|
Post by Ryan_Shawjosh on Dec 12, 2014 10:43:55 GMT
Some have said released and some have said a loan it seems. I would find it even less likely of him moving to one of those clubs permanently, anyway. You would have to worry about the wages in either case but you would then have to worry about contract length. I can't see clubs like us, and even West Ham for that matter, offering him high wages for 3 or 4 years with the risk that he might just be no better than what they have already. Chelsea might pay for some of his wages until the end of the season but would they do it for the length of whatever contract he demands? It'll be interesting to see where he ends up but I can see it being a Spanish club, and it will be if he has any sense. wouldn't surprise me if they did just release him. the reason it was a 2 year loan to Milan was because they were picking up the wages and it took him to the end of his Chelsea contract so Chelsea obviously have 0% interest in ever using him again and accept they won't get any transfer fee so just want him off the wagebill. having said that, Milan were paying him £3.1 mill a season that's only about 60k a week isn't it? how the mighty have fallen! It they do then it would open up a lot more options in the prem as he would be forced to take a pay cut. If that's true about £3.1 mill a season, then I'm not sure he would be out of reach of us and a few others. If they want the same from a prem team, would teams seriously turn down the chance of signing Torres for under £5 mill with no wages (taking out half a season he's spent at Milan)? I know it would be more complicated than that but that would effectively be what it would cost? I'm not saying him coming to us is realistic and you could use any stats you like in football to make something seem more likely, but maybe it's not impossible.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Dec 12, 2014 10:45:48 GMT
The article says (I think) that Chelsea are willing to release him. It'd be a pure wage issue. Which wouldn't help us but is he going to get 80k? If he is you'd be looking at West Ham..... Some have said released and some have said a loan it seems. I would find it even less likely of him moving to one of those clubs permanently, anyway. You would have to worry about the wages in either case but you would then have to worry about contract length. I can't see clubs like us, and even West Ham for that matter, offering him high wages for 3 or 4 years with the risk that he might just be no better than what they have already. Chelsea might pay for some of his wages until the end of the season but would they do it for the length of whatever contract he demands? It'll be interesting to see where he ends up but I can see it being a Spanish club, and it will be if he has any sense. A bit like Bojan in the summer, I think people are over egging the player and underselling ourselves in this imo. Like I said, I don't think he'll join us but I really don't think it's that much of a jump to think he would. We're a good proposition, on paper he isn't.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2014 10:49:32 GMT
Some have said released and some have said a loan it seems. I would find it even less likely of him moving to one of those clubs permanently, anyway. You would have to worry about the wages in either case but you would then have to worry about contract length. I can't see clubs like us, and even West Ham for that matter, offering him high wages for 3 or 4 years with the risk that he might just be no better than what they have already. Chelsea might pay for some of his wages until the end of the season but would they do it for the length of whatever contract he demands? It'll be interesting to see where he ends up but I can see it being a Spanish club, and it will be if he has any sense. A bit like Bojan in the summer, I think people are over egging the player and underselling ourselves in this imo. Like I said, I don't think he'll join us but I really don't think it's that much of a jump to think he would. We're a good proposition, on paper he isn't. particularly as Milan even offered him back to Atletico and they have refused to take him on as well. at some point he has to recognise that the days of expecting a big name in World football to come calling are (you would think) behind him now.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Dec 12, 2014 10:51:08 GMT
Torres decline was partly his loss of pace but mostly a loss of confidence at Chelsea.
30 years of age now, so should still have 2 or 3 good years now.
I think a 6 month loan/contract initally to see if he can re-kindle it would be good to put on the table.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Dec 12, 2014 10:51:28 GMT
A bit like Bojan in the summer, I think people are over egging the player and underselling ourselves in this imo. Like I said, I don't think he'll join us but I really don't think it's that much of a jump to think he would. We're a good proposition, on paper he isn't. particularly as Milan even offered him back to Atletico and they have refused to take him on as well. at some point he has to recognise that the days of expecting a big name in World football to come calling are (you would think) behind him now. And people see that name Milan and all the quality it evokes. At the minute they're 7th in Serie A and playing awful football and have been like that for some years. Agreed, he will either bite the bullet and move down the league or go to the MLS.
|
|
|
Post by britsabroad on Dec 12, 2014 10:51:58 GMT
You never lose skill. It's unlikely he'll ever find it again but it's in there somewhere. He needs to go back to Atletico if they'd take him or somewhere where he could become the main man again and feel settled. I suspect he'll just go where the money is, though. But you do lose pace, and that was what set him apart. He was a victim of his own hype really. He was great for Liverpool for a couple of years, when he was lightning quick off the mark, but they kept bringing him back early from injury. Other than those couple of years he was never more than a goal every 2 or 3 games player though, even at Atletico. I was and still am amazing Chelsea paid that for him. Now his pace is gone I'm not sure what he's got left.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Dec 12, 2014 10:53:01 GMT
Would have to be a performance based contract for me, he has been shite for a while.
Not sure he's attainable but it's good to ponder.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_Shawjosh on Dec 12, 2014 10:56:48 GMT
You never lose skill. It's unlikely he'll ever find it again but it's in there somewhere. He needs to go back to Atletico if they'd take him or somewhere where he could become the main man again and feel settled. I suspect he'll just go where the money is, though. But you do lose pace, and that was what set him apart. He was a victim of his own hype really. He was great for Liverpool for a couple of years, when he was lightning quick off the mark, but they kept bringing him back early from injury. Other than those couple of years he was never more than a goal every 2 or 3 games player though, even at Atletico. I was and still am amazing Chelsea paid that for him. Now his pace is gone I'm not sure what he's got left. His pace wasn't the only thing he had but rather, as you said, is what set him apart from other top players. One goal that springs to mind was the volley he scored for Liverpool (think it might have been against Blackburn). His movement and technique was incredible. Don't get me wrong, I'm still amazed at the amount they paid for him but he had a lot more than just pace.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Dec 12, 2014 11:12:47 GMT
Still only 30 so should have at least 3-4 years left at top level. I think Torres needs to go to a club and a manager who will show faith in him, because I think he really needs a manager who can put an arm around his shoulder right now. Was just incredible at Lpool!
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Dec 12, 2014 11:50:10 GMT
We could get him fired up again with the Boothen roar behind him and we would have a great player on our hands!
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Dec 12, 2014 11:53:15 GMT
A frontline of Torres and Bojan....
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Dec 12, 2014 11:54:20 GMT
The similarity to Shevchenko is uncanny.
Shevchenko was one of the hottest strikers in the world, scoring for fun in Serie A. Abramovich personally chased him for a number of years before signing him for a big fee.
The minute he signed for Chelsea he looked a shadow of his former self, whether he had been in the decline at Milan I don't know but it wouldnt surprise me.
A couple of years later, the same happened to Torres.
Strange.......
For what it's worth, I think Torres may be finished. It could be that a club like us or West Ham could reignite his career, but I'd rather spend the money on someone younger, with potential for a high sell on fee.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Dec 12, 2014 12:03:02 GMT
I'd take him. Did his knee in a few years ago which is where all his pace went. I actually think he's adapted his game really well though. He doesn't rely on his pace so much now, but has become more of a traditional striker.
I'd take him for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2014 12:13:30 GMT
I'd take him. Did his knee in a few years ago which is where all his pace went. I actually think he's adapted his game really well though. He doesn't rely on his pace so much now, but has become more of a traditional striker. I'd take him for sure. but he's become a traditional striker who only scored once in his first ten games at Milan. there's a reason why they want to sever a 2 year loan deal only a few months into the first year and the fact that his old club (where he's seen as a legend) don't want him back either speaks volumes for me! he's scored 21 goals in total at club level since 2011 and played 120 games... that's less than Crouch, Walters or Diouf and let's not pretend that Serie A is still a league to be reckoned with, the standard isn't as good as the Prem and it's nowehre near as competitive or as physical. it's one hell of a gamble (even for free!) for anyone to take. i think if (and it's a big if) we got him then he'd be another Gudjohnsen. i don't really see any need nowadays to invest in players that were once great but haven't shown it for ages (i.e. Gudjohnsen, Woodgate, Owen) simply because they might come good again and because we can say that "X used to play for us". we're better than that nowadays aren't we? i'd rather go for players that may have a future rather than ones who have already had their time and have shown no evidence of ever getting even close to that quality again for years now.
|
|
|
Post by basingstokie on Dec 12, 2014 12:51:42 GMT
Well and truly finished. Liverpool did so well to get £50m when they did. Shame they spunked most of it on Carroll, although they did buy Suarez at the same time.
Next stop Qatar for 1 final pay day
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Dec 12, 2014 12:53:58 GMT
At 60k per week on a free he would cost just over £3m for a years contract, probably half to complete the season. Well worth the risk.
But not if it stopped us buying Yarmalenko.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2014 13:02:48 GMT
At 60k per week on a free he would cost just over £3m for a years contract, probably half to complete the season. Well worth the risk. But not if it stopped us buying Yarmalenko. so you'd pay 60k a week for a goalscorer who over the last 4 years has scored an average of 1 every 6 games whilst playing with a far higher quality of team mates than he'd have here, purely on the basis that he scored loads more about 6 years ago when he was playing with a far higher quality of team mates than he'd have here? this is Michael Owen all over again...once an fantastic striker, has been dogged by injuries, hasn't shown any form for anyone for years but we'll take him based on what he did years ago. i thought it was precisely this kind of thing that Coates wanted to get rid of hence bringing in the "Young players, exploit the foreign market and make sure they have a resale value" transfer policy? i don't want to go back to the old transfer policy of "Buy anyone based purely on their name which was built on achievements from donkey's years ago just so we can say a big name star once played for us". i thought we wanted to progress past all that?
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Dec 12, 2014 13:14:10 GMT
At 60k per week on a free he would cost just over £3m for a years contract, probably half to complete the season. Well worth the risk. But not if it stopped us buying Yarmalenko. so you'd pay 60k a week for a goalscorer who over the last 4 years has scored an average of 1 every 6 games whilst playing with a far higher quality of team mates than he'd have here, purely on the basis that he scored loads more about 6 years ago when he was playing with a far higher quality of team mates than he'd have here? this is Michael Owen all over again...once an fantastic striker, has been dogged by injuries, hasn't shown any form for anyone for years but we'll take him based on what he did years ago. i thought it was precisely this kind of thing that Coates wanted to get rid of hence bringing in the "Young players, exploit the foreign market and make sure they have a resale value" transfer policy? I agree with your risk assessment if it didn't work, on the other hand it isn't a lot of money in football terms especially if it did. He is complaining that he is getting very little game time, which never improves talent. All signings come with a potential risks including loans, we have made little use of Assaidi for example but got a lot from Moses who had also been written off.
|
|
|
Post by djralphy2k9 on Dec 12, 2014 13:15:59 GMT
With Moses back and Bojan the magician weaving his magic then Torres can be the poacher, put it in the box and he will score
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2014 13:19:11 GMT
With Moses back and Bojan the magician weaving his magic then Torres can be the poacher, put it in the box and he will score like he did with Chelsea and like he's done for Milan you mean?
|
|
|
Post by djralphy2k9 on Dec 12, 2014 13:20:40 GMT
With Moses back and Bojan the magician weaving his magic then Torres can be the poacher, put it in the box and he will score like he did with Chelsea and like he's done for Milan you mean? Bit tongue in cheek there my friend, I think there is a good striker in there but not for silly money
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2014 13:23:58 GMT
so you'd pay 60k a week for a goalscorer who over the last 4 years has scored an average of 1 every 6 games whilst playing with a far higher quality of team mates than he'd have here, purely on the basis that he scored loads more about 6 years ago when he was playing with a far higher quality of team mates than he'd have here? this is Michael Owen all over again...once an fantastic striker, has been dogged by injuries, hasn't shown any form for anyone for years but we'll take him based on what he did years ago. i thought it was precisely this kind of thing that Coates wanted to get rid of hence bringing in the "Young players, exploit the foreign market and make sure they have a resale value" transfer policy? I agree with your risk assessment if it didn't work, on the other hand it isn't a lot of money in football terms especially if it did. He is complaining that he is getting very little game time, which never improves talent. All signings come with a potential risks including loans, we have made little use of Assaidi for example but got a lot from Moses who had also been written off. he's played in 10 of the 14 serie a games this season and scored just once. he's made 120 appearances in 4 years and scored just 21...the reason he "doesn't get enough game time" (which he seems to think) is because he doesn't score goals, nothing else! if he was still a true goalscorer with undoubted quality then don't you think it's a bit strange that no-ones tried to buy him off Chelsea over the last few years? not only has no-one wanted to buy him but now he's playing regularly for a side in a weaker league who are only 7th they've decided they don't want him either. how are we expecting him to come good in a league that's far harder exactly, what are we basing it on? they're just the same excuses that some used for Owen.
|
|
|
Post by bertiestan on Dec 12, 2014 13:29:22 GMT
We'll worth the gamble imo
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2014 13:34:21 GMT
We'll worth the gamble imo see, that's fair enough and a few people have said it and i appreciate everyone is entitled to their opinion but (genuine question) what are people basing this on? 120 games in 4 years, just 21 goals (which, as i've pointed out is less than Crouch, Walters and Diouf) Chelsea don't want him No-one else has wanted him since he's been at Chelsea Milan gave him a 2 year loan deal and want to cancel it less than 4 months into it He's seen as an all time legend at Athletico and even they don't want him back off Milan (as Milan have offered him to them) seriously, what has he done since he was 26 to warrant anyone thinking that he would worth the gamble of paying 60k a week for him? i genuinely don't get it at all. would we offer 60k a week for any other forward with that goalscoring record over a 4 year period?
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Dec 12, 2014 13:38:42 GMT
For our club I would presume that it would be improbable we could afford both Crouch and Torres. no brainer for me Crouch all day long.
Torres isn't one for the dogs home he is finished.
|
|
|
Post by burberrybassist on Dec 12, 2014 15:33:56 GMT
Did Torres and Crouch play together at Liverpool?
|
|
|
Post by enuntio on Dec 12, 2014 16:48:17 GMT
It actually sounds good. Bojan, Moses, Diouf, Crouch, Torres I'm sure it would look good also
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Dec 12, 2014 16:50:02 GMT
Torres lost his form after the injury long before he went to Chelsea, before the 2010 World Cup, which he was rushed back for but didn't really feature.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2014 17:00:15 GMT
Sign him now just for the xmas shirt sales
|
|
|
Post by scfcwebby on Dec 12, 2014 17:10:15 GMT
Yes please..... Sign him now Hughsey!
|
|