Torres

[johnmc]

Anyone starting to think Liverpool did very well out of this deal. Carroll and Suarez have the attributes of a very good partnership - it wouldnt surprise me if they get 20 goals each next season. Whereas Torres looks like he would be lucky to get 20 goals the rest of his career.

At Liverpool I thought he looked like a player who just didnt want to be there, but he hasnt looked any better at Chelsea save for a bit of an effort against the rags.

A lot of people on here would have had him for £50m as well, me included

 

[leighton]

I think he will come good for Chelsea. He was nowhere near worth the money they paid for him so Liverpool got a great deal for him.

As for Liverpool and Carroll and Suarez I dont think Carroll will be a hit for them. Teams will know how to defend against him now and it will be a bit like a Crouch type of player who will get some goals but wont get as many as they hope for. Suarez early days yet needs time to settle.

 

[PSmyth07]

They got a good deal for Torres but spent it rashly on Carroll. £35m for an unproven CF who was injured? And Real Madrid were supposed to be putting a £33m bid in for Tevez.

Suarez looks good but he's only played 90 minutes.

 

[Dirty Harry]

I think they did well out of it John although not too sure what to make of Torres at the moment, he clearly was a top striker and like you put his form down to being disillusioned at Liverpool, but he`s no sharper at Chelsea imo, whether it`s just a settling in period we`ll have to wait and see.

Carroll and Suarez look like they could be a real handful if they hit it off together, just glad that Stevie Starfish has seen better days, if he was in his pomp they`d be a real threat next season imo.

 

[balkanno]

Double win for Liverpool, they got rid of him and the dumb Chelsea payed 50M. Nothing better could happen to them.

 

[johnmc]

They got a good deal for Torres but spent it rashly on Carroll. £35m for an unproven CF who was injured? And Real Madrid were supposed to be putting a £33m bid in for Tevez.

Suarez looks good but he's only played 90 minutes.

They "swapped" Torres and Babbel for Suarez and Carroll. What they paid for who is all relative really. If they got £35 for Torres and paid £20m for Carroll would it be so bad?

 

[pee dubya]

They got a good deal for Torres but spent it rashly on Carroll. £35m for an unproven CF who was injured? And Real Madrid were supposed to be putting a £33m bid in for Tevez.

Suarez looks good but he's only played 90 minutes.

They "swapped" Torres and Babbel for Suarez and Carroll. What they paid for who is all relative really. If they got £35 for Torres and paid £20m for Carroll would it be so bad?

It's one way to look at it, but that's ignoring the other potential options. Maybe if they'd waited until the Summer for Carroll they could have got him for half the price (they've done ok without him so far, and their season is a bit of a write off anyway), they could have swapped Torres and Babel for Suarez, Carroll plus more. I think by splurging so quickly they've missed the opportunity to overhaul their midfield (it needs it) using the Torres money as well.

 

[johnmc]

It's one way to look at it, but that's ignoring the other potential options. Maybe if they'd waited until the Summer for Carroll they could have got him for half the price (they've done ok without him so far, and their season is a bit of a write off anyway), they could have swapped Torres and Babel for Suarez, Carroll plus more. I think by splurging so quickly they've missed the opportunity to overhaul their midfield (it needs it) using the Torres money as well.

Fair point - but whos to say Carroll would have been cheaper in the summer?

 

[Anonymous]

Carroll may prove to be worth his fee . . [perhaps] and that's a wait and see situation.
In my humble opinion I see him as becoming a decent player but once established he'll need to change aspects of his game because all prem managers study the strengths and weaknesses of opposition players so that they can negate their effectiveness. Look at shrek for example, it's not just that he's having a bad run - it's more the case that he's pretty much a one trick pony and teams set up to keep him quiet . . which is what he is most of the time (and even a one off shinned shot from a bicycle kick doesn't alter that statistic notably).

We see it ourselves when say, Tevez has a busy game but is busy getting nowhere - it's because opposition know what his strengths are and they set out to channel him into 3 or 4 on one's as he approaches the box. Introducing new aspects to his game (think little chipped cross onto Dzeko for instance) makes a difference. That's what football's all about at this level - constant change and constant reinvention to baffle the 'close-down tactics employed.
That's where I see Mancini showing his class in new player selection - the way he's brought in players with different talents so that he can shuffle our approach - also why missing Johnson limits our ability to change the game mid-match (ergo why he's so good coming on as a super-sub to make nonsense of defenders who have already settled into a game plan.

Torres? Well he was magic but that magic was built on his blinding acceleration and that's something that he's lost due to the many hard knocks he's had (same thing hasv happened to owen and many other former prodigies). I can see Torres being a good 'un again one day but he'll never have what he once had so definitely not worth the sum. . I'm delighted that we didn't buy him because he may have the odd big game left in him but his speed in diminished and he isn't as good a Johnson as a week-in-week-out player so won't bring the points over a season despite perhaps the occasional poached goal.

 

[Skip Donoghue]

My opinion of Torres is he looks burnt out, starting so early at athletico Madrid he has probably peaked and is now in decline, much in the way Michael owen did, and Norman whiteside before, would not be suprised to see a similar outcome for Rooney too