Ahhh. Here do you know how long he's got left anyway? And apparently we've started negotiating for Suarez extension today. Goes against FSG offering mid season extensions but want it finished before summer. Bet there will 15 copies in 5 different languages this time lol
The lawyers will have loads of fun and make loads of money sorting the Suarez contract out! As for mid-season extensions - for every rule there is at least one exception I've no idea how long Johnson has left on his contract but if he stalled in the Summer then it would appear to suggest that he doesn't have too long left.
We've got him, we're forced to pay him and there's no one at our club better than him. That doesn't make him value for money or mean it's the going rate, it means we have no choice. If there was an alternative player, we'd be after them. Hence the Montoya interest.
So where is the argument? If you can find better for cheaper then go for it. If not then you have to accept his wages. End of story
Accepting because we have no choice doesn't make it the going rate. It means we offload as soon as possible because he's not value for money. Plenty of RBs in the league are better and cheaper; that makes them the going rate and us over paying for less. You seem to be arguing that 100k is fine because we have no choice. I'm saying 100k isn't fine for what he gives us and we need another player instead. FSG/Rodgers clearly agree, hence the Montoya interest.
I'm saying that your analysis is far too simplistic. I am certainly saying that his wages are NOT the drive force for LFC seeking a replacement. More important factors than that are his age, his performance level and the time left on his contract. We are paying him £100K and will continue to do so (and more) provided that he meets/exceeds requirements. There is not one member of our squad that we are not seeking a replacement for - hence the Montoya interest!
I heard that Glen will be forced to accept a pay cut which would indicate that we won't continue to pay him £100k a week, regardless of whether or not he meets expectations. Also, Zabaleta and Ivanovic are better right backs than Johnson IMO.
I have to say Glen Johnson irritates me. I try not to repeat myself, but I remember when we were terrible a few years back and he was the laziest player in the team. Half heartedly attacking, jogging back, not putting a strong challenge, stopping the ball from wide areas. His attitude stunk of someone who was not prepared to shoulder any responsibility when the going was tough. Now, in a better team, he is largely the same, with the odd really good game mixed in between. At 30, and on over 100k, we should definitely look to replace him. He's on too much to be a squad player, but isn't performing enough to start regularly.
It is a difficult situation, Flanagan is all of a sudden the best RB we have but he's covering the left back slot, Kelly is a better defender but then we would lack width. I hope we have a replacement lined up and I'm sure we do.
Since he's come back into the team, our shape has changed dramatically, we have natural width and that benefits the team. He can also cover the left as he did very well last season. Sure, he's made a few errors but attacking FB's nearly always do. There aren't many in the league better than him in his position tbh, perhaps why he's been selected by successive England and Liverpool Managers. However, if his attitude really is bad, I seem to recall Hodgson challenging him?, then maybe best shot of but I personally think we'd notice him gone if we don't replace with high quality.....and I don't mean that we'll block more crosses!
£100k for a player who is approaching 30, injury prone, prone to costly errors is not good enough - add the fact that he is not contributing in an attacking sense either. The only reason why we missed his presence was because we literally had no one else who could cover. He's the best we've got at the moment which is an indictment of the competition he has.
He is very good at providing width and moving the ball from the 1st to the 2nd third of the pitch. He also creates an overlap which may not always be the option that players like Allen & Lucas use but it drags players out of the main playing zone. That said his stats to not measure up to his wages and i'd rather take his 100K a week off the payroll and give to Suarez in a 6 year deal with a £120m buy out clause available to only champions leagues clubs who have won the trophy in the last 5 years who are based outside of the UK
It's a weird one with Glen, he really does look like a player playing at about 80% and that's not acceptable whatever his wages are. The strange thing is we all know he can play better and offer more. He's never been a player I've looked at and thought "oh god Glen's playing again" but these days he rarely gets you off your seat like he used to either. I really don't think he's been helped by the chopping and changing of the defence around him this season so I would be interested to see how he performs over the rest of the season in a settled back four (if we ever get a settled back four).
Oh the moral outrage!!!! Come on lads. In reality you don't give a **** how much he is paid. There are others in the squad who don't deserve their wages but you keep stum about that. Johnson is the best we've got at present in his position. Until a better player can be recruited then you'll just have to keep giving him your support.
That rules out Real Madrid then! Only Barca or B.Munich. Surely we could sneak a couple of caveats in there ruling these two out too?
I don't sense too much "moral" outrage Skip it's more a question of is a player value for money? As I said if a player looks like he's playing at 80% that's unacceptable whatever he earns. However IMO if you're willing to sign a big fat contract worth a fortune then yes the club should expect the majority of your performances to reflect that. At the moment Glen isn't justifying being one of our highest paid players (and I've been one of his biggest supporters as you know)....if he does get back up to the levels he is capable of then his wages come into question a whole lot less.
Casting a critical eye over him doesn't mean we're not supporting him. I've always been uneasy with Johnno's defending- he can be good one game and lousy the next, and that inconsistency makes me nervous. When he was providing a decent attacking threat the risk was justified, but now that seems to have all but evaporated I do wonder about his role. I understand it goes with the system for an attacking full back to get caught upfield and be covered by his CB, but in those instances I expect to see him busting a gut to recover position and too often he just doesn't seem to be bothered. He has the talent, but the motivation seems to be lacking, which is very strange in a season when the team is doing so well.
Billy, I totally agree with you. I just get narked when a players wages are picked upon. Criticise him on his performance or limitations. Offer alternative solutions if you can - that all fine and should happen. I don't know why he does not appear to be operating at more than 80%. Perhaps there is some hangover from the injury? Perhaps he's holding back because he doesn't want to risk his England place - after all Walker is his prime competition and Walker is crap! But I doubt that Rodgers would put up with 80% if he's still at that level come the Summer 2014.
