? It was £31.5m - that's a big chunk of change - you could buy a good player for that, or three good academy projects.

Would have liked more expenditure, same as yourself - just trying to add further brush-strokes to the picture.

Agreed, my post wasn't an attempt to provide a definitive forensic analysis, but just to outline the readily available basic info on purchases, sales etc… in a concise manner.

However, another question to ask is which came first, the chicken or the egg. I think we spent as much as we did because we raised so much from sales… its always felt that the purse strings have always been managed conservatively, with the occasional big spend after several windows of relatively low spends… in 3 out of those 10 years we made profits of £9, £11 and £38M.

On the one hand it can be described as tight, on the other it can be described as just being very canny, it all depends if you are a glass half full or half empty kind of guy…

Money, on the whole, in every field you care to analyse, has always been the metric and always will be the best measure of success, those who pay the most in terms of Transfer spend and wages tend to come out on top, not always but certainly more often than not…

When we were in our pomp under Shankly and Paisley, I would lay money that we paid the best wages and and probably spent the most on transfers, Blackburn probably did, Utd did in their pomp, not so sure about Arsenal tbf, but Chelsea certainly did, the only one apparently who haven’t is Man City apparently……… lol !!!

[Steveo]

So - where is the £2.3 Billion for the PGA coming from F$G fanboys ?

Keep your head down and spread your legs a bit more. 😜