amiable wrote: » Off topic but a real eye opener as to what standard the kids need to be at these days. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DThjb_XyyoU
Knex. wrote: » Would he be a fairly reliable fella? Or rather, would his sources do you think?
Leiva wrote: » Agger to Barca just won't go away Reminds me of the Masch time.
5starpool wrote: » They may well excite me with their play, but they don't excite me by virtue of having signed.
5starpool wrote: » While i generally like Dempsey (incident with Bellamy last season excepted) neither him nor Borini excite or fill me with renewed optimism for the season ahead (no more than Adam/Henderson/Downing did last season). If we are signing a player that will excite us by the very fact that he has signed, I hope it's not one of those. They may well excite me with their play, but they don't excite me by virtue of having signed.
NukaCola wrote: » What?
Dickerty wrote: » If you saw 1 car heading in one direction, and 15 other cars heading the other, would you assume that the 15 were going the wrong way?? Yes, loaning Carroll unless the purchase clause was non-negotiable and absolute would be a bad idea.
jasonb wrote: » I presume what 5starpool means is that so far, he's not excited by who we've signed / are supposed to sign. Yes, they might play well on the field, and excite us there, but who we've signed so far hasn't been exciting.
mormank wrote: » Haha, I have seen this on numerous occasions and can honestly say I've never really thought about it but now that I have thought about it I would just assume that they were headed to different places and not that 1 was "going the wrong way".
-Ade- wrote: » Seems not given this mornings news. Wouldn't hold it against him if he wanted to move on. Agger could play for any top European side and not look out of place whatsoever.
atilladehun wrote: » I'd sell Skirtel for a $1 if it means we could keep Agger. He makes so many players look better. Our worst part of the season was when he was injured.
NukaCola wrote: » What, when Carra was playing? Is that not the correlation right there no? When Carra plays he makes everyone look poor?
ush wrote: » Kind of suprised the Rodgers didn't start by jettisoning Carragher off the playing staff.
Mr Alan wrote: » There's not a manager in the world who would have. I suspect Carra will feature at least as much as he did last season.
Blatter wrote: » I suspect Rodgers will move Coates firmly ahead of him in the pecking order tbh.
Dickerty wrote: » I don't. Rodgers cannot on one hand say that Carroll is not a good enough passer to fit in, and then have Carra taking 8 seconds to pick a pass. Coates has been developed in a country where defenders see plenty of the ball are are expected to pass it, and run with it. He's MILES ahead of Carra on natural ability alone.
Mr Alan wrote: » Rodgers reasons for not wanting Carroll don't add up.
NukaCola wrote: » If Rodgers wants Carroll out because he doesn't fit his system, then where does Carra fit in that system? If Rodgers is consistant i would hope Carras playing days are restricted to Cameos....he was shown to be terrible last year and still got in the team, hopefully Rodgers is strong enough to bench him.
NukaCola wrote: » Please explain.
Mr Alan wrote: » See an article posted here yesterday. See the fact he's not even met the player yet has said everyone will get a chance. See his successful use of a similar inferior player in the same system in Danny Graham.
