BG

This would be roughly where I would be at if I was convinced the powers that be were more likely than not to appoint someone obviously good. As I think that's probably less than a 50% chance I'm a bit torn. The things which weigh heavily against for me are I don't trust him to select top players, I don't think he can attract the best players and there isn't much evidence he can organise a back four. Therefore to do well with him we need to have a brilliant season attacking wise (like last season).

The only way I can avoid having nightmares about those three amigos is by displacing them with Poulsen and Konchesky into head. Then they seem like dream signings.

Interesting. Yes just read a little in the press about it. Still, assuming he's having cervical decompression it's still a few weeks out generally rather than months. I think if Real hadn't sacked him he'd probably have had the op and taken a few weeks out. On another note I'm surprised Simeone is never mentioned. Done an unbelievable job at athletico. Maybe ungettable.

Spinal surgery wouldn't necessarily rule out ancelotti unless the surgery is very complex. Which I doubt given he's seemingly walking around etc. Or unless there was an underlying cause for his need to have spinal surgery beyond a mechanical issue.

Not seen much of his Sevilla or Valencia. Record at Valencia is quite good. Goals against looks a bit of a concern everywhere he has been..

I'm assuming its a reference to the glittering array of talent purchased last summer.

The defence has only look ok for two periods that I recall. Once with Carragher in a four n the second half of his first season. Second with a back three for this season. When Suarez left it was obvious we needed a strategy. Something along the lines of clearly we are unlikely to be as good going forward this season as we've lost the third best player in the world. Therefore we need to be better in other areas. To do that we need e.g. a brilliant centre mid and a brilliant centre back. Instead we cocked about as per usual signing squad filler stuff and hoping one or two were hits.

We are going to have to do an Henry with him. Only solution.

Agree with 1, 3, 4, 9 and 10 especially. I basically agree with 5-8 but it's largely a consequence of 1. It also reminds me of Martin Johnson's description of an England cricket side. Something like "there are only three problems with this England side: can't bat; can't bowl; can't field."

This content is not viewable to guests.

Ward is doubtless following his client's agenda. But he'll also know that the cut of a big transfer is more attractive than no cut of a small tribunal fee.

The wages and fees are going up due to the TV deal. In the context of Shaw/Carroll etc its not that much. I think if we asked for 50m all the clubs above us would be interested (perhaps not Arsenal). So crazy in fact are the wages and fees in England that I read somewhere yesterday that even apart from the fact that he's not at the right level (yet, maybe ever) for Bayern Munich one of the reasons he wouldn't be going there was because the wages he was after were more than Thomas Muller and Manuel Neuer get. Which is quite striking when you think about their CVs.

The clause should be higher than that. And it doesn't need to include anything about United. The Heinze case means we can just say it is not club policy to deal with United.

Don't agree. I think he'll know he needs to keep his foot on the gas if he wants to develop as a player and get the move to City etc. A lot of players have looked good at his sort of age and never gone on to anything as they stopped developing.

The adviser has made the classic error over the past few months - much like Charlie Whelan in a different walk of life - of becoming the story. I'm not sure I could name another agent in football bar Mendes and his client list is somewhat different to Ward's.

Agreed. Puts player and agent in a vey difficult position if Henry says we're holding you to the contract and you can go in two years. Not sure what card agent and player can play then - refuse to play? The alleged Gallas play?

Clearly they are expecting the club to say that they won't sell at any price and attempting to make his staying untenable. Might backfire if the club hold firm.

Christ that article is depressing. The model's a mess and Rodgers' wishlist is painfully inadequate.

They put up with Mourinho for three seasons with him not winning much...albeit they hated him.

Here. You can download the full report too.

I see we are the fifth highest paying team in the Premier League. And the 14th highest paying team (across all sports) in the world.

I find myself a bit torn tbh between this view and thinking that: 1. He did have some control over the signings. It was very obvious that he really wanted the Southampton trio. Hard to believe that that 50m quid couldn't have been better spent on forward cover that wasn't Mario (who he clearly had enormous reservations about). 2. More general concerns about his ability to spot and attract top players. If we sell Sterling this Summer that's an even greater problem (personally I think we will dig in). You at least know if we had a Klopp/Rafa/Ancelotti that even if we sold Sterling they'd be able to attract top players. With Rodgers I wouldn't be sure if he could even if he had identified them. 3. The abundant evidence that he can't organise a back four effectively which makes winning anything much much harder.

At least we were signing players like those two and Mascherano.

Think the owners may very well just refuse to sell him. 35m would be a joke anyway. The benchmark is Luke Shaw at ?32m. Be amazed, if he's sold at all, if we take less than 50m.

This content is not viewable to guests.