keithcun wrote:
Tut tut. Bit of revisionism there pal, expect better from you!
Wickham and Marveaux ring a bell?
The money doesn't have to be recuperated from a future sale. If Downing helps Liverpool to get in the Champions league twice in the next 5 seasons his fee will have been recuperated. Would Man U get their £18m back if they sold Michael Carrick tomorrow, or would they think the success they have had as a team during his spell has balanced the fee, which many thought was too much. If Man U spend £35m on Sneijder and replaced Carrick (as an example), would that money be recuperated in a future sale or would Man U deem it a price worth paying if they went on to win the League twice in the next 4 seasons?
I'll think you'll find Dalglish has wanted and tried to sign Downing in January. Did it ever cross your mind he wanted both?
OK, so we didn't overpay for two players, although it's arguable that we probably should have overpaid for Wickham, considering he's a) A striker; b) very young with huge potential; and c) his fee was actually quite small in comparison to Henderson's, Carroll's and Downing's.
We may make money in other ways, but I always believe every club that spends a big sum, unless they don't need future re-sale money, should always have three/four years ahead of them in mind. I feel that paying £20m for a player - whose value will only decrease - isn't the best piece of business to be making. Although he's contributed to them winning trophies, I don't think United's signing of Berbatov was that great a move, and I don't think they'll get much change from him if they go on to sell him. However, their signing of Hernandez is the complete opposite: cheaper, less risk involved and his price has probably trebled in one season. I understand that United having an established squad means they can go out and not put expectations on a player like Hernandez, but I'd personally rather see us go out and take risks on young players, instead of overpaying on a player who is decent, purely because of the reward factor. With Downing, we know we aren't getting a world class player, we know we aren't getting a player with CL experience and we know that his price tag is only going to decline, so the overpaying factor, for me, is frustrating.
As for wanting both, well, the impression I got (depends on what you believe) was we asked for Young, got told no, tried as hard as we could to change their mind, but they still said no. I never heard too much speculation on Downing in January, but if there was concrete interest, I'd willingly accept we wanted both. Still, for the sake of the debate, I think Young's a better player than Downing. Just has more to his game and asks more of the defence.