Liverpool FC Forum

[loopyliverpool]

Well it was a gamble in the sense that we paid the highest fee for him of the history of the club, and we paid that for a player whose record of goals was this

2000/01*1
2001/02* 7
2002/03 14
2003/04 23
2004/05 20
2005/06  13
2006/07  15

The goals he scored in 2003-2005 were good numbers, but the rest of them especially the last two seasons weren't that great considering he took all the penalties. Considering that we needed a world class striker and that we had penalty takers at the club, it was a big money for me a player  only two seasons  had real good numbers.

His numbers and his play were those of a good-very good striker, but I was terrified that he was the choice of Liverpool back then, because it was a big money, and because we came from other failures seeking the striker we needed (Morientes, Cisse who was here, Kuyt). I didn't expect him being what he has been: a world class striker and exactly what we needed.

I'm the first to acknowledge my failure to predict this massive success, but let's be honest about something, very few in Spain thought that he would be a massive success, and I don't remember English fans around here especially sure about him being a total success.

Then he came, and right from the first day he started playing incredibly well. Good, but it wasn't an obvious choice as you suggest.

P.S. Last season Torres scored 16 goals, but playing 17 games. In the last seasons before coming here, he played almost everything, more than 34 games in the season, yet he only got 15 and 13. Last season Torres was pretty good aswell, and if he wasn't better it was because he saw his form cut by injuries.

But you have to put it in context that he wasn't in a great team! The top goal scorers inevitably come from the teams challenging for honours and Torres was playing in a very average team. He has regularly scored for us and he seems to score a fair few for Spain... both very good sides.

[Nando26]

Do I still think Johnson is overpriced? Yes, I do. And TWO games of a season aren't going to change my view, I'M not that fickle and easily impressed. Maybe I'm just one of a few who don't think silly money splashed all over the shop justifies a price tag, comparing Johnson with others proves nada as Johnson isn't Torres, Aquilani etc and plays an entirely different role so expectations for a player are higher for one who isn't there to specifically score goals etc.

£17.5m is way too much for a full-back, maybe about right for the very best full-back in the world (or top 3-5), but is looking world class against STOKE proof he is in that bracket?!?!? Instead of comparing Johnson's price with Torres, I give you a comparison with :

Sagna £6m
Evra £4m
Arbeloa £2.6m
Clichy - nothing or not a lot
Eboue £1m
Warnock £1.5m

Point being Johnson is in the price bracket with what Chelsea throw at full-backs, maybe if he has a game like he did against Stoke every other game for the rest of the season I'll concede he was overpriced but maybe worth £12m-£15m

Johnson can also play right wing centre back &even behind the striker hell get more goals then all them you mentioned
& he is in the top 5 right backs in the world, two games? hes been the best right back in the league for 2 seasons hes nailed on inthe england team & hes one of the few british players that are top quality

So yes he is worth the money

[Bad Bob]

Well it was a gamble in the sense that we paid the highest fee for him of the history of the club, and we paid that for a player whose record of goals was this

2000/01*1
2001/02* 7
2002/03 14
2003/04 23
2004/05 20
2005/06  13
2006/07  15

The goals he scored in 2003-2005 were good numbers, but the rest of them especially the last two seasons weren't that great considering he took all the penalties. Considering that we needed a world class striker and that we had penalty takers at the club, it was a big money for me a player  only two seasons  had real good numbers.

His numbers and his play were those of a good-very good striker, but I was terrified that he was the choice of Liverpool back then, because it was a big money, and because we came from other failures seeking the striker we needed (Morientes, Cisse who was here, Kuyt). I didn't expect him being what he has been: a world class striker and exactly what we needed.

I'm the first to acknowledge my failure to predict this massive success, but let's be honest about something, very few in Spain thought that he would be a massive success, and I don't remember English fans around here especially sure about him being a total success.

Then he came, and right from the first day he started playing incredibly well. Good, but it wasn't an obvious choice as you suggest.

P.S. Last season Torres scored 16 goals, but playing 17 games. In the last seasons before coming here, he played almost everything, more than 34 games in the season, yet he only got 15 and 13. Last season Torres was pretty good aswell, and if he wasn't better it was because he saw his form cut by injuries.

But you have to put it in context that he wasn't in a great team! The top goal scorers inevitably come from the teams challenging for honours and Torres was playing in a very average team. He has regularly scored for us and he seems to score a fair few for Spain... both very good sides.

Hi mate, I've got to back up what Sabre's saying here.  If this board is anything to go by--and back then it probably was (hard to believe how much we talked about football not so long ago  )--there were plenty of knowledgeable people who harboured doubts about Torres.

Most of us had see him perform well for Spain in the World Cup so we had seen the potential.  But, he had not yet pushed into the very upper echelons of world strikers at that stage.  Besides, we had all seen Baros take Euro 2004 by storm so we well knew how deceptive a good international tournament can be!  So, we were looking at a kid with the potential to be a top striker but one who certainly wasn't there yet.  As Sabre's pointed out, we'd had some bad luck with highly-rated strikers just before we signed Torres and, at that time, spending 20 million + pounds on one player was a HUGE deal.

On top of that, we had our man in Spain--Sabre--sharing his perceptions of Torres...perceptions formed based on far more frequent viewing than most of us had ourselves.  Sabre was very clear that he was a quality player with an amazing skillset but that he was still going to be a bit of a gamble because there was no real way to predict his mentality.  The 'local boy made good' might seriously struggle to adjust to life in England and to English football.  He might find the pressure of playing for Liverpool too much if he made a slow start, etc. etc.  I think Sabre was helping us all to manage our expectations back then and I think he was right to do so.  There were a lot of unknowns about the deal.

Hindsight being 20/20, it's easy to dismiss those concerns now as a bit silly and think that Nando's ascendancy to the very top of his craft was inevitable.  It wasn't.  We took a gamble when signing Torres for that money, just as we've done this summer with Johnson.  Thus, the comparison IS instructive, IMO, because, as Torres shows, sometimes in football you have to gamble.  Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

[maguskwt]

Well it was a gamble in the sense that we paid the highest fee for him of the history of the club, and we paid that for a player whose record of goals was this

2000/01*1
2001/02* 7
2002/03 14
2003/04 23
2004/05 20
2005/06  13
2006/07  15

The goals he scored in 2003-2005 were good numbers, but the rest of them especially the last two seasons weren't that great considering he took all the penalties. Considering that we needed a world class striker and that we had penalty takers at the club, it was a big money for me a player  only two seasons  had real good numbers.

His numbers and his play were those of a good-very good striker, but I was terrified that he was the choice of Liverpool back then, because it was a big money, and because we came from other failures seeking the striker we needed (Morientes, Cisse who was here, Kuyt). I didn't expect him being what he has been: a world class striker and exactly what we needed.

I'm the first to acknowledge my failure to predict this massive success, but let's be honest about something, very few in Spain thought that he would be a massive success, and I don't remember English fans around here especially sure about him being a total success.

Then he came, and right from the first day he started playing incredibly well. Good, but it wasn't an obvious choice as you suggest.

P.S. Last season Torres scored 16 goals, but playing 17 games. In the last seasons before coming here, he played almost everything, more than 34 games in the season, yet he only got 15 and 13. Last season Torres was pretty good aswell, and if he wasn't better it was because he saw his form cut by injuries.

But you have to put it in context that he wasn't in a great team! The top goal scorers inevitably come from the teams challenging for honours and Torres was playing in a very average team. He has regularly scored for us and he seems to score a fair few for Spain... both very good sides.

Hi mate, I've got to back up what Sabre's saying here.  If this board is anything to go by--and back then it probably was (hard to believe how much we talked about football not so long ago  )--there were plenty of knowledgeable people who harboured doubts about Torres.

Most of us had see him perform well for Spain in the World Cup so we had seen the potential.  But, he had not yet pushed into the very upper echelons of world strikers at that stage.  Besides, we had all seen Baros take Euro 2004 by storm so we well knew how deceptive a good international tournament can be!  So, we were looking at a kid with the potential to be a top striker but one who certainly wasn't there yet.  As Sabre's pointed out, we'd had some bad luck with highly-rated strikers just before we signed Torres and, at that time, spending 20 million + pounds on one player was a HUGE deal.

On top of that, we had our man in Spain--Sabre--sharing his perceptions of Torres...perceptions formed based on far more frequent viewing than most of us had ourselves.  Sabre was very clear that he was a quality player with an amazing skillset but that he was still going to be a bit of a gamble because there was no real way to predict his mentality.  The 'local boy made good' might seriously struggle to adjust to life in England and to English football.  He might find the pressure of playing for Liverpool too much if he made a slow start, etc. etc.  I think Sabre was helping us all to manage our expectations back then and I think he was right to do so.  There were a lot of unknowns about the deal.

Hindsight being 20/20, it's easy to dismiss those concerns now as a bit silly and think that Nando's ascendancy to the very top of his craft was inevitable.  It wasn't.  We took a gamble when signing Torres for that money, just as we've done this summer with Johnson.  Thus, the comparison IS instructive, IMO, because, as Torres shows, sometimes in football you have to gamble.  Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

very good post... couldn't have said it better myself... 

anyway back to us spending the kind of money for Johnson and Torres, etc., as a big four club, we need to be able to do that for key players...

having said that I have to say that Wenger's scouting network is really really top notch... look at the way they're playing right now. The only weakness they have is whether these youngsters have the stamina for the whole season. Usually, they would start off brightly and once they encounter some tough games and drew or lost they're confidence is shaken and wouldn't recover quickly... But how I wish some of those youngsters are playing for us with the experienced likes of Gerrard, Carragher, Torres, Reina, Benayoun etc.

[account deleted by request]

All transfers are gambles but IMO Torres wasn't such a huge gamble, he was a Spanish international of some standing, had scored regularly (if not always prolifically ) for a struggling team, was young and had the size and pace. Certainly he was more of a gamble then say Eto'o or even Villa would have been, but I think he was already a notch above where Benzema is now and Madrid have "gambled" £35million on him.

Just like Benzema lots of top clubs where interested in Torres, but thankfully Rafa was the one to put his money where his mouth was and signed him.  I knew little about him having only seen him a few times (I wanted him to be our second striker )but I had read enough to know he was very highly rated by some very shrewd and knowledgeable people. Certainly when we signed him I was more surprised that we got him so cheap (£27million with add ons) rather than that we paid too much for him , which does indicate that he was already a bigger name than some are trying to suggest. 

I for one certainly felt that Keane and Johnson where huge gambles (even though they where prem proven) which I never felt about Torres.

[Bad Bob]

All transfers are gambles but IMO Torres wasn't such a huge gamble, he was a Spanish international of some standing, had scored regularly (if not always prolifically ) for a struggling team, was young and had the size and pace. Certainly he was more of a gamble then say Eto'o or even Villa would have been, but I think he was already a notch above where Benzema is now and Madrid have "gambled" £35million on him.

Just like Benzema lots of top clubs where interested in Torres, but thankfully Rafa was the one to put his money where his mouth was and signed him.  I knew little about him having only seen him a few times (I wanted him to be our second striker )but I had read enough to know he was very highly rated by some very shrewd and knowledgeable people. Certainly when we signed him I was more surprised that we got him so cheap (£27million with add ons) rather than that we paid too much for him , which does indicate that he was already a bigger name than some are trying to suggest. 

I for one certainly felt that Keane and Johnson where huge gambles (even though they where prem proven) which I never felt about Torres.

It's a good point, mate, and I think it shows that the gamble is often in the eye of the holder to a certain degree.  I think part of the deal with Torres was that we'd been burned once with Morientes (top Spanish striker) and so some were not certain if he could adapt to the English game (I don't think anyone doubted his talent).  Thankfully, he took to it like a duck to water adn we haven't looked back.

I hope the same is true with Johnson.  There's no argument that 17.5 million (or whatever the exact figure is) is a lot to spend but, if he carries on as he's begun, it will be money well spent.  I simply do not agree with the argument that:

1) you shouldn't pay this much for a fullback

AND

2) if, you do, he should be the best fullback in the world

I think that all the top teams have proven in the last few years that having a top attack-minded fullback in the side is a vital part of the modern game at this level.  As such, the already proven, top drawer attacking fullbacks will--in today's inflated market--command more than we paid for Johnson.  By extension, that means that we've had to pay a lot of money for a fellow who isn't in that bracket yet but has it in his locker to get there.  The other approach is to pay less for kids with promise (a big gamble in its own right) or to forego the attacking fullback approach and focus on buying cheaper 'steady eddies'--a move, IMO, that we've tried and found wanting.  If we're to push for the title with the likes of Yossi and Kuyt on in wide positions we will certainly need attacking fullbacks who can provide width, pace and attacking menace down the the flanks.

[account deleted by request]

Yeah Bob, I think there is always a little more apprehension over large fees when its a player you have seen developing for years rather than some player you have never heard of before.

Buy some unknown player for £17.5million and its ...... Wow he must be good !
Buy someone who you have seen struggling as he comes through the ranks and its...... How much for fks sake! 

Johnson has certainly impressed me up to now, but I think he needs to prove himself defensively before I AM COMPLETELY WON OVER, but he has already shown much more than I thought he had in just a couple of games.

[loopyliverpool]

There are two facts which seperate Torres from all the other strikers mentioned in this thread who failed to make it and that is he possesses both pace and is a clinical finisher. Morientes good finisher a bit slow, Cisse very quick - finishing a bit circumspect, Kuyt-? These attributes IMO made Torres a safe bet to be successful.

[LFC2007]

It was a big gamble, absolutely no doubt about it, especially if you hadn't seen the player for a prolonged spell (Sabre, no excuses ), and I mean prolonged spell, not just clips from youtube or sky sports fecking news. Obviously Rafa would've been significantly more informed than any of newkit's part-time scouts. As it was, whoever we were to eventually sign that summer was a massive talking point because it was so important to our progression; we'd had bits and bobs up until that point under Rafa and this was our first clear chance to spend 'big, big money' on one individual, in a spending bracket we hadn't come close to, so it was crucial we got it right and we did in a big, big way and that's why Rafa deserves immense credit for it. He couldn't have made a wiser choice.

[Sabre]

There are no excuses, I was wrong, as already acknowledged.

However I don't discuss to be right or wrong, but to disagree or agree on topics, and I entered this debate to clarify that IMHO Rafa's decission had more merit than loopi was ready to admit.

I also want to add a couple of points about his claim of Atletico's size and quality.

* Atletico Madrid wasn't, isn't and won't be a small team. They're the third team in Spain in titles, and even in the year they were relegated, they had a expensive squad whose goal for the season was to be on top. It would be more or less as if Arsenal were relegated in terms of shock.

Atletico handles more money than most, and they've been a team able to attract names like Hasselbaink, Vieri at best, or Forlan and Aguero now. That is in the years that Torres played for them they underachived for the squad they had. That is, it's true Atletico didn't shine, but on paper, they always had one of the best squads, money wise and name wise.

* Sure, Torres had a big name and he made his name famous right from the beginning, he became the captain of Atletico with the impact that has in my country, he reached international status, but never won a place due to his lack of goals with the national squad, some of his goals were spectacular,  he was, what you can say a famous player in my country, and he was known aswell in Europe by most fans, at least, "name" wise.

No doubt he had offers, that's true aswell. However he was a big name, that was rising doubts about his evolution all over the place. Football wise, the jury was out. And the fact is that I remember very few people who sticked for the guy in my country.

On the contrary, and I tell you this as a background info, Torres had a lot of people on his back the summer he signed for us. THere were lots of journos saying what a big deal that was and not only doubting he'd make it here like me, but giving real stick. These two years they have been silent most of them critics, although a few of them still write some digs like "Atletico is stronger team with Aguero than with Torres", and "Torres has won nothing in any team, he doesn't make teams win, he shines for himself".

So, far from finding excuses, I want to stress that Torres has shut many critics' mouths here in the country, and that at least from here, his success wasn't a sure bet.


(anyway, these things are told from each one's point of view, so it's normal we saw Torres different)

[Bad Bob]

As it was, whoever we were to eventually sign that summer was a massive talking point because it was so important to our progression; we'd had bits and bobs up until that point under Rafa and this was our first clear chance to spend 'big, big money' on one individual, in a spending bracket we hadn't come close to, so it was crucial we got it right and we did in a big, big way

That's a very key point.  We really were in uncharted territory contemplating spending that kind of money and, as a result, the scrutiny on Torres was intense.

[loopyliverpool]

If that is the case I stand corrected. But, in the limited times I saw him play I always thought he was an exceptional player. Just to clarify I wasn't knocking Athletico as a big club or whatever I was intimating that they weren't the best team while Torres played for them and for him to have the return of goals he did have was pretty damn good. As for Rafa's decision to buy him - undoubtedly the best business he has done at our club. Im not going to go over what I think about the transfer because Im obviously in a minority of one! So I shall leave the subject. I just wonder what Rafa would say if you asked him: Was it a gamble to bring Torres to Anfield?

[LFC2007]

I just wonder what Rafa would say if you asked him: Was it a gamble to bring Torres to Anfield?

I think so.

We knew he was a player with kwality, but when you spend over twenty million pounds on one player, you know you have to get it right.

---------------------------------------

He would be right of course.

There are no excuses, I was wrong, as already acknowledged.

All in jest 

[Dazzer]

Way I see transfers budgets and how much to spend on a player is like this  , You only as rich as the life style you live.What I meen by that in football look at man city they have untold amounts of money so spending 18 mil on a right back is fine for them even if he turned out to be a flop they can offord it.

But when you talking about our club at this moment in time 18 mil is a ton of cash for a right back I don't care if he has the english flag tattoed on his bottom its alot.Now we can say in a season if it was worth it and only then because we will know then what we had to give up to sign him(maybe another striker or a classy winger).

But you never know this season we mgiht not need those players and Glen might prove to be the missing link who knows.But I know one thing its a massive gamble but we all know Rafa has never been shy with taking risks. 

[Sabre]

If that is the case I stand corrected. But, in the limited times I saw him play I always thought he was an exceptional player.

That's hardly surprising, because his style is spectacular. His pace wasn't any worse as you could expect, and some of his goals were spectacular. We all could see one of his games. Why the doubts? because there are always players, and I'll mention the most obvious example that comes to mind, like Patrick Kluivert, that have an obvious quality, but for some reason, when they go through the test of time, their goal tally is not according to the quality you see in some moments.

And maybe because Atletico was playing poorly for their standards or  for whatever reason, Torres wasn't regularly making goals for Atletico, not at least to the level of his quality. You add to that that in the times you saw him in a stadium with your local club his games were poor and with bad body language, and as a result you are not whatsoever convinced he's the right choice for Liverpool.

But Rafa, fortunately is pretty stubborn with the players he likes, in the case of Torres, his numbers didn't stop him, and in the case of Aquilani, the injuries haven't stopped him.

Aquilani is a very parallel case to Torres, there are doubts about his signing up, for different reasons this time, and like in the case of Torres he HAS TO get it right. We can't afford a new Fabio Aurelio / Kewell episode.

(LFC2007      )