Brendan Rodgers says there is no-one better than him for Liverpool job

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
18 goals in 42 appearances, ****ing awful that.

One of the worst players in the league? yeah sure

Your football knowledge has literally.......................no start.

+7 GD in 30 PL games

[HASHTAG]#recordsigning[/HASHTAG] [HASHTAG]#ouch[/HASHTAG]
 
Agüero, Kane, Costa, Austin, Giroud, Sánchez, Hazard, Berahino, Rooney, Cissé, Silva, Benteke, Bony, Eriksen, Sakho, van Persie, Chadli, Diouf, Ings, Pellè, Jelavic, Mata, Ulloa, Touré, Lukaku :emoticon-0141-whew:

[HASHTAG]#recordsigning[/HASHTAG] [HASHTAG]#ouch[/HASHTAG]
 

I see. I clicked on the first link and the headline said
Radamel Falcao joins Manchester United in £16m season-long loan deal

You took that to mean an investment of £22million as you didn't read the article, you added the £6million loan fee to the figure of £16million which is what the article says it would cost United in total. Oops! [HASHTAG]#fatkidsonlyreadheadlines[/HASHTAG]

That article quotes wages of £190k a week. Other articles quote £265k a week, before or after tax depending on the article. United may or may not be paying all of the wages depending on which article you read. And all of them seem to be factoring in 52 weeks worth of wages for a 9 month loan (if I wasn't self employed I'd be taking this article to whoever paid my wages and asking them to pay me 52 weeks worth of wages for 9 months work!). So let's go with £265k a week and United are paying all of it (which the club have denied but we'll ignore any information that's come from the people who signed the player and base our assumptions on newspaper speculation). 40 weeks of wages would be just over £10million. Add on the £6million and looky here, we're at £16million not £20million [HASHTAG]#fatkidsthinktheerare52weeksin9months[/HASHTAG]

So given the inconsistencies in the articles it suggests that the journalists have about as much of a clue as you do!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tobes The Grinch
He already got mullered Astro, no point botheriing

Failcao, 13.6 million wages + 6 million loan fee to monaco , 20 million / 4 goals = 5m
best
case
scenario

Plus


<whistle>

[HASHTAG]#Pwned[/HASHTAG]

[HASHTAG]#mancmeltdown[/HASHTAG]
Unfortunately Astro's gone and produced a number of articles that shatter your Falcao theory.

Your Balotelli pricing analysis is pure Sisu Gold. Brenda should get you on the staff. You could convince some of the fans that Brenda only actually spent £25million last summer as the other £75million has been spread across the next 3 years!
 
I see. I clicked on the first link and the headline said
Radamel Falcao joins Manchester United in £16m season-long loan deal

You took that to mean an investment of £22million as you didn't read the article, you added the £6million loan fee to the figure of £16million which is what the article says it would cost United in total. Oops! [HASHTAG]#fatkidsonlyreadheadlines[/HASHTAG]

That article quotes wages of £190k a week. Other articles quote £265k a week, before or after tax depending on the article. United may or may not be paying all of the wages depending on which article you read. And all of them seem to be factoring in 52 weeks worth of wages for a 9 month loan. So let's go with £265k a week and United are paying all of it (which the club have denied but we'll ignore any information that's come from the people who signed the player and base our assumptions on newspaper speculation). 40 weeks of wages would be just over £10million. Add on the £6million and looky here, we're at £16million not £20million [HASHTAG]#fatkidsthinktheerare52weeksin9months[/HASHTAG]

So given the inconsistencies in the articles it suggests that the journalists have about as much of a clue as you do!


Article smarticle.

Falcao is on £265.000 = £13.780.000 per year + £6.000.000 loan fee to Monaco = £19.780.000 /4 = £4.945.000 per goal.

I admit I was 55.000k per goal off the mark :D
 
Article smarticle.

Falcao is on £265.000 = £13.780.000 per year + £6.000.000 loan fee to Monaco = £19.780.000 /4 = £4.945.000 per goal.
Oh dear #irishkidslikefatkidsthinkthereare52weeksin9monthspossiblybecausetheyspend3monthayearsinanalcoholinducedblackout
 
Unfortunately Astro's gone and produced a number of articles that shatter your Falcao theory.

Your Balotelli pricing analysis is pure Sisu Gold. Brenda should get you on the staff. You could convince some of the fans that Brenda only actually spent £25million last summer as the other £75million has been spread across the next 3 years!

How is it?

If we sign Balotelli for 4 years at 16 million, then that is 4 million per year it has cost the club for every year of his contract.

he can't be judged on the 16 million fee yet because he has 3 years left to score many more goals.
It's called investment, we've invested ina 4 year deal for 16 million.

We did pay it outright, but he doesn't cost us anything for the next 3 years but wages if he decides to leaveon a free after four years.

+ might I add, if we sell him in three years, for half that, it means he only cost us 8 million meaning your argument is even more faulty.<laugh>
 
Oh dear #irishkidslikefatkidsthinkthereare52weeksin9monthspossiblybecausetheyspend3monthayearsinanalcoholinducedblackout


Eye bleeding hashtag <laugh>

he signed last summer and will leave this summer <ok> It took you 30 minutes to come up with that <laugh>
[HASHTAG]#fail[/HASHTAG]



No need for xenophobia, now now
 
Granted Shteve, it may be less than 12 months. But that's no fun <ok>

Doesn't change the fact you've been mauled on this whole subject tho.<whistle>

can you confirm that United have not agreed to pay him for the full year tho, till this september?
 
How is it?

If we sign Balotelli for 4 years at 16 million, then that is 4 million per year it has cost the club for every year of his contract.

he can't be judged on the 16 million fee yet because he has 3 years left to score many more goals.
It's called investment, we've invested ina 4 year deal for 16 million.

We did pay it outright, but he doesn't cost us anything for the next 3 years but wages if he decides to leaveon a free after four years.

+ might I add, if we sell him in three years, for half that, it means he only cost us 8 million meaning your argument is even more faulty.<laugh>
It's not a 4 year investment. It's a 4 year contract. In three years he'll be out of contract you plum so he'd be able to move on a free! In 12 months he'll be angling for a new contract. Refuse to give it to him and you either have to get shot to the highest bidder within 12 months (and they'll be queuing up) or let him get into the last year of his contract to run it down and leave on a free.

Buying a player is a day one investment. If football clubs pretended otherwise they'd be bankrupt in no time as managers would be convincing chairmen that they didn't really spend £100million last summer, it was really only £25million with another £75million to be spread across the next three years with the promise of future success and strong resales. Brenda may use that argument on Balotelli but I suspect the owner will point to the fact that there is **** all evidence to suggest that the player is going to either score lots of goals in his next £4million investment tranche (or the third and fourth investment tranches) or have any kind of significant resale value (you'll have noted that Balotelli's transfer value has been heading in one direction since he signed for City).
 
Eye bleeding hashtag <laugh>

he signed last summer and will leave this summer <ok> It took you 30 minutes to come up with that <laugh>
[HASHTAG]#fail[/HASHTAG]



No need for xenophobia, now now
He signed on August 31st and will leave the day after the season ends. It's really not that hard a concept to grasp!
 
It's not a 4 year investment. It's a 4 year contract. In three years he'll be out of contract you plum so he'd be able to move on a free! In 12 months he'll be angling for a new contract. Refuse to give it to him and you either have to get shot to the highest bidder within 12 months (and they'll be queuing up) or let him get into the last year of his contract to run it down and leave on a free.

Buying a player is a day one investment. If football clubs pretended otherwise they'd be bankrupt in no time as managers would be convincing chairmen that they didn't really spend £100million last summer, it was really only £25million with another £75million to be spread across the next three years with the promise of future success and strong resales. Brenda may use that argument on Balotelli but I suspect the owner will point to the fact that there is **** all evidence to suggest that the player is going to either score lots of goals in his next £4million investment tranche (or the third and fourth investment tranches) or have any kind of significant resale value (you'll have noted that Balotelli's transfer value has been heading in one direction since he signed for City).


<doh>

His deal with the club is a 4 year contract, but to the club, it's a 4 year investment <laugh> They've put 16 mil into balo for his services for 4 years <laugh>

Every investment has a turnaround time projection where they expect a return over time, in this case goals.
 
Granted Shteve, it may be less than 12 months. But that's no fun <ok>

Doesn't change the fact you've been mauled on this whole subject tho.<whistle>

can you confirm that United have not agreed to pay him for the full year tho, till this september?

Next he'll claim he's only getting an hourly wage when on the pitch, which TBF would explain why he can't get a game