CONFIRMED - Steven Caulker - DONE DEAL (loan)

Christ. Lovren will leave this summer.

 

When he does we will sign a replacement. That might be right at the end of the window after a few games.

 

Whoever we sign will probably not be as good as Lovren.

 

So we sign a player whose career was going backwards at Lyon, find out that he wasn't half bad playing a particular system tactically and yet anybody we get in to replace him will probably not be as good as him? There really isn't any probability about it. The chances are that he could be better than Lovren, equally as good, or not as good. We could sign a player thought to be poorer on the face of it, but who might prove to be a revelation. We could sign one deemed to be vastly superior, but who turns out to be a dismal flop.

Lovren could be that dismal flop at Liverpool, or wherever the greedy git ends up.We really do not know. I realise that you have absolutely no faith in our scouting network, or in Koeman's judgement, otherwise you would take a less jaundiced view of our situation. But carry on wallowing in your negativity if it makes you happy.

Hopefully we get someone better than Lovren and the scouting department did brilliantly to identify him. But there aren't always opportunities like that or everyone would unearth them.

End of the day he is a £20m centre back. The majority of those are unattainable for us and teams like us.

Thats all Im saying.

My main point is that CB is a very weak position for us, which Im sure many would agree with.

Reed said we would emerge stronger as an overall squad from this window even if players went. But we are quite some way off doing that right now. Which, again, Im sure many agree with.

Nothing controversial or overly negative there, surely?

Hopefully we get someone better than Lovren and the scouting department did brilliantly to identify him. But there aren't always opportunities like that or everyone would unearth them.

 

End of the day he is a £20m centre back. The majority of those are unattainable for us and teams like us.

 

Thats all Im saying.

 

My main point is that CB is a very weak position for us, which Im sure many would agree with.

 

Reed said we would emerge stronger as an overall squad from this window even if players went. But we are quite some way off doing that right now. Which, again, Im sure many agree with.

 

Nothing controversial or overly negative there, surely?

Well he's not joining us , he's having a medical at QPR this morning according to breaking news on sky

Well he's not joining us , he's having a medical at QPR this morning according to breaking news on sky

I assume this medical consists of being able to carry a 5kg brown bag?

Fair points IMO

Of course. Which is why nobody really replies.

Hopefully we get someone better than Lovren and the scouting department did brilliantly to identify him. But there aren't always opportunities like that or everyone would unearth them.

 

End of the day he is a £20m centre back. The majority of those are unattainable for us and teams like us.

 

Thats all Im saying.

 

My main point is that CB is a very weak position for us, which Im sure many would agree with.

 

Reed said we would emerge stronger as an overall squad from this window even if players went. But we are quite some way off doing that right now. Which, again, Im sure many agree with.

 

Nothing controversial or overly negative there, surely?

Nope, absolutely spot on.

Has it been definitively confirmed that we actually made a bid for Caulker?

Lovren is going, so is Morgan. Caulker's not coming. Time to look elsewhere and quickly...

Quick, phone the club and tell them.

They wouldn't have thought of that.

You utter mong.

Being widely reported that Caulker is having a medical at QPR today.

As I've now repeated 3 times, we have not activated his release clause, so all those getting depressed about QPR 'beating' us to sign Caulker are completely misguided.

Hopefully we get someone better than Lovren and the scouting department did brilliantly to identify him. But there aren't always opportunities like that or everyone would unearth them.

 

End of the day he is a £20m centre back. The majority of those are unattainable for us and teams like us.

 

Thats all Im saying.

 

My main point is that CB is a very weak position for us, which Im sure many would agree with.

. Several clubs wanted him and we didn't need to sell him, so we commanded stupid money for an 18 year old.

Reed said we would emerge stronger as an overall squad from this window even if players went. But we are quite some way off doing that right now. Which, again, Im sure many agree with.

 

Nothing controversial or overly negative there, surely?

We bought Lovren for £8 million. Therefore the likelihood is that there are other £8 million CBs out there as good as he was at that time, isn't that so? Our scouts identified him as a good prospect, so they can do it again, unless you believe that this find was something exceptional, a find not likely to be repeated easily. Teams like us rely on scouts to unearth hidden gems, teams at the top are lazier and identify those players in teams like ours, or have them thrust at them by greedy agents.

The price now is inflated by quite a bit because we have the whip-hand in any negotiations for him. The same for Shaw. Then another stupid point you make, that CBs costing £20 million are unattainable for team like us. Plainly if we wanted to, we could spend the £20 million or whatever we receive for Lovren and buy another CB for the same money, so they are not unattainable to us. But it is sensible that we buy one as good for less money if we can, isn't it? This is hopefully what we have done with Lallana's money and will do with Shaw's fee too.

Nobody is disagreeing that we are weak at CB, but until our business is done for that position, then it is premature to make any judgement. Certainly an opinion that it is unlikely that we will get in a player as good as Lovren is groundless.

Whether we emerge stronger despite the departures remains to be seen. Of course we aren't stronger yet, but there is some horse-trading still to be done, isn't there?

Your insistence that we porbably could not sign a player as good as Lovren is where you are negative. And it isn't as if that is the only area where you are overly negative either. Others have felt the need to point this out to you too.

Of course. Which is why nobody really replies.

Well I've replied and pointed out the parts that are arguable, but which you assume to be probabilities based on nothing much in particular.

Well I've replied and pointed out the parts that are arguable, but which you assume to be probabilities based on nothing much in particular.

Fair enough. When I mean we couldn't get a 20m CB, I mean in the way that the ones worth that pretty much all play CL football, and the ones that aren't will only leave teams to go and get that, like Lovren is with us.

We could pay the fee, but that doesn't mean you get the player. Plus, they want the wages a 20m player commands, up in the type of figures that aren't sustainable for us.

Thats not negative, its reality. If we buy in a centre back better than Lovren then fantastic, but IMO he was right up there with the top ones for most of the last season, hence the fact Liverpool want him, so would need a superb piece of scouting to find someone better, who isnt already at a top club, or wanting to move to one.

But of course, we may do it.

Hopefully we get someone better than Lovren and the scouting department did brilliantly to identify him. But there aren't always opportunities like that or everyone would unearth them.

 

End of the day he is a £20m centre back.

Who we signed for £8m 12 months ago. Which would give me a bit more faith in the scouting network - though obviously the ideal is to keep someone we already know works within our system as opposed to one who might not.

Christ. Lovren will leave this summer.

 

When he does we will sign a replacement. That might be right at the end of the window after a few games.

 

Whoever we sign will probably not be as good as Lovren.

 

Hooiveld isn't PL quality and Yoshida borderline for me. Fonte was poor the first year but better last year when playing alongside a top centre back.

 

I think we need two because of the three we have who look likely to stay there are too many question marks. The likes of Hammond, Chaplow, Richardson all were rightly let go, yet Hooiveld has managed to hang around and is set for his third PL season despite being proven inadequate in both the previous ones.

 

CB is a key position. IMO we are really short of depth and even with a good signing we are an injury & suspension away from a horror show at the back.

When Poch came in we beat Chelsea Liverpool and Man City at home and were 'the best team to go to old trafford' according to Fergie. All without Lovren and with Fonte partnered with Yoshida or Hooiveld... They can't be that bad

When Poch came in we beat Chelsea Liverpool and Man City at home and were 'the best team to go to old trafford' according to Fergie. All without Lovren and with Fonte partnered with Yoshida or Hooiveld... They can't be that bad

Actually we beat Chelsea with Yoshida and Hooiveld in central defence, and Kelvin in goal for the second half. Luckily they had Torres up front for 90 minutes rather than someone with pace in behind or excellent aerial ability, and didn't attempt to play the ball over the top of us.

its rather odd how people are talking up hooiveld as a possibility in defence.

people never learn

Who we signed for £8m 12 months ago. Which would give me a bit more faith in the scouting network - though obviously the ideal is to keep someone we already know works within our system as opposed to one who might not.

Pssssst. Don't mention Veregard Forren

its rather odd how people are talking up hooiveld as a possibility in defence.

 

people never learn

Who's talking him up? I dread the games everytime he's in the starting line up. If he doesn't leave though we'll have to just accept he's our 4th choice and hope we don't get 2 injured Centre Backs at the same time.

Who's talking him up? I dread the games everytime he's in the starting line up. If he doesn't leave though we'll have to just accept he's our 4th choice and hope we don't get 2 injured Centre Backs at the same time.

Hooiveld next to Fox worried the shyte out of me; Hooiveld next to a decent left back wouldn't be so bad.

Gazzaniga is the one that truly scares the wee out of me when I see his name on the team sheet. He's not Prem quality by far.

Hooiveld next to Fox worried the shyte out of me; Hooiveld next to a decent left back wouldn't be so bad.

 

Gazzaniga is the one that truly scares the wee out of me when I see his name on the team sheet. He's not Prem quality by far.

I'm afraid that's just rewriting history. Jos is abysmal at premier league level and if we have to use him at any point next year I will be very nervous.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28365312

Caulker set for QPR medical. A shame, really.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28365312

 

Caulker set for QPR medical. A shame, really.

Harry's brown envelope strikes again

Is Caulker that good? i did see the hype about him but Cardiff did let in a load of goals, especially when their Chilean defencive midfielder was out

I think Caulker's one that, provided he's playing alongside an older and more experienced CB, has the potential to improve. He could have been a decent option to play alongside Lovren's replacement. But all in all it's not too gutting.

Harry's brown envelope strikes again

I dont think he needed that, it is the stupid owner paying out massive wages. Why do successful businessmen fall for HR's chat to get players in?

what makes you think he is paying 'massive' wages for caulker?

what makes you think he is paying 'massive' wages for caulker?

It's QPR?

what makes you think he is paying 'massive' wages for caulker?

http://www.squawka.com/news/liverpool-no-longer-interested-in-steven-caulker-as-qpr-close-in-on-their-target/143778

Gazzaniga is the one that truly scares the wee out of me when I see his name on the team sheet. He's not Prem quality by far.

Oh so very much this!

It's QPR?

so?

so?

Are you deliberately obtuse? Do you believe they will be paying him peanuts? How much are they paying Rio? £80K per week? What do you think Caulker will be on? 5?

Are you deliberately obtuse? Do you believe they will be paying him peanuts? How much are they paying Rio? £80K per week? What do you think Caulker will be on? 5?

no more than what we could offer him

no more than what we could offer him

Do you think we would pay £80k per week for a CB? Any CB?

No. Therefore I would suggest it is more likely that QPR are willing to pay more in wages (to whoever) than we are.

no more than what we could offer him

I suppose the Cardiff fans wont be told he is going for CL football

Do you think we would pay £80k per week for a CB? Any CB?

No. Therefore I would suggest it is more likely that QPR are willing to pay more in wages (to whoever) than we are.

that is what they are supposedly paying ferdinand.

does that mean all their transfers are going to be at that level?

that is what they are supposedly paying ferdinand.

does that mean all their transfers are going to be at that level?

They're definitely a low transfer fee, high wages kind of club though aren't they. Bit like West Ham. Once the average wage is at a certain level, players will generally ask for more money than they should be worth, and the club are more likely to say yes.

Come on batman, are you just trying to be awkward on this. You dont need to be Sherlock Holmes to put together turned down by Liverpool due to excessive wage demands, HR, and QPR

I dont know either way

nor does anyone on here

I get the feeling we have only ever been a pawn in Caulker's agents bid to get more wages out of QPR....

I dont know either way

nor does anyone on here

I dont know either way

nor does anyone on here

"Crystal Palace had also matched the fee and offered wages of around £42,000 a week but QPR have bettered those terms and convinced the former Tottenham defender that a move to Loftus Road, where he will figure alongside Rio Ferdinand, can propel him back into the international fold."

The sort of wages he'll be on are probably at the very top end of what we can offer. I don't think he's good enough to justify that

I get the feeling we have only ever been a pawn in Caulker's agents bid to get more wages out of QPR....

I think QPR offered him huge wages but he didnt really want to go there so he stalled on signing to see if anyone better would match them. They didnt.

that is what they are supposedly paying ferdinand.

does that mean all their transfers are going to be at that level?

No, it doesn't, but I too suspect they offered more, wages-wise, than we did. Just a gut feeling, so admittedly not scientific. Also suspect he weighed up the likelihoods of survival, plus living in London etc etc. F'sure.

that is what they are supposedly paying ferdinand.

does that mean all their transfers are going to be at that level?

No. But if you were Caulker what would you be expecting as your wage, bearing in mind your CB partner is on £80K?

Don't try and pretend that QPR don't pay inflated wages. Have a look back at their last couple of seasons.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/01/qpr-higher-wage-bill-than-atletico-madrid

What were they paying Cesar? Samba? Remy? etc etc.

The wages thing is the method Harry used at Pompey etc, ultimately leading to club meltdowns but success along the way. They all fall for it. Difference is with a bit of clever accountancy we could do a similar thing with our recent cash influx, adding in clauses to ensure we don't go down the swanny if it all goes pear shaped and we get relegated. Football's broken, though.

Are we losing our players/losing out on players because we are not ambitious enough or that the wages we are offering are to low?Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.

Are we losing our players/losing out on players because we are not ambitious enough or that the wages we are offering are to low?Shift+R improves the quality of this image. Shift+A improves the quality of all images on this page.

No its because 95% of those rumoured in the press are bo!!ocks, as is the Caulker one. We have are targets and are getting on with it. They are probably more ambitious which is why we need to fly under the radar and things take a lot more time, not to mention players want to assess all their options.

No. But if you were Caulker what would you be expecting as your wage, bearing in mind your CB partner is on £80K?

Don't try and pretend that QPR don't pay inflated wages. Have a look back at their last couple of seasons.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/01/qpr-higher-wage-bill-than-atletico-madrid

What were they paying Cesar? Samba? Remy? etc etc.

Are they really paying him £80k pw? Christ.