Have Liverpool let the Premier League title win go to their heads with Florian Wirtz buy? Man City have done some fine business.
Send your views on all subjects to theeditor@football365.com
Man City have already outdone Liverpool
Cherki, Timmy Reindeer, AND change, or Wirtz for £100m. Hmmmm, let me think for a moment about that one. No, second thoughts, I won’t need to ta. Liverpool cosplaying Madrid because they stinged a window and then unexpectedly, but deservedly finally won a proper PL title, albeit in a year without much in the way of serious competition, has gone to their heads IMO. Cherki and Timmy will rip it up, and wee Florian will be injury plagued all season as he gets kicked out of games by the bigger boys.
RHT/TS x
Is Wirtz ‘worth’ over £100m? It doesn’t matter…
A couple of points about the Wirtz transfer fee, since I’m sure it will be a topic of discussion for the next week.
Firstly, the fee itself. There are many “hilarious” memes showing a comment about Liverpool saying they can’t compete financially with City and then listing the big fee signings they’ve made. Some context is nice, so let’s look at the facts.
Since the summer of 2020, Liverpool have spent €580m according to transfermarkt.com. This includes the Frimpong signing, but not Wirtz. That puts them 9th in the Premier League, behind Brighton, West Ham, Villa and the rest of the “Big 6”. To be clear, that is gross spend, not net spend. That in itself is extraordinary. The team that won the league has spent less than 8 other teams in the last 5 years. For some context, United are €1b, City are €1.1bn and Chelsea €1.8bn. This clearly provides some cash behind the sofa to go big this summer.
The other, more important, point is about the value of players themselves. They don’t have any. We like to think of a player as being “worth £60m or £90m” or whatever. But the value of a player is purely what a team is willing to pay. Bayern Munich were willing to pay €100m for a 30-year-old Harry Kane. They’re probably happy with that. If Burnley had somehow got that transfer over the line, would it be worth it? No.
For example, what’s Isak worth? To Newcastle, maybe £150m. To Liverpool, maybe they’d pay £100m. To City, who don’t need him? Would they actually pay more than £40 or £50m for a player who would sit on the bench?
People say that Wirtz would have to put up Salah-type numbers to be worth it, but he doesn’t. If he ends up being a regular contributor to Liverpool over the next 10 years, he would be worth it. If he contributes for 5 years and then is sold for £70–80m, he would be worth it.
Maybe to some degree it is an “overpayment” but that’s fine also. Liverpool got Mac Allister for £35m. They got Gravenberch for around the same. Further back, we got Robertson, Salah, Matip, Mané, Alisson, Van Dijk and more for well under what they would have been worth, had you known how good they’d be. So if Wirtz is actually only “worth” £90m, that’s actually fine, because I’d be delighted to have a player that good in the team. Sometimes you “underpay”, sometimes you “overpay”. All that actually matters is: are they good enough to make the team better?
Mike, LFC Dubai
READ: Wirtz next? Lukaku, Pogba, Torres among the big old wastes of money
…It looks like Dave, LFC has beaten me to the punch.
I too had been waiting for a little more balance to the Wirtz transfer ramblings, rather than continuing to digest the “ooh he’s a bit expensive isn’t he …” … and .. “haven’t Man City done well in terms of relative value when they bagged Cherki .. “ (the answer to that second question is ‘yes they have’ … think they’ve got a good ‘un there).
Similar eyebrows were raised when Liverpool decided to break the transfer record for a defender when ‘gambling’ £75m on Virgil … and why not back that up by breaking the record paid for a goalkeeper at the time (.. until a few days later when Chelsea got suckered into a “who’s got the biggest d*ck ?” competition and put a millstone around Kepa’s neck).
Both of those purchases by Liverpool helped to significantly strengthen the skeletal structure of the team, on which recent success has been built.
Why should we then not be optimistic about the forthcoming Wirtz transfer doing the same ?
A couple of months ago I penned a mail highlighting certain creative concerns about Szoboszlai, recognising that the departure of Trent would lead to a necessary rebalancing of the creative output of the team, with slightly less expectations placed on the fullbacks in that regard. I felt that that the attacking midfield area was where we may expect to improve things and it would seem that this may be coming to fruition.
Bobby Firmino was my favourite Liverpool player for a number of years, for a number of reasons – at the heart of that was his joyful persona on the pitch coupled with an altruistic attitude towards working for the team, but he was also the oil of the team – the aspect that made all the other parts work better.
A number of my favourite game days of the last decade involved me leaving the ground thinking “Bobby was brilliant again today wasn’t he …”.
I feel Wirtz may now be the heir apparent from a creativity perspective and that excites me.
Time will tell.
Sparky, LFC (still feel slightly uneasy that this mail has been sent prior to the obligatory ‘player holding pen at desk avec new manager hand on shoulder’ photo)
Where will Frimpong fit?
I’m as excited about the upcoming season as the next Liverpool fan. However can someone explain to me how we’ll play with Frimpong? I’m assuming in more open games he’ll have a field day from right back, and get forward at every opportunity. However against a team with quality out wide, for example if we’re playing City with Doku, does Bradley play? And / or does Frimpong play in front of him as a right sided midfielder?
Yours excitedly but with a bit of confusion,
Michael, LFC in Hackney
Keeping RashfordAs a huge Manchester United fan, I strongly believe that Marcus Rashford should be kept at the club. His dedication, skill, and passion for the team are undeniable.
Rashford’s growth and development as a player have been impressive, and he embodies the values of Manchester United. His commitment to the community and his philanthropic efforts are also commendable.
Investing in Rashford’s talent and potential would be a wise decision for the club. With the right support and guidance, he can continue to thrive and become an even more significant asset to the team.
I urge the club’s management to prioritize retaining Rashford and providing him with the necessary resources to excel.
Sincerely,
DENNIS ANNAPEN – DURBAN SOUTH AFRICA
**Why all the focus on trophies?**It seems to me that there are 2 ‘main’ types of football fan/supporter. You have the fan that is in it only for the glory or the trophies. And the other type of fan is in it for the emotional ride, or more simply, fun.
I fall completely into the latter, but I understand that some fans need their team to win a trophy for them to have a good time or feel fulfilled.
However, in the last 8-10 years, I have noticed that this has changed and now only winning the league or Champions League is enough or even considered successful. I will never understand why fans don’t appreciate winning an FA Cup or a League Cup these days. The disrespect is unreal, calling them ‘Mickey Mouse’ cups for example. Why such disdain? The attitude seems to be that it’s not important at all and that it doesn’t matter. Where did this come from? It definitely wasn’t always like this and I’ve been thinking about this for a while. Maybe like other mailbox contributors around my age, it’s a change in football culture or a change in our life priorities, but surely, the overlying factor we all have in common, is our undying love for Football.
Why is everything so black and white? He is terrible or great? Winning teams need the 7/8 out of 10 guy who play well every game. We all know players, especially midfield workhorses, like Henderson, O’Shea, Wijnaldum, Park Ji Sung, Keane, Fletcher, Carragher, Fernandinho, Makelele, Carrick, to name but a few, who were not the high profile players every team desired, but they held the team together. These types of players I feel are disappearing from the game.
On the flip side, maybe they have become more important/expensive (Caicedo, Wirtz, Enzo Fernández, Bellingham, Casemiro, Rice, De Jong, Tchouameni, Rodri (who avoids using social media, genius!) all in or about 65m – 100m) one could make a case for each of these transfers working out, ie not a flop, (even Casemiro has won 2 trophies at utd, so not a flop entirely) Midfielders are given more leeway,
However expensive forwards are not given the same kind of time or leeway, or maybe more is expected due to price tag. (Nunez, Lukaku, Hojlund, Anthony, Havertz, di Maria, Morata). I have an idea of why this is. I believe that the English game is more focused on fitness, quickness and technique, basically in that order. A lot of the successful teams have/had wide forwards who score more than the striker, eg, Mane, Salah more than Firmino, before Haaland, they won the title with no number 9. If Arsenal get an excellent left forward, like Leao, or Doue, I think Havertz could be like a Firmino figure, with Saka on the right, they will be right in the mix.
David Power
(People like EdQuoththeraven is one of my favorite contributors, and should be praised for continuing to write in a professional and detailed manner, even if it’s ‘only Crystal Palace’. More of this for 2025/26 please)
Believe in youthIt’s notable that so many young players are being sought during this transfer window for extremely high prices. On top of that we have seen club and national teams rely on players under 20 to succeed.
While Fergie’s ‘class of ‘92 helped him win the election EPL and dominate it for the next 10 years or so, this was still an anomaly for the longest time. Fergie was the ‘state of the art’ in maturing young talent – making them stat with landladies that ensured they got a decent meal (and tarttled when off piste), dropped in to ensure they met curfews etc. And he blended them gradually into teams containing some of the best, mature and professional players around them. All willing to give ‘advice’ when needed.
Since then we have seen the whole idea of academies – with proper conditioning, nutrition and coaching of players from a very young age – churn out young, confident and very professional players. These guys are ready to jump in and make a difference. The young player trope spouted be ex-pros doesn’t completely apply to most of these guys. The current crop, born in this century, have only ever known this more professional life.
Which is why we get record transfers, World Cup winners, club side MVPs and more.
So it is surprising that Tuchel decided he needed Henderson and Walker around in his squad. They have been performing way below their best for a couple of years now. There are better players in either of their positions. We saw Carsley, with the exception of one blip (when he seriously messed with the team and tactics at Pep-ian second guessing levels), use young players who delivered confident, creative and exciting football. Reverting to the U-21s, we saw him repeat this against the Czech Republic.
While I get Tuchel isn’t in the job to create a ‘legacy’ with England youth, it is precisely those younger players who would play in the confident style he desires (after sorting big pants Bellingham, of course.)
Sure, he sees more in training, etc, but its like practicing penalties in training, its like the old boxing phrase that everyone looks great until pinched in the nose. F*cking with formations, training in heated tents, players out of position, players that should be put out to pasture, does absolute nothing for morale or learning what is possible with the right players, in the right positions attempting to implement your strategy. I can only assume some players were kept in reserve because they were going to the Club World Cup and perhaps requested by club sides.
Can’t wait for this disaster of a club competition in so many ways to be over. Even transfer ‘season’ is more interesting. At least it will be a great test for the US immigration authorities to practice kicking out fans for the full World Cup.
Paul McDevitt
Sad reality of the Club World Cup
It’s a sign of the cynical times we live in now, that everything must be questioned for its integrity.
If a new scientific research is published… who sponsored it? If a report comes out about global warming… whose agenda is this helping?
Sometimes this is paranoid cynicism, other times it’s sensible scepticism.
I wouldn’t call myself a cynic, but I find myself very suspicious at the moment as I read and listen to analysts and journalists, suddenly become very positive, or at least open to the Club World Cup. It makes me wonder if this sudden open-mindedness has been ‘incentivized’ by Infantino and his a$$ociate$.
I can’t point the finger of blame here at F365, but I’ve definitely noticed a bit of a trend lately at The Athletic, whose coverage I often enjoy, and whose podcasts I listen to, as well as some others elsewhere. All of a sudden, the (fairly reasonable) eye-rolling at the Club World Cup has stopped, and the conversation is now more about “Maybe this will shine a line on football teams from around the world!” and “Benfica v Boca Juniors is an amazing tie for the football hipsters!”
Maybe this is all authentic – maybe as the football actually looms, these analysts are not exhausted after a long season and are genuinely looking forward to these glorified post-season friendlies. Maybe there are thousands of fans who think exactly the same.
I love following football. I love following Spurs (for my sins) and nothing beats a great international tournament. But this Club World Cup? A messy, money-grabbing mismatch of 32 teams who are probably dreading 4-6 extra weeks added on to their 60 game seasons? Awful.
International football has a romance about it. It has history, and legacy and national pride. I understand why players move heaven and earth to play for their countries, and why fans follow it feverishly.
Club football? It’s the highest quality, no doubt, and yes, we all love our clubs – but for those players, it’s their job. It’s a job I’m sure they enjoy, and one they are paid to do, but it’s a job. Players are of course proud, dedicated and ambitious, and want to win prestigious trophies with their clubs – but asking them to buy into this, at the end of a long season, when they know it is purely a FIFA money-spinner? Pathetic.
The coverage to date has treated the CWC as exactly this – a low interest FIFA vanity project. The lukewarm interest in TV Rights and ticket sales are a clear example. But now that I start to see certain journos take a surprising turn in its favour, I wonder if it’s genuine, or if they’ve been encouraged…
My hope? It’s a mess. Empty stadiums. Nobody watching on TV. Bayern beating Auckland 10-0 (Sorry Auckland) to show everyone what a farce this is. PSG and Real Madrid sauntering around the pitch with disinterested, tired players.
It’s just too much – the squashing of more and more and more into the calendar just dilutes all that’s left. Look at the last 10 games of the Premier League this year — it dragged its feet to the finish line because players and fans are at saturation. Don’t get me started on the post-season internationals.
Anyway, an interesting few weeks awaits (…or maybe not interesting at all).
Andy, THFC, Eire (Good Luck, Thomas Frank!)
READ: Ten players in the Club World Cup shop window for Premier League scouts