The Liverpool Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve*
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 44K
  • Views Views 3M
LFCMarshall said:
Ive mentioned it before, but I cannot understand any Liverpool fan not wanting him ... Not to mention it is on a free transfer as well.

There is a reason City are doing all they can to get him to stay
Click to expand...

Tyton said:
Milner's a great ******* player. I'm a fan. He's always a bit under the radar because media always tends to overrate flashy talent over someone who does all the hard work.

I can't think of a reason people may NOT want him in Liverpool. People would be wise to remember immortal words of certain Bill Shankly "football team is like a piano. You need eight men to carry it and three who can play the **** thing"

Because Milner can carry the piano all by himself.
Click to expand...

Not a significant upgrade on what we have in terms of anything different. 30 in January, on his last big pay day and you're looking at least at 100K a week. Over £ 5 million a year. That's a HECK of a lot of money to invest in a veteran player who's not a difference maker.

He want's to play regularly in his favourite central midfield position.

And no question he'd instantly upgrade and walk into the side all things being equal over Joe Allen or Jordan Henderson. He does everything those two do but better. But not significantly better to warrant that amount of money. He's a real solid, hard working pro no question. But he's not a consistent difference making player.

You're in effect talking about him replacing Gerrard. One veteran out for one veteran in. When you have Can, the best box to box midfielder we have, ready to develop and hopefully grow into that roll.

Is it really worth sacrificing that development and throwing that amount of money at a player who'll be 30 through the next season just because he upgrades on some of the garbage we currently have?

I could maybe justify it more if we where a set team and he was going to be one of the differences in taking us over the top. But we are the very last thing from that and to shove a massive percentage of the wage budget (which FSG are real tight on to start with compared to other clubs at the top end) on a 30 year old when you're in need of rebuilding isn't a very prudent thing to do. At all.
 
Last edited:
Scouseinthehouse said:
Not a significant upgrade on what we have in terms of anything different. 30 in January, on his last big pay day and you're looking at least at 100K a week. Over £ 5 million a year. That's a HECK of a lot of money to invest in a veteran player who's not a difference maker.

He want's to play regularly in his favourite central midfield position.

And no question he'd instantly upgrade and walk into the side all things being equal over Joe Allen or Jordan Henderson. He does everything those two do but better. But not significantly better to warrant that amount of money. He's a real solid, hard working pro no question. But he's not a consistent difference making player.

You're in effect talking about him replacing Gerrard. One veteran out for one veteran in. When you have Can, the best box to box midfielder we have, ready to develop and hopefully grow into that roll.

Is it really worth sacrificing that development and throwing that amount of money at a player who'll be 30 through the next season just because he upgrades on some of the garbage we currently have?

I could maybe justify it more if we where a set team and he was going to be one of the differences in taking us over the top. But we are the very last thing from that and to shove a massive percentage of the wage budget (which FSG are real tight on to start with compared to other clubs at the top end) on a 30 year old when you're in need of rebuilding isn't a very prudent thing to do. At all.
Click to expand...

most posters on here dont look at important variables such as money, age, blocking development of another similair player. which frustrates me because you can repeat the same **** over and over again, but when your not singing from the same hymn sheet whats the point. basically the signing of milner has more negatives than positives, end of discussion.
 
dilakh2 said:
most posters on here dont look at important variables such as money, age, blocking development of another similair player. which frustrates me because you can repeat the same **** over and over again, but when your not singing from the same hymn sheet whats the point. basically the signing of milner has more negatives than positives, end of discussion.
Click to expand...

I understand where they're coming from. It's not like James Milner is a bad player and he would upgrade on most others we have in that position.

But in our current position, as you say, the negatives outweigh any positives.

I can't see it to be honest regardless as this goes completely against the profile of young player Boston are set on. It's one thing bending that and bringing in proven experience like Toure to give you depth. It's a WHOLE other to do it on top end wages for a guy who wants to play every week who is a good, all round player. But not a special one to justify the investment.
 
Scouseinthehouse said:
I understand where they're coming from. It's not like James Milner is a bad player and he would upgrade on most others we have in that position.

But in our current position, as you say, the negatives outweigh any positives.

I can't see it to be honest regardless as this goes completely against the profile of young player Boston are set on. It's one thing bending that and bringing in proven experience like Toure to give you depth. It's a WHOLE other to do it on top end wages for a guy who wants to play every week who is a good, all round player. But not a special one to justify the investment.
Click to expand...

could not have said it any better. you would think playing fm would allude people that their is no such thing as a free transfer.
 
dilakh2 said:
ings yes good backup striker young his injury prone which is what puts me off. but benteke is the biggest no, more than milner. we just ****** got rid of carrol why would we want carroll 2.0. unless we plane on crossing the ball then theirs no need for benteke.
Click to expand...

Don't think Ings is a good idea, and I think spending 30m on Benteke will turn out to be a disappointment too. He's another target man, how exactly will he fit into the profile of a fast, pressing forward? We need to break the bank for Lacazette, but sadly, it won't happen.

I can't remember who said it, might have been someone on this thread, might have been in a paper somewhere, maybe the Sevilla article, but we shouldn't target the 30m Benteke at Villa, we should be finding the 7m Benteke that Villa bought from Genk in 2012. Whilst a Benteke style player would probably not fit, the point that we need to find them ourselves before their price inflates disproportionately is really something to consider.

EDIT: It is the Sevilla article on This is Anfield: http://www.thisisanfield.com/2015/05/sevilla-monchi-moneyball-liverpool/
 
dilakh2 said:
most posters on here dont look at important variables such as money, age, blocking development of another similair player. which frustrates me because you can repeat the same **** over and over again, but when your not singing from the same hymn sheet whats the point. basically the signing of milner has more negatives than positives, end of discussion.
Click to expand...


Actually, most posters have fathomed that in and still would take him. You tlak about blocking players? Stop and look at your squad, you dont have enough quality as it is.

Also who says he replaces Gerrard? Milner can play central or on the wing. Liverpool wanted top quality and then turn their noses up and Milner whos is top quality.

make no mistake you are going to have to pay 100k a week to any top quality player or more. And you are hardly in a position to be picky.
 
Mike. said:
Actually, most posters have fathomed that in and still would take him. You tlak about blocking players? Stop and look at your squad, you dont have enough quality as it is.

Also who says he replaces Gerrard? Milner can play central or on the wing. Liverpool wanted top quality and then turn their noses up and Milner whos is top quality.

make no mistake you are going to have to pay 100k a week to any top quality player or more. And you are hardly in a position to be picky.
Click to expand...

i wouldnt say milner is top quality, that is a step to far imo. he is a good player yes, but we need goals from our midfield the max he has got in pl is 7. that doesnt for me warrent top end wages. your forgetting he is going to be 30 factor in a 3 or 4 year deal. he will be at the tail end of his career for us which will make it harder for us to move him on when he enters the twilights of his career because of the wages he is on.
 
dilakh2 said:
i wouldnt say milner is top quality, that is a step to far imo. he is a good player yes, but we need goals from our midfield the max he has got in pl is 7. that doesnt for me warrent top end wages. your forgetting he is going to be 30 factor in a 3 or 4 year deal. he will be at the tail end of his career for us which will make it harder for us to move him on when he enters the twilights of his career because of the wages he is on.
Click to expand...

When he plays, he's one of City's best players. You are not going to be selling him on anyway so it's moot. You'd be signing him to perform for the next 3-4 years. He's not going to be 30, he turned 29 in Jan. Actually you need goals from your strikes, and balance from your wide players, he creates changes, brings excellent balance.
 
Mike. said:
Actually, most posters have fathomed that in and still would take him. You tlak about blocking players? Stop and look at your squad, you dont have enough quality as it is.

Also who says he replaces Gerrard? Milner can play central or on the wing. Liverpool wanted top quality and then turn their noses up and Milner whos is top quality.

make no mistake you are going to have to pay 100k a week to any top quality player or more. And you are hardly in a position to be picky.
Click to expand...

There's another problem ironically. Milners versatility. He wants regular football in his preferred central role. The main reason he wants out of Citeh. Can you trust Rodgers, who moves players around and plays players out of position like they're going out of fashion; to not play him there? With what we have, and what he wants, he would in effect be a direct replacement for Gerrard.

I'd completely take issue with the 'top quality' line to justify £100 K on Milner. He's coming off what, a 5 goal, 7 assist league season? From 29 games. 19 of which he's started, finishing 15 of them. Heck, through his entire career, through 14 years, he's only ever scored 5 or more in a season on 2 separate occasions. If that constitutes 'top quality', man have the standards in this Country fallen dramatically. If I'm paying a midfielder over 5 million a year, I'm wanting a double figure return in either goals or assists. If not both. You're talking about making Milner a focal point. And his output just doesn't justify that outlay for that key role.

I hate using isolated statistics, but the point being is he's much of a muchness to what we already have. A good, hard working, all round player who flashes but doesn't quite have that constant top bracket difference making quality to justify that outlay on a 30 year old. Through a rebuild Which we're once agin mired in.

At this stage of both his career and where Liverpool are at, that sort of outlay just doesn't make prudent sense over a 3 year or so period when it could go toward somebody who would contribute far more over far longer a period.
 
Last edited:
Scouseinthehouse said:
There's another problem ironically. Milners versatility. He wants regular football in his preferred central role. The main reason he wants out of Citeh. Can you trust Rodgers, who moves players around and plays players out of position like they're going out of fashion; to not play him there? With what we have, and what he wants, he would in effect be a direct replacement for Gerrard.

I'd completely take issue with the 'top quality' line to justify £100 K on Milner. He's coming off what, a 5 goal, 7 assist league season? From 29 games. 19 of which he's started, finishing 15 of them. Heck, through his entire career, through 14 years, he's only ever scored 5 or more in a season on 2 separate occasions. If that constitutes 'top quality', man have the standards in this Country fallen dramatically. If I'm paying a midfielder over 5 million a year, I'm wanting a double figure return in either goals or assists. If not both. You're talking about making Milner a focal point. And his output just doesn't justify that outlay for that key role.

I hate using isolated statistics, but the point being is he's much of a muchness to what we already have. A good, hard working, all round player who flashes but doesn't quite have that constant top bracket difference making quality to justify that outlay on a 30 year old. Through a rebuild Which we're once agin mired in.

At this stage of both his career and where Liverpool are at, that sort of outlay just doesn't make prudent sense over a 3 year or so period when it could go toward somebody who would contribute far more over far longer a period.
Click to expand...

Now this is according to ESPN Andres Iniesta does not have double figures in goals or assists this season is he not worth 100k a week? Well not according to your prerequisite. You are looking at this totally the wrong way IMO too, last year you ****** away money on trying to beat the market and it backfired spectacularly.

IF Liverpool want to realistically attempt to get back in the top 4 they need good, proven, premier league players, which James Milner quite frankly is. As mike keeps saying too there is a reason city are throwing money at him too stay and let's face their squad is far superior to yours.

I would also also love to know for the same money who else you could get in? Who is the alternative?
 
I think the least we need to worry about is wages If it improves our squad

We were the 5th placed team in terms of wages this season and have lost another 250k roughly from the departures of Gerrard and Johnson
 
Last edited:
dilakh2 said:
most posters on here dont look at important variables such as money, age, blocking development of another similair player. which frustrates me because you can repeat the same **** over and over again, but when your not singing from the same hymn sheet whats the point. basically the signing of milner has more negatives than positives, end of discussion.
Click to expand...

So should we not sign another solid centre midfielder? You keep saying how James Milner is similar to what we have already got, but please explain how?

James Milner is nothing like Joe Allen
James Milner is nothing like Lucas
You could slightly say he's like Can and Henderson, but not half as much as you're making out.

He would walk into our team, so why don't we want him?

The developement of Can? Christ if the lad is good enough he will play games, if he's not, he will be behind the pecking order. You mentioned Rossiter earlier, as much as I would love some youth to be promoted, their are not many who would fit on Premier League level.

Rossiter in our midfield next season? It should be a huge no.

We lack leaders, experience. It's all good having a young squad and yes they can become the next big thing, but you can;t walk in to next season with 4 centre midfielders. Especially when you play 3 a game.

If I was a Arsenal, Chelsea fan, Milner wouldn't turn my head. I'm a Liverpool fan, and sadly that is the position we are in at the moment. We can't go out and buy your Pogba's.
 
epic terrorist said:
Now this is according to ESPN Andres Iniesta does not have double figures in goals or assists this season is he not worth 100k a week? Well not according to your prerequisite. You are looking at this totally the wrong way IMO too, last year you ****** away money on trying to beat the market and it backfired spectacularly.

IF Liverpool want to realistically attempt to get back in the top 4 they need good, proven, premier league players, which James Milner quite frankly is. As mike keeps saying too there is a reason city are throwing money at him too stay and let's face their squad is far superior to yours.

I would also also love to know for the same money who else you could get in? Who is the alternative?
Click to expand...

Aside from there being a WORLD of difference in the respective ability's of Iniesta and Milner, the one thing the Americans haven't done is splash major money on wages. The ridiculous Henderson contract came out of the blue and similar offer to Sterling; but that's them in their view 'taking care of their own' and investing in the future. We still pay well. but not the top end.

Of course Iniesta, and Milner for that matter for what he brings to City, are worth the respective wages regardless to their current respective clubs for what they bring. But they aren't the key players, certainly in Milners case, to their respective sides. If Milner gets re-upped at City, good for him and them. He's been there the past 5 seasons, the longest he's spent at any club and is an integral part of the squad who Pellegrini loves for his all round game.

City have an established group and can afford to do that. Liverpool don't and can't.

The difference being, with a limited transfer and wage budget in relation to the teams they're competing against, Liverpool would be bringing that in.

So the point on double figures goals or assists is that when you bring in a guy who'll turn 30 through this season, and make him one of your highest paid players and one of the focal points in your side; is that you need him to be a guaranteed difference maker and be contributing double digit goals or assists from midfield. We have players of Milners ilk in the likes of Lallana and in terms of playmaking contribution, not ability, Henderson. We'd be expecting him to come in, taking him on what he says he wants to force him to leave City, week-to-week football in his preferred central role, akin to a direct replacement for Gerrard and be a key player. Which he would be virtue of being better from most of what we have. But not to the extent of the current key players at City and Barcelona and the other clubs here Liverpool are competing with are. Thats the crux here. He wouldn't be THAT great a difference maker to what the side already has. Coutinho signed a new deal for upwards of 70K a week. Would bringing in Milner at 30 and more be that significant an upgrade on what Phil brings to justify the bigger outlay?

Who else is the alternative? There's a question and it's up in the air as we don't know whether Rodgers will be here or what the **** he's thinking as to how we'll play next year and who fits. But regardless of how small or not the budgets are, we need to be going out and paying the wages and transfer fees on top bracket quality. Even if it's just 2 or 3 players that arrive. And someone like Milner, both from a long term stand point and what he brings, just doesn't justify or fit that. A very good, hard working, all round pro. But not that extra top bracket quality we need. He'd be more of the same to what we have ..... but slightly better.

With glaring holes all over, and even more glaring priorities of a top class centre back, wide man and top flight centre forward, not to mention the continuing problem in goal; to take up a massive chunk of the wage budget on a 3 year or so player who doesn't give you a significant difference to what you both have and need would be a foolish move IMHO. We've gone through this cycle for years of getting slightly better players than what we have in large amounts of money and just 'settling'; instead of going out and paying top whack on top quality difference makers. Rodgers filled out the squad last year. Now's the time to start adding the top talent. At whatever the cost or however few your budget allows.

Would I be ****** if Milner ends up at Anfield? No, he's not a bad player at all and again would be an instant upgrade by virtue of some of the poor quality here already. He's a good, solid pro. That's not at issue at all.

But all things considered, in our current situation going forward, we could and should be looking to do a LOT better with our resources.
 
Last edited:
The fact that you don't shell out on wages is exactly why you're in this position.

Would Milner improve Liverpool a lot? Yes

Are you in a situation to be picky? Definitely not.

Considering you just cut 250k a week off you wage bill too, the manouverability is there.

What market are Liverpool supposed to be shopping in, because the current one isn't working for them, and the very elite is all but closed to them given the way they handle deals
 
Last edited:
I think we are all jumping the gun a bit here too, the seasons just finished, we don't know who our real first second or third choice targets are yet, we don't know fully who is available, as a lot tends to come out over June, so we will see what happens!

I agree that we could try and get better than Milner, I would like to see better, I'm just not sure we actually can if Rodgers stays on this season, we're stuck at the moment!
 
Mike. said:
The fact that you don't shell out on wages is exactly why you're in this position.

Would Milner improve Liverpool a lot? Yes

Are you in a situation to be picky? Definitely not.

Considering you just cut 250k a week off you wage bill too, the manouverability is there.
Click to expand...

Which is all relevant and why FSG needs to take a long hard look at themselves and change both the structure and transfer policy at the football club.

Or else you're continuing to just 'settle' and never improve to any significant degree regardless of whomever is running the football side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top