29 Jun 2017 14:46:49
Just got some more info on VVD transfer, we will hear that Saints and LFC are in talks again towards the end of next week. VVD's Rep has spoken with Saints now that the manager is in place and confirmed that he would still like to move to LFC as has been the plan since Feb and he is unhappy as he believed he was told he could move in the summer. Saints have now accepted this and will appease fans by allowing Pellegrino the funds to bring in players and a "Marquee" signing.

1.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 15:52:51
Another total stab in the dark.

2.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 18:11:14
Saints have come out and sed none of there big players r leaving. VVD will NOT join us this summer.

3.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 18:34:12
Fowler you'll find if you look it up they said the same about lovern and lalanna, if players want out they usually get it, not saying he'll end up at lfc, buy who knows.

4.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 18:44:22
Just can't see it happening plus I don't want us to pay 70 million for a defender it just stupid money.

5.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 19:16:47
My source has got no reason to tell lies and I've got no reason not to believe him. His career is in premier league football so he gets decent info.

6.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 19:38:33
Plus southampton have just signed or signing a CB and now they are looking to sign Vermalen. Why would they buy 2 CB's if none of theirs are leaving?

7.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 19:45:11
Let's hope so.

8.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 20:26:56
He'll be in a red shirt next season. Of course he will ( with only a touch of white) it won't be as much as 70 mil either. I will be very surprised if I'm wrong.

9.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 21:03:54
Jonny- Southampton have red on their kit?

10.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 21:35:56
Vvd will not be coming. The owners won't be seen to go back on there word.

11.) 29 Jun 2017
29 Jun 2017 22:55:56
Because owners never go back on their word do they . and as for not wanting to spend 70m on VVD, well neither would I. but im not. your not either. it's not my money so id let them spend what ever they want. can't win with some people, don't spend enough 1 day and spend too much the next. Will VVD improve the team? Yes . who's better out there that actually WANTS to move to LFC?

12.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 00:07:50
So as it is not your money, I would assume you don't watch any games or highlights, buy any merchandise or tickets, and that you definitely have never subscribed to club membership of any kind?

Seriously, how would you feel if your local pub ran out of money for drinks because they had spent it on a bouncy castle? Yeah sure, the bouncy castle is exciting if you have a little brain, but It was still a kick in your teeth as they now can't afford to buy something that would actually benefit their primary target market.

A marquee signing would appease the little FIFA fanatics who just want to brag about transfers at school, but the actual fans who have to watch him play every weekend are the ones who will suffer. We do not need to spend £70m on a centre back with about 5 good games in his career.

Every penny in football comes from the fans. If you are happy for your team to waste all of OUR investments into OUR team on a guy priced at at least 3 times his fair value, then you clearly do not care about OUR clubs long term stability. Do not detach yourself. We, the fans, are the only constant in this equation. Owners change, players change, kits change, club names change, Stadiums change, managers change, hell even the training grounds change. We are the glue that holds it together by pumping our support and money into the club.

Van Dijk for me is no better than Lovren or Matip. Our issue at the back is mainly leadership and aerial strength. Van Dijk is admittedly a Phenom in the air, but he is no leader. I think for £70m you should be getting the best centre back in the world. He isn't even the best centre back at Southampton.

13.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 00:36:00
Spade in the ground.

14.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 01:14:24
Adam, no-one thinks that we don't put money into the club, through all of the methods you have listed.

However, I think a lot of posters are less concerned about the actual transfer fee, but instead whether the players are going to improve the team or the squad. For me, right now, I'm looking for players that will improve the first 11.

I do see VVD as better than Lovren, and less injury prone than Matip (based on Joel's first season in the EPL) .

So I do think he will improve the first team, and he's a player that Klopp wants, and who seems to want to play for Klopp, so for me (and many others) VVD is a signing we would like to see happen. Also, it would compound the mess we have made for ourselves if we leave a player high and dry at a club he has professed to want to leave.

In terms of whether spending the money on VVD stops us pursuing other targets, I don't know that to be the case and neither do you. Ed002 (I think, apologies if it wasn't you ma'am) has always said that money will be (and has been) made available to Klopp to try to sign the players that he (along with the other transfer advisors) thinks will help bring the title to the club. Given the well publicised increase in revenue as a result of the TV deal and us (hopefully) qualifying for the CL, I don't doubt that spending £60m (or whatever) on VVD will not stop us trying to buy other players.

Finally, don;t forget that, this season in particular, transfer fees to English clubs have had yet another massive leap. Is Pickford worth £30m? Not compared to transfer fees 5 years ago, or even last year, but in today's transfer market, probably. Whereas teams not so long ago (couple of seasons or so? ) were spending £30-£40m on top quality players, that going rate is now £50-£60m. Look at the figures not only being bandied about but actually being paid by the top teams in the EPL (yes, Ed025, I begrudgingly include Everton in that list! ) .

The market is crazy, but it is the market now. VVD is better than Lovren. We paid £20m for Lovren 3 years ago. That equivalent fee would be £40-£50m now. And most people would pick VVD over Lovren. Listen, who would've thought that there would be a queue of clubs willing to pay £120m for an 18 year old striker, but they are. Martial (in my view) was the equivalent "hot property young French striker" a couple of seasons ago, and United paid (upto) £60m for him in 2015. Crazy in itself, but just shows how the market has moved in the last couple of years.

Sorry for the essay, but to summarise, please understand that transfer fees have gone crazy recently across the market, and most of our fans are just looking for improvements to the first team, rather than getting concerned about how much more our club is now paying for players that would've cost, on a like for like basis, a half or a third of their current price only a couple of seasons ago.

{Ed001's Note - Martial was nothing like Mbappe. Two different levels completely. Martial was a bright prospect but nothing really special now. Mbappe is an absolute standout. not for his age, but in general. Martial was not a world class talent but Mbappe is.}

15.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 01:54:31
I can't understand this obsession with constantly wasting massive amounts of money, I've said it before we should keep Sakho and develop Gomez, but no we'll keep making the same mistakes.

16.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 02:30:45
Understand what you're saying mk and agree too. I don't believe the figure 70 mil myself and to say vvd has had only five good games. I'm not sure that is right. I don't think klopp is being rash here, it is these signings that could ultimately seal his fate, for better or worse. I would expect it to be between 40/ 50 mil which is still a lot of money for a defender. I remember hypia for what a million? Surely there is someone out there we could get cheaper who could do the job although I reckon klopp is seeing ghe defender he can develop vvd into and personally I think he has it in him to be one of the worlds best.

17.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 07:29:01
A bouncy castle at a pub? Could be carnage 😄.

18.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 15:47:44
I agree with hbr and I know this is controversial but sahko is as good as vvd and he would cost nothing. Can't see klopp going back on his word though here. Let's hope we get a decent price for him. If vvd is worth 50 sahko must be worth 40.

19.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 18:20:38
VVD is worth every penny of £70M if he sorts out our torrid defensive record.

Nobody on this site except the Ed chaps have any idea what a true valuation of a player entails and if our owners are willing to shell out, then they must agree on what fee Saints ask for.

20.) 30 Jun 2017
30 Jun 2017 18:32:46
Comparing Martial to Mbappe is just crazy. Martial is not in his league and in fact, has regressed since he came to Utd. They were warned that he was not ready yet for the big time but like we did with Markovic, they did not listen and now, look at him. As for Mbappe, age has nothing to do with it.

City made a 40m euros bid for him two years ago when he was 16. That is talent and nothing to do with age and he has grown and progressed well ever since. It is the opposite for Martial who wouldn't start in our first 11.