Finn Hatherell
Staff Writer
After losing September’s fixture to Manchester United, Liverpool are currently lying in 12th position and have had their worst start to the league since 1911 . However, it will not just be Brenden Rodgers that the fans will begin to vent their frustration at if this bad run continues, but also the owners, Fenway Sports Group, who have promised much, but delivered little since taking over Liverpool two years ago.
After the controversy of transfer deadline day on the 31st of August it was Fenway Sports Group (FSG) who looked like the laughing stock of the Premier League by offloading Andy Caroll but failing to bring in a replacement, leaving their transfer strategy looking frugal and lacking any real substance. Brenden Rodgers wanted to offload Andy Caroll from the wage bill, as he agreed with FSG that the club could not afford to have a 35 million pound striker sitting on the bench each week, as that would not do the club or the players any favours.
So off went ‘Big Andy’ to West Ham on a season long loan which seemed to free up the funds to allow Rodger to pursue his summer long transfer target, Clint Dempsey. Everything then seemed in place for Rodgers to assemble his desired squad that could fit into his footballing philosophy. Demspey had just enjoyed his most successful season in the premier league scoring 22 league goals, which was a phenomenal return for a player who was rarely deployed as an out and out striker. Rodgers saw him as a perfect addition to his squad due to his versatility, technical ability and the potential of adding some much needed goals to a Liverpool team that only found the net 47 times in the league last season.
However, Clint Dempsey was not the ideal player that matched the requirements of FSG’s transfer policy. At the age of 29, John Henry and Tom Werner (owners of FSG) viewed him as a player that was clearly at his peak, but his value was rapidly depreciating. He did not fit in with the ideals of the much talked about ‘Moneyball’ transfer policy that FSG have tried to employ at Liverpool. Due to his age, FSG were not willing to spend more than £4m on him, so Fullham decided to sell him to Totenham for £5m, even though Liverpool was Dempsey’s preferred destination.
Dempsey going to Tottenham has been a huge blow to Liverpool, as they now have to do with only two established strikers in their squad until the transfer window re-opens in January. Therefore, surely the failure by FSG to bring Dempsey to Liverpool should bring their ‘Moneyball’ transfer policy into question? Since taking over Liverpool, John Henry and Tom Werner have spoken of the importance of buying youth to help create a long term successful future for the club. Due to this policy, the club refuses to bring in any players over the age of 27, as they seek to buy players that will give the club ‘maximum value’.
The thinking behind this theory is that they can buy players when they are young at a cheap price, turn them into better players and then sell them at their peak, showing a handsome profit for the football club and helping to create a sustainable financial future. However, the question I would ask is where does this policy leave the football team?
Two previous players which Liverpool bought who would have fitted in perfectly with FSG’s policy are Fernando Torres and Xabi Alonso. Both of these players were brought in under Rafa Benitez before FSG owned the club. Xabi Alonso was bought by Liverpool as a 22 year old for £10m – he was then sold at the age of 27 for £30m. Fernando Torres was brought at the age of 23 for £26m; they then sold him at the age of 27 for £50m. Both of these transactions represented a major financial coup for the club as Liverpool made a £44m profit off both players. However, their loss cannot be underestimated – when Liverpool sold Xabi Alonso in 2009 they ended up finishing 7th place in the league that season, as opposed to 2nd the year before. The sale of Fernando Torres in 2010 has left Liverpool still looking for a suitable striker to replace him, as they have found goals hard to come by since his departure.
The result in losing both these players has meant Liverpool have gone three seasons without Champion’s League football. According to FSG’s transfer strategy, the sale of both these players would seem beneficial to the club. This is the problem with their ‘Moneyball’ transfer strategy – they view players purely as financial assets and not as footballers. I agree that buying young players is better value and can work to the club’s benefit, but there are some cases when players need to be looked at purely in football terms – this way, in the future, Liverpool won’t miss out on the likes of Clint Dempsey because of their limited re-sale value.
Ironically enough it was Robin Van Persie who scored the winning goal that helped Manchester United beat Liverpool 2-1 in September. Van Persie, so far, looks to be the signing of the summer; however. at the age of 29, with a £24m price tag, he’s a player that FSG would never consider as a viable transfer target for the football club, even though he may prove to be the difference in United winning the premier league title this season.
The model that has brought success to Manchester United has involved the manager dealing with all football matters and the owners backing his decisions. Rodgers should begin to point to the success of their rival’s simple philosophy if FSG continue to fall short come the January transfer window.
So far, FSG have talked a good game – they have spoken of their desire to build a new stadium and build a squad capable of once again fighting for the premier league title. They have been ruthless in their actions so far, sacking the great ‘King Kenny’ a man who is arguably bigger than the football club itself. In hiring Brenden Rodgers they have taken a bold risk in hiring a young manager with limited experience, and if results don’t rapidly change it will not be long before chants of ‘Daglish’ resonate among the Anfield faithful.
In order for this risk to pay off they must give Rodgers their full support, and that involves providing him with the funds necessary to build his own squad, irrespective of what their opinion on his transfer targets may be. Rodgers is already beginning to feel the pressure, but Tom Werner and John Henry will soon come under scrutiny, too, if they don’t begin to allow Rodgers to manage the club based on his own footballing principles, and not based on their financial goals.
