Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not a fan of Diskerud, ever since he jerked Columbus around when they wanted to sign him. His dad/agent is a shady guy.

Klinsmann is shuffling the team around quite a bit - perhaps too much? We can afford to get away with it against Haiti - but only just. I'd like to see a little more consistency in the USA starting XI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
A
o55o4.jpg


B
o55pc.jpg


C
o55qp.jpg
 
Sanchez - £32m
Hazard - £32m
Ozil - £42.5m
Fabregas - £30m
Aguero - £38m
Raheem Sterling - £49m

Well done Liverpool, shame on you City.

Basti to United could prove a shrewd move if he stays injury free and can adapt to the EPL's pace. But United's midfield looks a lot better with Scheiderlin. Arguably better than City's

But they've lost two strikers so where will the goals come from? Rumours of Cavani but PSG would want Di Maria in exchange i'd imagine...and is Cavani still Cavani.
 
So it looks like Stirling to Man City is a done deal at £49m as is Van Persie to Fenerbahce

£49m, is Stirling worth it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
Big money has inflated the market for top players such that all sanity has departed when it comes to player valuation. Sterling for £49m makes plenty of sense if you accept that reality, and is certainly a windfall for Liverpool. The market is limited only by what people are willing to pay.

Liverpool are no longer a top-tier team - worse, they are very much a selling team, a fate that has engulfed every team in Europe with the exception of financial strongmen Chelsea, Man City, Real, Barca, Bayern and Man Utd. The squad screams 5th-7th place to me. Liverpool's only chance at silverware is to buy a prospect who comes good in a big way, and then win something in the 1-2 seasons that player plays for Liverpool before he is sold to a direct rival. Other than that, they might win the odd League Cup when the money teams are tired from fixture congestion.

As a business, Liverpool looks healthy - the TV money is sickeningly large. As a competitive unit they are locked in an eternal limbo. Another Spurs/Everton.
 
Last edited:
Have to say, for Liverpool I think it's a good deal, so long as they're now planning on spending a large chunk of it on the next Andy Carroll ;)

Joking aside, I think Stirling is a good player, but is vastly overrated
 
Stirling is a good player, but is vastly overrated

That's been the case for every English player out there for decades. If England produced a player equal to Lionel Messi, the league, FA, press and punters in England would still find a way to overhype him.

I wish no ill on Stirling, but the cynical side of me would love to see him pull a Fernando Torres on City.
 
Always thought he's called Sterling? :confused:

Every single Bayern fan (well, except four eventually) are hating big time on Pep, blaming him for their icon switching sides. Quite lovely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
I wish no ill on Stirling, but the cynical side of me would love to see him pull a Fernando Torres on City.

Don't go that route! nobody likes the cynicals - not even fellow cynicals. It's like wishing somebody an injury when playing against them. Chelsea you mean, always felt a pity for him, dunno - maybe because even those fat guys that never ever sucessfully kicked against a ball are making fun of such great athletes - doesn't even matter that they get more money single handedly than (most probably) multiple twietee-generations. :eek:

Doesn't matter though. :cool:
 
Always thought he's called Sterling? :confused:

He is - except when I misspell his name. :D

It's hard not not to be cynical - football has had a financial side for a very long time, and the big teams usually win - but the gap between rich and poor has become staggering, bigger than at any time in history. The logical end result is the Euro Capitalism Super League.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
He is - except when I misspell his name. :D

It's hard not not to be cynical - football has had a financial side for a very long time, and the big teams usually win - but the gap between rich and poor has become staggering, bigger than at any time in history. The logical end result is the Euro [STRIKE]Capitalism[/STRIKE] Super League.

Every single Bayern fan (well, except four eventually) are hating big time on Pep, blaming him for their icon switching sides. Quite lovely.
[/QUOTE]

Fizzoid was also talking about Stirling :D

I know what you mean, and I personally feel quite the same (Hertha is about to close a deal with a betting company, eh the devil I mean). It's hard for those die-hard fans out there, which I am not, but to wish someone ill (<and I know you were just saying it) wouldn't be my response to super-commercialism within football. But yea, one gets detached as is, nothing you could do against it really. Although I personally don't get my enjoyment from Hertha (or Dortmund) winning something but from the way they play. But I see that this will be incredibly more difficult to admit (being a top sellers club at best) when rooting for legendary Liverpool.
 
If I were talking to a person interested in football and looking for a team to support, I would suggest remaining a neutral fan. If you pick a big team you will be seen as a johnny-come-lately; if you pick a smaller team you will always be disappointed with results. Better just to enjoy the game itself than get too tribal.

As for Sterling - I wish him well; my comment was directed more towards Man City. Sterling is being led by the nose by his agent, and it's true that this move makes total sense from Sterling's perspective. He will make more money the first week he joins City than I will in the next eight years, and he'll probably win a trophy or two.
 
if you pick a smaller team you will always be disappointed with results.

The soccer gods they are fickle. Even if you pick a marquee team you will be disappointed when they enter a slump or when the star player you follow is out on injury...

I love watching a good game even if the team I nominally support draws or loses.

Soccer is kind of like fishing that way for me, it's more about the journey/experience than the end result.

B
 
I love watching a good game even if the team I nominally support draws or loses.

I think some of the most fun I've had watching football has been in games between teams to which I have no allegiance whatever. You see things with an unbiased eye and appreciate good football for what it is - some of the group matches in the 2014 World Cup were great in that respect.
 
I agree with Blackadder. Personally, i find it much more enjoyable to watch as a neutral. You start appreciating quality and tactics rather than the 'please let us score' or 'please don't let us concede' viewpoint which can be myopic and bad for the heart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.