Leave a comment

melj1213 June 8 2011, 10:45:00 UTC
A 20 million pound deal for Henderson? Really? He´s a good player but he´s not worth 20m

Andy Carroll: £35m. Jordan Henderson: £20m. Adam Johnson: £6m. Liverpool, getting the worst value from the north east since 2010.

Reply

melj1213 June 8 2011, 11:37:58 UTC
But you already have a young core of English players who want a chance to prove their worth and help buiñld up the club, why block their progress by buying in like for like players and ship them out on loan?

You got 50m for Torres and N´Gog went as part of the deal for Henderson, so you didn´t get anything from that sale ... you spent 35m on Carroll, and 13m (outright, thought the whole deal is worth 20m if you include N´Gog) on Henderson. That´s hardly the deal of the century considering that both Carroll and Henderson were way overpriced

Reply

problematique June 8 2011, 12:00:55 UTC
ALL english players are way overpriced
what are you going to you

your club just spend 16m on phil jones, a player i could argue you don't need, who's a young and unproven english talent as well

Reply

melj1213 June 8 2011, 12:25:50 UTC
We need to strengthen defensively since we already lost GNev and probably Wes & Evans might go, and having another option is never a bad thing the way our defenders drop like flies during injury scares.

Also he will probably be replacing Evans as back up to partner Smalling in the future, and since most of our most promising academy/reserves players are midfielders, he´s not blocking their progress.

Yes 16m is a bit overinflated, but it´s for a player we need in a position we need cover for, without hampering our best young youth prospects coming up.

Totally different scenario

Reply

melj1213 June 8 2011, 12:26:56 UTC
oh and we *had* to pay 16m to match the escape clause in his contract, you didn´t have to pay what you did for Henderson

Reply

shadow_sea June 8 2011, 12:53:10 UTC
That makes no sense - that's what Sunderland were asking for and he'd recently signed a long term contract so they were in a strong position in terms of negotiations.

Kenny, Comolli and the owners obviously obviously decided that they'd rather meet Sunderland's valuation than miss out on him so effectively we did have to pay that.

Reply

melj1213 June 8 2011, 14:14:11 UTC
Yes Sunderland were asking that but you had room to negotiate, or walk away and find another player. There are very few players who are truly unmissable and Henderson isn't one of them imo

We had to pay Jones' buyout clause of £16m because we were in the same situation of Jones having not long signed a new contract himself.

Reply

shadow_sea June 8 2011, 14:22:15 UTC
Is Jones "truly unmissable" then? He's very good but you could have walked away, found another player and not paid the £16m.

Stop trying to take the moral highground here, both our clubs were in exactly the same situation and decided it was worth splashing the cash. City, Chelsea and Arsenal had better watch out, we're coming after everyone's academy players and obviously have money to burn ;P

Reply

melj1213 June 8 2011, 14:47:24 UTC
But the difference is that Jones was apparently a long term Utd target but we weren't planning on going for him till next season ... but with interests from other clubs now we decided to fast track our plans, so we had the money earmarked for him anyway, we just weren't expecting to pay it till next year

Reply

shadow_sea June 8 2011, 14:55:47 UTC
I still don't see your point at all, by all accounts Comolli has been working on a long term strategy identifying targets for us ever since he came in - presumably we had money earmarked to spend on all of them.

Reply

mythologized June 8 2011, 11:36:25 UTC
just frittering away money you could be using to buy in more defensive players - a LB and maybe a CB - and maybe an experienced winger.

Why are you so sure we won't still buy those players as well? The transfer window hasn't even been opened for that long

Reply

melj1213 June 8 2011, 11:41:35 UTC
Where did I say you weren´t going to be buying those players?

I just said that the money you spent on Henderson would have been better spent if it had been put towards sales you need rather than sales like this one where you´re not gaining any real advantage from what you already had.

Reply

mythologized June 8 2011, 12:08:36 UTC
as long as we get the players at the end of the day (and you don't know who we will get or how much they will cost), I'm not too fussed with the way the money is allocated

Reply

scruby June 8 2011, 11:16:44 UTC
I really don't want them to go. Spearing has been great and Shelvey didn't have as much playing time but was really good too.

The problem is though is when Gerrard is back, they probably won't get a lot of playing time. /: Maybe they should go on loan, but I do want them to come back.

Reply

scruby June 8 2011, 11:15:11 UTC
I agree about the England thing, but what can I do? I wish he was cheaper.

I didn't really know who he is until now, though he might have been great in Sunderland.

I'd rather players play in there original positions, where they are most comfortable in.

Reply

melj1213 June 8 2011, 11:24:41 UTC
I think the main thing is I don´t get why you´d buy in Henderson - it´s not like you need him for the home grown quota (esp if him coming in means Shelvey and/or Spearing go on loan) and you already have young, "players for the future" in your squad anyway ... so what else does he bring to the table to make him worth such a huge price tag?

TBH I admit I haven´t watched many Sunderland games but he´s definitely no midfield magician and from what I´ve seen of Sunderland fans´comments they´re mainly gonna miss him because he´s a local lad than because he´s a stellar talent that´s going to be hard to replace.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up