Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:18 am
"Williams, though, was a boyhood Liverpool fan and would favour a move to Merseyside but he is likely to cost in the region of £12million and Fenway Sports Group have implemented a strategy that means they do not sign players over the age of 23."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... wners.html "Boyhood Liverpool fan." Aren't they all? Not signing players over the age of 23? I can understand not wanting to buy older players as their resale values are obviously lower, but 23 is a ridiculously young age to set as your limit. Is this a real FSG policy, or just newspaper BS? I don't understand why you'd be limiting yourself to limiting yourself to signing such young players. Obviously Suarez has been a success, but I do suspect they are seeing that success and think it can be replicated when it never will. I think Man Utd got massively lucky with Ronaldo and I think Liverpool got a similar piece of luck with Suarez. But those signings will be among the top 1% of signings made. I think if you have a policy of only buying players aged 23 and under you're pretty much limiting yourself to players who shine for a while very early, but could easily fade as fast. If Ashley Williams is a good enough defender to be able to help LFC push for the top 4 then he's worth buying. Being about to leave on a Bosman after 4 years means nothing if he's played well for you. If you're buying players under 23 just because they can't leave on Bosman's at the end of their contract then you're just significantly raising your chances of buying c**p players. I can understand wanting young players, cheaper players and favoring that type of recruitment, but I don't understand why you'd be limiting yourself by imposing a ban on buying older players. |
"Williams, though, was a boyhood Liverpool fan and would favour a move to Merseyside but he is likely to cost in the region of £12million and Fenway Sports Group have implemented a strategy that means they do not sign players over the age of 23."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... wners.html "Boyhood Liverpool fan." Aren't they all? Not signing players over the age of 23? I can understand not wanting to buy older players as their resale values are obviously lower, but 23 is a ridiculously young age to set as your limit. Is this a real FSG policy, or just newspaper BS? I don't understand why you'd be limiting yourself to limiting yourself to signing such young players. Obviously Suarez has been a success, but I do suspect they are seeing that success and think it can be replicated when it never will. I think Man Utd got massively lucky with Ronaldo and I think Liverpool got a similar piece of luck with Suarez. But those signings will be among the top 1% of signings made. I think if you have a policy of only buying players aged 23 and under you're pretty much limiting yourself to players who shine for a while very early, but could easily fade as fast. If Ashley Williams is a good enough defender to be able to help LFC push for the top 4 then he's worth buying. Being about to leave on a Bosman after 4 years means nothing if he's played well for you. If you're buying players under 23 just because they can't leave on Bosman's at the end of their contract then you're just significantly raising your chances of buying c**p players. I can understand wanting young players, cheaper players and favoring that type of recruitment, but I don't understand why you'd be limiting yourself by imposing a ban on buying older players. |
|