• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

ITK Thread

Bishop said:
We dont even need a Madison understudy. We need a replacement. Madison is not that good that he deserves a cast iron place in the squad.
Click to expand...
I disagree that Madison isn’t that good. However I agree that we shouldn’t be looking to sign understudies, to anyone though. We should always be trying to sign genuine competition for a starting place. That’s what Liverpool do and why they are so good.
 
Mosquito_Coasting said:
Most of our rivals are spending their arses off. Think Man U like Chelsea dont need to give a brick about FFP.
Click to expand...
I wonder what Chelsea are selling next to cover their splurge
Although they have sold some brick players And had the most PSR head room for the prem because the league let them make stuff up (women’s team and hotel)
United is a different ball game
I think they are speculating on sales income at some point
 
Finney Is Back said:
I disagree that Madison isn’t that good. However I agree that we shouldn’t be looking to sign understudies, to anyone though. We should always be trying to sign genuine competition for a starting place. That’s what Liverpool do and why they are so good.
Click to expand...
I agree
But I think it also takes time to get into that position
We have the quantity now but we need to change the quality
That star dust is needed
Kudus is better than our out right wingers
Pahlhina is better than our other DMs
We need this every window now
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I wonder what Chelsea are selling next to cover their splurge
Although they have sold some brick players And had the most PSR head room for the prem because the league let them make stuff up (women’s team and hotel)
United is a different ball game
I think they are speculating on sales income at some point
Click to expand...
I suspect they’ll lease their youth academy out to an arms length company next…. £150m a year lease (worried I’ve given them an idea here!)
 
Finney Is Back said:
I suspect they’ll lease their youth academy out to an arms length company next…. £150m a year lease (worried I’ve given them an idea here!)
Click to expand...
Possibly
I actually don’t think they need to do anything weird now because of the head room they have
Maybe for the European rules
 
Finney Is Back said:
I disagree that Madison isn’t that good. However I agree that we shouldn’t be looking to sign understudies, to anyone though. We should always be trying to sign genuine competition for a starting place. That’s what Liverpool do and why they are so good.
Click to expand...

Now regarding Madison it's fine if you think he's excellent, I don't, I think he's decent, sometimes very good but often a little underwhelming. He's not one of the very best ACMs in the world and that's what ultimately the churn should be trying to achieve.

So we agree in essence, because like you I think you should never just sit on what you have and that's my point Madison is not that good that we can just say sit and say "yeah we don't need any further reinforcement in that area". That's not how you improve your squad. That's not how you become a serious 11.
 
Bishop said:
Now regarding Madison it's fine if you think he's excellent, I don't, I think he's decent, sometimes very good but often a little underwhelming. He's not one of the very best ACMs in the world and that's what ultimately the churn should be trying to achieve.

So we agree in essence, because like you I think you should never just sit on what you have and that's my point Madison is not that good that we can just say sit and say "yeah we don't need any further reinforcement in that area". That's not how you improve your squad. That's not how you become a serious 11.
Click to expand...
The issue with Maddison is his historical issue of injuries having quite a big effect on his game (I don’t mean time out as much as his ability to get fit when back). It was a theme at Leicester too so isn’t new
We may think Donley is a long term option there But that’s some time away and this season now we have a huge void in that role that needs addressing as we all know
 
Bedfordspurs said:
De Ketellare failed when he last went to a big club but before and since then he has been great. Physically so strong too
Click to expand...
You can say a lot of things about De Ketelaere, but "physically so strong" is not one I'd use. He's built like a pipe cleaner. You could say he's strong for someone of his stature, but not as a general standout feature.
 
Kandi1977 said:
You can say a lot of things about De Ketelaere, but "physically so strong" is not one I'd use. He's built like a pipe cleaner. You could say he's strong for someone of his stature, but not as a general standout feature.
Click to expand...
Hmmm
When I’ve seen him at Atlanta it’s what stood out for me
He always looked more Kulu than Crouch for me
 
Bishop said:
Now regarding Madison it's fine if you think he's excellent, I don't, I think he's decent, sometimes very good but often a little underwhelming. He's not one of the very best ACMs in the world and that's what ultimately the churn should be trying to achieve.

So we agree in essence, because like you I think you should never just sit on what you have and that's my point Madison is not that good that we can just say sit and say "yeah we don't need any further reinforcement in that area". That's not how you improve your squad. That's not how you become a serious 11.
Click to expand...
In principle I agree but in practice it’s not always possible when finance is limited. As an example let’s say we got rid of Johnson (calm down now, don’t get excited), do we go big and replace him with someone better than Kudus or do we use the money for someone better than Solanke? And sign an understudy to Kudus. Financial giants like Liverpool can afford to do both but we often can only afford to do one.

We have to find different ways to compete, such as finding hidden talent before they blow up and this often means they start out as an understudy. Basically you address your weakest spot first with as good a player as you can afford but you might have to sign understudies elsewhere so you’re not short on players. But like I said, in principle your suggestion is the right one.
 
Kandi1977 said:
In my view, he's quite similar to Ødegaard, both in stature and how he plays. Don't think he'll play for us next season though.
Click to expand...
I don’t think clubs will gamble on him
Shame because he has the talent
On would be shocked if we went for Lookman from there
Always loved him as a player because he always wants the ball
 
thfcsteff said:
I think Liverpool are showing everyone the way. A few years ago I felt we were in an excellent position to make the most of a talented crop of young players and be able to buy top top players to augment. Our over-estimation/failure to either bring through or trust the likes of Devine, Dorrington, Scarlett, Soonsup-Bell, Nile John, and currently Donely, seems to speak loudly. Many of these players won youth trophies with us a couple of seasons ago.
I am not including Mikey Moore, Lankshear, or Abbott as I think all are players well worth developing for one more season.
I am even surprised at how we've dealt with Keeley. Don't get me wrong, I think Kinsky is a fine keeper, but Keeley looks to have the same potential plus even better passing skills.
I am likely missing something in this puzzle, but it is this puzzle which partially has us where we are.
BTW, one of the most bizarre deals I remember in recent times was the Lamela/Gil deal; that needs some explaining, because it is up there and above the Lo Celso 'we've got a first-refusal purchase option on another player' shenanigans...
Click to expand...

For me, the youth debate is always an interesting one.

Let me start with Keeley. I think Milo mentioned on one of the pods that he would go as he came in too late from the League of Ireland and would never get that homegrown / club trained status that Austin affords us. I'm guessing our coaches didn't see him as progressing to the number 1 position whereas I think they do with Kinsky.

Generally, with the academy prospects I want them to fail fast or succeed fast with our first team. My frustration in the past has been where I've seen the youngsters not get that chance to shine but then we have to watch a bang average first team squad player instead week in, week out. I don't really recall the club getting it wrong though on their decision making. Are there any players out there we rejected and they've risen to prominence? I only see the other type like Madueke who took control of their own career and chose to leave.

The last perspective on this one is that the academy serves a second purpose. We focus greatly on whether they make the grade for our first team. We perhaps forget that someone like Poch wouldn't even have had a positive net spending for most of his time in charge without the academy player sales. We got good money for Mason and Bentaleb as examples. We also insert the sell on clauses and the buy backs as additional insurance. Didn't we just get a few million from Marcus Edward's move this summer? There is definitely a second track with our academy for the nearly made it.
 
Muttley said:
For me, the youth debate is always an interesting one.

Let me start with Keeley. I think Milo mentioned on one of the pods that he would go as he came in too late from the League of Ireland and would never get that homegrown / club trained status that Austin affords us. I'm guessing our coaches didn't see him as progressing to the number 1 position whereas I think they do with Kinsky.

Generally, with the academy prospects I want them to fail fast or succeed fast with our first team. My frustration in the past has been where I've seen the youngsters not get that chance to shine but then we have to watch a bang average first team squad player instead week in, week out. I don't really recall the club getting it wrong though on their decision making. Are there any players out there we rejected and they've risen to prominence? I only see the other type like Madueke who took control of their own career and chose to leave.

The last perspective on this one is that the academy serves a second purpose. We focus greatly on whether they make the grade for our first team. We perhaps forget that someone like Poch wouldn't even have had a positive net spending for most of his time in charge without the academy player sales. We got good money for Mason and Bentaleb as examples. We also insert the sell on clauses and the buy backs as additional insurance. Didn't we just get a few million from Marcus Edward's move this summer? There is definitely a second track with our academy for the nearly made it.
Click to expand...
Poch also benefitted massively that Kane was here (as did the club)
There is not a chance in hell that he would have been anywhere near the success as a manager if we had been trying to buy a player anywhere near Kane’s level
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I wonder what Chelsea are selling next to cover their splurge
Although they have sold some brick players And had the most PSR head room for the prem because the league let them make stuff up (women’s team and hotel)
United is a different ball game
I think they are speculating on sales income at some point
Click to expand...
I think above a certain level the FA are scared to enforce punishment. Chelsea, City, United.
 
billyiddo said:
If we have no backup plan(s) for our priority targets then that would be a damning indictment of our transfer department
Click to expand...
Absolutely bollox, we all know that we have our primary unrealistic targets and often shoot for option number 3 or 4
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back