Torres Commits to Anfield, But is This Best For Liverpool?

Apr. 08, 2010 - 05740386 date 08 04 2010 Copyright imago Liverpool s Fernando Torres Celebrates After He Scores His sides 4th Goal UEFA Europe League Quarter Final 2nd Leg Liverpool v Benfica 8th April 2010 PUBLICATIONxNOTxINxUK Football men UEFA Europe League Europe League EC 3 2009 Single Vdig xub 2010 horizontal premiumd.

El Niño has ended his silence today and has announced he “is more committed to Liverpool FC than ever.” This almost feels like a summer move, because with Liverpool finishing 7th last season, it seemed inevitable that the combination of his highly-overvalued price tag and Torres’ desire for Champions League football would lead to his departure from Anfield.

Depending on which Liverpool supporter you speak to, you get a different emotional response on Fernando Torres’ decision to stay put.

There are those with Torres tunnel vision, who dare not envision their hero in another uniform, plucking goals for a title rival like Chelsea. They claim that with Torres, Liverpool are a far better team than without him. Indeed, a Torres-Gerrard-Cole attacking triumvirate has mouths salivating in Liverpool, and will surely be among the best front lines in the Premier League.

And then there are those that feel in this Manchester City-distorted transfer market that maybe, just maybe, it would have been wiser to get the £50, £60, or even the mind-boggling £70 million for Torres, the astronomical numbers that City had purportedly been flirting with to land the Spanish striker.

With the potential of such an absurd amount of cash coming in, should Liverpool have listened to offers?

Such overvaluations only come around so often, and with Torres’ recent history of niggling injuries that keep him out for a month here or a month there, a £50-70 million offer is gross overestimation of his true value in my mind. While I lack genius knowledge of the world transfer market, surely Roy Hodgson could have replaced Torres with at least three top-drawer players had they resolved this situation very quickly post-World Cup.

June 29, 2010 - Cape Town, South Africa - epa02229893 Spain's Fernando Torres (R) during the FIFA World Cup 2010 Round of 16 match between Spain and Portugal at the Green Point stadium in Cape Town, South Africa, 29 June 2010.

Even with his dreadful World Cup performances, City and Chelsea were still pricing Torres at alarming rates. Had Liverpool sold early, that influx of cash could have given Liverpool a lot of leverage in the transfer market to go after top names like David Silva, Mario Balotelli, or Rafael van der Vaart just to name a few. Or perhaps buying a direct “replacement” (quotes because it is hard to replace Torres) plus some cheap, young up-and-comers to bring depth into the squad that Liverpool desperately needs. With either approach, money would have been less tight to try and lure players to Anfield that would serve to rebuild the club.

The reasons for second-guessing the retention of Torres are A) economics and B) improvement.

First, yes, Torres is a top 5 striker in the world when healthy, but he is not worth the ridiculous sums of money Man City were throwing out there, and much of that has to do with his propensity for injury. Any product with the very real tendency to break down at critical junctures should have its value lowered. Despite your deep love for that product, when a buyer comes along and grossly overvalues it, and you, as the seller, are in need of quick cash to improve your overall company, you should sell that product and reinvest in your business.

Second, does retaining Torres improve a Liverpool side that finished seventh last season? It was surprising to see them play so poorly last year, and one can blame various injuries and poor form from their captain Steven Gerrard, but their fall from grace last season begs the question of whether offloading star players to build depth at the club is the better way to respond to a disheartening season.

But as the powers-that-be at Anfield saw it, just like many Liverpool supporters spanning the globe see it, a Liverpool with Torres is better than a Liverpool raking in £50-70 million with which to rebuild.

Of course, there is no right answer, just opinion. Time will tell which option would have better served Liverpool and their fans.

What do you think? Leave comments and ideas below.

22 thoughts on “Torres Commits to Anfield, But is This Best For Liverpool?”

  1. Who needs 60-70mil?!? haven’t you heard?? We’re about to change the game Chinese style….stay tuned.

  2. aside from “plucking” being the wrong adjective to describe torres’ smashing goals, that was a darn good piece. great argument for selling. same story goes for van persie. love the guy, hate his injuries. would arsenal be better without gambling on his propensity for injury?

    they shoulda kept yossi regardless. and started him.

  3. Pretty spot on summary of both sides of the argument.

    I think it all comes down to if the player is willing to commit to the club or not.

    Torres is worth passing the money up if he is 100% on board. That much cash is desirable but ultimately Torres is going to help Liverpool make just as much or more by playing well on the team (helping the team get back into the Champion’s League and the shirt sales, for instance).

    Before Torres came out and stated his desire to commit to the club, I was calling for a cash-in. Since he finally came out and stated that he is happy at Liverpool and still wants to help the club, I’d glad we scoffed at the money.

    Mascherano is an example of a player we do need to sell for the 20 to 25 million that is (allegedly) being offered. He won’t commit to the club and has stated to the media that he wants to leave – get rid of him. Get the money and buy a player to replace him that wants to be there. Even better, get Lucas to do his job and buy a backup for Torres.

  4. You’re missing one important point. With Hicks and Gillett as Liverpool owner, there’s no way the 70 mil will be re-invested. Absolutely no way. So the second option will leave Liverpool with no world class striker and no squad depth.

  5. it’s not just on field performances, or lack of, that have to be taken into account. it’s his marketing and that of the club as well. do we want mercenaries that come to play for the money or honest, loyal players like torres that parallels the clubs values and ethics? people buy his shirts because they love everything about him, not just because he scores unbelievable goals

    1. I agree that the money he brings in from marketing have to be factored in. I read that he had the #1 selling shirt last season for PL clubs.

      And Gaz Hunt- Liverpool definitely need to make this Mascherano sale happen. If they can get 25m for him that would be incredible. system might have to change though, because what I’ve seen from Lucas has never been inspiring, to put it extremely nicely.

      1. Yup – he’s the most sold shirt in the Premier League. Gerrard is the second and Rooney third. Like I said, he’s easily worth over that 70 million given factors such as that and that fact that he can help Liverpool gain those needed Champion’s League funds.

        I have never been a big fan of Lucas, however, I think (1) he’s improved vastly in the last year or two and (2) he has been played out of position in a midfield role instead of defensive midfield / holding position.

        I think Lucas is perfectly capable of playing in a Mascherano role. I think a big reason he’s looked so crap in the past is because he’s been asked to play in a creative role when he is, by nature, a destroyer not a creator (like Mascherano).

  6. i stopped reading this when you suggested that liverpool could have bought more class players with the money torres would have brought in. do you seriously think H&G would have given roy all the money? liverpool haven’t even spent the 5m they got from benayoun’s sale and you think they would been given 70m to play with? liverpool have become a joke under H&G. the only spending they have done is for one player, wilson. the other two signings are free transfers, thats what liverpool has been reduced to, free transfers.

  7. Torres must quit Liverpool and join Manchester United.Man United is the best
    suited team for Torres and he will win lot of silverwares.

  8. Hola Leagured,
    I think you’ll find that in order to become a Manc, you’ll need to get pissed and blow up your car.

  9. I think the argument has it’s valid points, however it does overlook one key consideration – the commercial revenue Liverpool generate from having Torres in the side. His jersey has been the #1 selling replica for the last two seasons, and his marketing reach is enormous.
    I would suggest that the 50-70mil would not sufficiently compensate Liverpool for years of his service on the pitch, and his undeniable pulling power off it.

  10. When healthy,bar none,best striker in the world….Bar none.
    Well worth it to have him stick around this season,for Fernando & the club.
    GLORY made a great point,with G&H as owners,its pretty likely that the 70m or whatever we got for Torres wouldnt be reinvested.What good would selling him,just to pay off debt or drive up their profits do?
    If the takeover rumours are true,it could be a whole new ball game.And Torres knows this.I truly believe we are only 2-4 signings (2 starters,2 squad) away from a deadly team that would easily mount a real title challenge…Sure Torres wants to win titles,but I think its just as important to him to win them with Liverpool.

    1. Bar none best striker? I will have to politely disagree.

      Bar none is a strong statement with the likes of Drogba and Rooney in his very own league. What about his own Spanish teammate David Villa?

      Like I said, he’s a top 5 striker when healthy, but not #1 “bar none.”

      1. Id put Drogba at 2 and Rooney at 3.In fact theyre the only other strikers Id mention in the same breath as Torres…..The only slight against Torres is his injury record. Drogba for as big as he is,is a baby,and a flopper. Rooney can be frustrated into bad decisions…….Villa,somewhere near the bottom of the top ten.

  11. At those prices, the Scousers would have sold. Don’t believe what the papers say! David Villa went for 35M, Torres wouldn’t have been worth much more, maybe 40M.

  12. If he stays healthy, yes

    If he doesn’t, it is a disaster

    They have no one else to replace him whether they admit it or not

  13. I agree, David Ngog is not going to cut it if Torres goes down, which he will. He’s already probably out for the first couple matches anyway.

    Liverpool needs depth, plain and simple. They have very little.

  14. What rubbish.How many world class strikers do u find are so committed to the Club even while being a foreigner. ? ..Torres is staying after finishing SEVENTH in the league ,how many players would be so committed still.? He wore the liverpool scarf just moments after winning the DAM World Cup.
    He’s embraced the culture so well in the last 3 years.

    This talk of money works in fantasy land but no way should he be sold even for 100 million.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *