Rodgers: " I'm working under financial restrictions"

BeautifulGame wrote:We arent really comparable with spurs and newcastle in financial terms.We are still one of the hugely marketable clubs in football and earn a lot more in sponsorship deals.

So 25mil isnt that huge a transfer kitty when u consider the revenue generated.Afterall we signed a record breaking shirt sponsor around the same figure despite missing out of CL football for 3 consecutive seasons.

Maybe so, but it's still hardly being "financially restricted" especially on 2 players.

Wenger spent similar amounts of Podolski and Giroud but i doubt he would come out and say i'm restricted with this budget.

It's an excuse IMO in case he fails to succeed, he can easily come back and say that the owners didn't back me.

Or he is trying to keep a lid on expectations.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:It's not an obsession, i just don't understand why one would complain about financial restrictions when you spent 25m on 2 unproven players....

Because the guy before him got to spend something like 100m?

I mean come on....Rodgers got Allen and Borini for nearly the same price that Dalglish got Henderson

Gosh, you people really want to go on about this? It's a matter of definition and nothing else. Financial restrictions for Barnsley, Liverpool and Manchester City mean totally different figures. That's all there is to it.

Art Morte wrote:Gosh, you people really want to go on about this? It's a matter of definition and nothing else. Financial restrictions for Barnsley, Liverpool and Manchester City mean totally different figures. That's all there is to it.

This. When people in this thread are saying Liverpool is a bigger club, it means bigger financially, not historically (obviously excluding the posts where someone said it explicitly). What Surag said earlier had nothing to do with Liverpool's history as a club, but everything to do with their marketability and financial resources, both of which are substantially more powerful than Newcastle's.

I don't care who you are, 25m on two players is not financially restricted.

No matter how big your supposed financial resources are.

2 players that haven't played in Europe either so it's not like your spending 25m on 2 CL proven level players.

I can't understand for the life of me how spending 25m on Allen and Borini is being restricted.

Also the reason Dalglish had so much money is because he sold Torres for 50m so don't compare them please.

I do agree though. I'm sure with 25m Liverpool could of gotten a few bargains.

[quote="Surag]The point i'm making is smaller clubs with shoe-string budgets can afford to take more risks with such kind of players whereas its certainly not the case with big clubs..[/quote]

wtfamireading.jpg