Why did we pay 35m for Andy Carroll?

[AlessoAfrojackAvicii]

First of all. This is not a thread designed to slate Andy Carroll, I'm happy with his performances of late and I've been disappointed(yes) that he's been benched the last few games.

Just a few points I'd like to make.

Carroll had only scored 11 goals for Newcastle when we signed him, hardly prolific. In fact, every season there is a player from a lower team that goes on a goal scoring streak.
He wasn't top scorer in the Championship the season before.
He was injured when we bought him(Aquilani all over again), and people are still using the 'he's not fully fit' excuse.
We'd just been given 50m for Torres, Newcastle knew this so they boosted the price up. Why didn't we say no? He wasn't worth 35m, probably never will be. I'd say he was worth 15m at the time.

So considering we'd just bought Suarez for 22m, why did we agree to pay 35m for Carroll?

Like I said, I'm starting to like Carroll. But he's still not worth the money we paid, and I love hearing the excuses people come up with to justify it.

[bmcg]

the market , we got stung , done , fleeced , robbed , staged , set up , marked etc etc etc ... just for laughs ? who knows

[welshypool]

ahhh, nice change of topic, how refreshing

[AlessoAfrojackAvicii]

ahhh, nice change of topic, how refreshing

If you don't have anything useful to add to the topic, go make yourself a milkshake.

[370]

First of all. This is not a thread designed to slate Andy Carroll, I'm happy with his performances of late and I've been disappointed(yes) that he's been benched the last few games.

Just a few points I'd like to make.

Carroll had only scored 11 goals for Newcastle when we signed him, hardly prolific. In fact, every season there is a player from a lower team that goes on a goal scoring streak.
He wasn't top scorer in the Championship the season before.
He was injured when we bought him(Aquilani all over again), and people are still using the 'he's not fully fit' excuse.
We'd just been given 50m for Torres, Newcastle knew this so they boosted the price up. Why didn't we say no? He wasn't worth 35m, probably never will be. I'd say he was worth 15m at the time.

So considering we'd just bought Suarez for 22m, why did we agree to pay 35m for Carroll?

Like I said, I'm starting to like Carroll. But he's still not worth the money we paid, and I love hearing the excuses people come up with to justify it.

What you really should ask first is "why did Chelsea pay 50m for Torres?". These two questions are closely linked.

[AirbornePegasusYNWA]

We paid it..............end of!

[Bigcliff]

[AlessoAfrojackAvicii]

What you really should ask is "why did Chelsea pay 50m for Torres?". These two questions are closely linked.

Please tell me you aren't comparing Torres to Carroll before they moved clubs Torres wasn't worth 50m, but I'd of paid 50m for him before 35m for Carroll.

[bmcg]

slap that little donkey cliff , slap it , slap it hard

[SHANKLYREDS]

Ill tell you i would rather have torres over caroll an day of the week,£35mil for a player who can only head the ball and hes not tht great at heading is an absolute disgrace

[fattybombom]

What you really should ask first is "why did Chelsea pay 50m for Torres?". These two questions are closely linked.

Because he was one of the best strikers in the world.. Simple really, hasn't worked out, but he still has quality

Why pay that money for Carroll when he wasn't even the best striker in the championship!

The two are not linked in the slightest. One players shown quality over the years, the other for 6 months. Guess we lucky we didn't sign Zaki when he had a great 6 months

[welshypool]

If you don't have anything useful to add to the topic, go make yourself a milkshake.

will be a lot of people making milkshakes but just to annoy you I will hang around now and then adding nothing of any note as this topic is dead...dead....dead...covered so many times....dead.....dead......dead....

I might start a new one, why do certain posters relentlessly post the same topics over and over, is it self importance (on a forum)...is it the need to be noticed (on a forum) should they just try a new topic?

So many questions

[#TheTruth]

You cant justify it.

We paid £35m for a £5m striker ( i say £5m because he's no better than Ngog).

[Archieuk]

WOW!!! These Andy Carroll posts are getting soooooo BORING.
As for Andy over Torres, i'll take Andy all day thanks, now..... next subject!!

[370]

Please tell me you aren't comparing Torres to Carroll before they moved clubs Torres wasn't worth 50m, but I'd of paid 50m for him before 35m for Carroll.

When Chelsea captured Torres on the last days of the window, LFC set conditions about replacement.
They had to pay 50 for Torres because we had to pay 35 for Andy (Andy's price + 15m).

[BearWithMe]

Because Kenny said he was our number 1 summer target. he had just broke into the England team and scored, he was looking like a world beater for Newcastle single handily destroying us and Arsenal, and he was only 20.

Newcastle wanted £35m for him Spurs said no we said yes. simple

[ConorLFC77]

We had lost Torres and we needed a new striker. We signed Suarez and were in for Carroll, who on paper, is an ideal partner. Newcastle knew we wanted him and desperately needed him (having lost Torres). Therefore the value went up. When the demand goes up, the "supplier" (Newcastle) can increase the price by a considerable amount.

Bad decision for us to sign Carroll though, and an even worse decision by Torres to leave.

[BrendanRodgers]

Comparing Torres and Carroll is like comparing **** to crap.

Both have been awful this season. We play better with Carroll because it allows Suarez to drop deep.

But we definitely need a new striker this summer

[Joe-El]

Maybe due to Torres' exploits while a Liverpool FC player in the Premiership and Europe... it's not like 'that' goal he scored against Blackburn was a shared figment of all of our imaginations... not to mention the 33 he put away in his first full season, most of which he created and scored almost single-handed (the majority of the rest of his goals were of course created by Gerrard).

There cannot be any shame in Chelsea spending £50m on Torres, that price was correct in view of his unquestionable talent. Yes he's had a bad year at Chelsea but most Chelsea supporters are fully behind him because in spite of what we or the Manure loving press like to believe, he still is a top draw player and one nearly every single honest Liverpool FC fan would have playing next to Suarez in a heartbeat.

Carroll in the other hand is dogxxxx, Cisse showed him what is expected of a true striker, he looked like the real deal NOT Carroll.

The big flop is the single most telling reason why Kenny and Comolli should really be sacked. The spanners were even close to signing Connor Wickham too! I'm sure they'd be after Kevin Davis if he lost the little scoring ability he still possesses!

Kenny Out!!!

[la9li]

What you really should ask first is "why did Chelsea pay 50m for Torres?". These two questions are closely linked.

Don't see it being at all linked. Chelsea owner could easily afford to pay a Billion for a player and not lose too much sleep. Someone at Anfield had a sudden rush of blood to the head and decided that an immediate response was needed (when it wasn't at all as Carroll was injured when signed).

I never understood the "Liverpool HAD to pay 35 million for Carroll because it was linked to the Torres deal. Utter rubbish. Liverpool should have slapped the 50 mil price tag on Torres and banked the money until the summer. This is not hindsight it was obvious at the time.

There was NO RUSH and NO NEED to buy an injured player in Jan 11, let alone the horrendous amount paid for him. Still make me utterly sick to remember that debacle.

[Aaronh]

All these sad ****'s who have nothing to say should stay away, does an online post annoy you that much that you have to enter just to tell them, if so get outside, have a walk, get a grip.

The OP has asked a question, using actual points, unlike the usual threads that resemble transfer talk.

Good points, that bring whoever is involved in our transfers into serious question, you cannot panick with 35 million, at the time our season was as good as gone anyway, we panicked and have suffered because of this.

Why we spent 35 million cannot be answered by anyone but the persons that made the decision, they need to be seriously questioned based on the points you outlined above.

A bold statement, and not a fact as I cannot travel, but Andy's capabilities will never equate to a player worthy of his price tag.

In all honesty I feel sorry for him more than anyone.

[bmcg]

As for Andy over Torres, i'll take Andy all day thanks

Tu estas loco ?

[la9li]

when chelsea captured torres on the last days of the window, lfc set conditions about replacement.
They had to pay 50 for torres because we had to pay 35 for andy (andy's price + 15m).

there was no "had to" about it. Who was holding the gun??

[Aaronh]

Comparing Torres and Carroll is like comparing **** to crap.

Both have been awful this season. We play better with Carroll because it allows Suarez to drop deep.

But we definitely need a new striker this summer

You can easily say that now we are a year down the line.

Torres once looked like a player worthy of a huge price tag, he was out of form with injuries, but under Kenny he was still putting the ball in the net.

Carrol has NEVER looked like a player worthy of a price tag near his. When he was in form 20m maximum, and I'd still have been dissapointed at paying that.

[BearWithMe]

there was no "had to" about it. Who was holding the gun??

if you want something, and that something costs x amount then you HAVE to pay it.

[370]

there was no "had to" about it. Who was holding the gun??

Newcastle...

[Jesal]

Got mugged. Panic. Stupid decision. Set the club back a season, sorry but it's true.

Pains me to say that. I like the lad as a member of the squad but if he was so good, Kenny would start him every game just like he has to start Suarez every game.

[#TheTruth]

there was no "had to" about it. Who was holding the gun??

Exactly. When they said the figure they wanted we should have laughed and walk away, Not go yes ok we will pay you whatever you want.

[la9li]

Newcastle...

Again. There was no "HAD TO". Liverpool didn't HAVE TO DO ANYTHING. Liverpool had control: Do we buy an injured player for a vastly overinflated price now or not??

The clear answer is "NOT".

There was no "HAD TO". Because simply Carroll was not needed at the time. He couldn't ******* even play!!!!

[Rafa_Is_Our_Spy]

WOW!!! These Andy Carroll posts are getting soooooo BORING.
As for Andy over Torres, i'll take Andy all day thanks, now..... next subject!!

You serious