Liverpool Transfer News: Why Overpaying for Gylfi Sigurdsson Is a Good Idea
Liverpool have reportedly refused to meet Gylfi Sigurdsson's revised wage demands prompting a detour for the player towards Tottenham Hotspur. According to the Liverpool Echo, Sigurdsson raised his demands by 50 percent to what had been agreed before.
Liverpool fans have been expecting this signing for a while, and it would signal a major blow if the Reds do not secure this acquisition. However, Liverpool owners FSG are very definitive as to what they would like to offer as a player's wages and will not tolerate being held to ransom.
Despite that, Liverpool should show a bit more fight in the transfer market to secure the signings of their first-choice players. Brendan Rodgers may not be able to attract a lot of good players from around the world, and the ones he is able to attract should be made priorities.
Sigurdsson was one player that was ready to come to Liverpool and had proved to be a good midfielder for Swansea towards the latter half of last season. There are not many players who would represent that for the Reds, and Rodgers and John Henry should be aware of that before they decide to not grant Sigurdsson his demands.
It is about weighing options at the moment for Liverpool.
If paying Sigurdsson about a million or two above what was deemed right helps you get qualification for the Champions League, then it would certainly be worth it. Though Sigurdsson's signing will not come with any guarantees attached with it, it does seem to be the one with the most realistic return-on-value investment at present.
Henry and company should be wary that appointing a manager like Rodgers has its drawbacks. The hike in wage demand by Sigurdsson is probably one of many of those. That not many players will be attracted to Liverpool to help it challenge is another.
John Henry should know what will be best. He has to focus on Liverpool this transfer season or face losses on his investment for another year.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?