Liverpool Message Board
So, obviously nobody in the Liverpool nation/world wants to see Suarez get sold to Arsenal, and Arsenal have been derisory, disrespectful, agitating, AND borderline in "breach" of EPL/FA/UEFA sanctions with the 40M +1 bid. That being said, as Loki pointed out, and most of us know/think, Arsenal are our most likely challenge if just aiming for 4th, along with Spurs, so sending him there, without Giroud, Walcott or Wilshere the other way, is a no go, and they won't pay 51M- 55M..
As it stands, outside of Madrid digging for loose sofa change, or maybe Bayern because of Pep / Pere Guardiola, I don't see where else in Europe he can go, or who wants this clown / circus. It got me thinking, that we've done it before, and possibly we could do it again.
IF, and it's a big IF.. Chelsea give up their chase for Shrek of 40M, and turned to us, offering 40M, plus Torres, I'd be hard pressed to not take it. Suarez is out for 6 matches, so he doesn't help them immediately. He helps them eventually become the favorites which many consider them now, and, while some may be doubtful of Torres, he's in his physical / and age prime, no injuries in 2 years, and I bet would burst into life at Anfield. Plus I think for our style and chances created, Rodgers could get 20 goals from in for 2-3 years, I really do. If not Torres, though I doub't they'd offer him, Lukaku, but he's a young star in the making..
That idea could also be applied for Man City too.. We're not competing with them, and while he'd make them stronger, they already have 4 borderline world class strikers, and I'd say we could ask for 35M + Dzeko and Sinclair, and call it a day.. In that sense, we'd get 2 quality players, one of the highest in Dzeko, and one keen to find his POY form from Swans 2 years ago, which would push Downing out.
Obviously these go against all logic and things we'd really not enjoy seeing, BUT, they aren't the worst options, and strengthen us w/ money to burn.. It CANNOT be Arsenal
I could defo go for the City option, but the Torres option? I think our style of play is more suitable to his game than the way Chelsea have played, but he's lost the pace that saw him burn off many a defender when he was with us. I still say it, but we could do no worse than Jordan Rhodes as a striker. He might cost 10 to 12, but he got what 29 goals in the league last year, plus he's young and fits the model. This kid is the new Shearer!
- 1 Reply to Loki
Kinda makes you wish we'd gone for Negredo or Jovetic ourselves, and for whatever reason, City said they have no intention of selling Dzeko making him 4th choice, but often their best. I kinda feel for the guy. As for Torres, I think he may have lost a step, but the two biggest things he's lost are his confidence, and his predatory/instinctual nature..
Everytime you watch him play for Chelsea, since they he arrived there, he seems as if he's always caught in two minds, about whether to make a run, stop, go, lay a ball off, try and create, try to partner.. He's noticeably bigger and stronger, and certainly pacey enough, especially considering the support we'd have around him, and let's say it's 40M + him, we'd basically get him back for 10M, and have 40M to reinvest .. I much prefer him, or any of the other names from Europe, no disrespect to Rhodes, only as I see he'd need to make a step up and adjust for a year or two..
Still out there are Salomon Rondon, Luis Muriel, Leandro Damiao, Alessandro Matri, and again, my # 1 choice if I were able to spend money for us, Erik Lamela.. he's got it all man!
I'll put deals with players used as a makeweight aside as I don't usually like this way of doing business. However if either Chelsea or City came in for him and made a market rate offer I'd go for that way before any bids from Arsenal or Spurs, simply because in the near term they are not our direct competitors, while the North London clubs are. If either Spurs or Arsenal want him, they have have to pay a hefty premium, and even then I'm not sure its worth it.