I get why Liverpool wants to hold on to Coutinho - for the exact same reasons as Southampton holds on to Van Dijk. And exactly like with Van Dijk you can make the argument, that a club should know its place in the food chain, because Southampton isn't a club that all of a sudden can attract his level of players and its just symbolic action to do so for 1 more season. Of course they could force Coutinho to run down his contract, but that would force players to sign shorter contracts or reject Liverpool far more in the future.
khaled_a_d said:
Clubs don't control players like that, you can't keep unhappy player against his well two years in row even if he had 10 years contract, players take notice of that and same with agents. Hell it was even said that his own teammates understood the situation and many was happy for him because they knew it will be a dream move.
And even some of the reliable journalist for Liverpool already admit that he would have been sold last summer if the offer was in June, but it was after he told them he is staying.
I am not sure what is the argument here, next summer it is almost certain it will be a question of how much rather than will they sell. That in case we came interested again
Concept of "food chain" is just absurd. Why should clubs not aspire to be better and get bigger? By that logic Leicester shouldn't bother enhancing the structures after they surprisingly won the title, because they're bottom half fodder. Just build to survive, stay up and keep their place in the food chain...
If Van Dijk wants to leave, he can leave once his deal expires if that is the stance of the team he's under contract with.
Contracts are agreements which teach players commitment and long term planning of their careers, not some silly symbol and pat on the back for a good season. Clubs don't cheekily slide in 4 more years into their deals either. They bind the player to the team for as long as he is seen as an asset for a growing brand, and in return he gets paid. Football is a profession and a business. Dude signed a 5-year deal in January committing to the club and its supporters and changes his mind five months later? What juvenile behaviour is this?
If they didn't want to get clamped down at Anfield knowing Barca could come knocking, why not sign it for sodding 3 years or not extend at all? Lukaku didn't extend. Absolutely fine to blame the agent for that TBH. Just anticipate the guy's career...
BarçaBarça said:
The CB-question is indefensible, tbh. A lot of CBs were available and traded during the summer, who are way better than Liverpools defence, which by far is their greatest concern.
With two of Höwedes/Laporte(has a release clause)/de Vrij/Rüdiger/Manolas/Süle or even Musacchio/Lindelöf their team would be able to take the 'next step' with far more certainty than by keeping Coutinho. It is just a shame if symbolic action means more than real issues for Liverpool, as they will never be more than a sub-top-club with that defence.
Howedes is the only one of the group who would even consider the move given he was looking for a move away. The rest are in teams who are either on the same level or better off. And Liverpool don't have the money to just cash in on the clauses.
What 'next step'? You mean once they leap down the ladder back to the 9th place in hope to claw their way back up over the next 3 years if any prospective 21 year old doesn't get lured by someone else from European top15?
