CONFIRMED Rhian Brewster

[Yellarbellyblade]

Is this the "Liverpool type" signing The Price talked about way back?

I always presumed that that was why we signed so many scousers

 

[JPSharpy93]

Would prefer a loan with an option for us to buy, much less risk from our point of view, as oppose to the other way around. But I can see how Liverpool are in a strong position to dictate things.

Overall I’d like us to spend the £20 million if that’s what it takes, if he goes in 2 years for £40 million after smashing it week in week out then fair enough. If he leaves us for £5 million, at least we showed some ambition and gave it a go for one of the most highly rated prospects.

 

[S64 Blade]

We also didn’t pay £25M for them with a nice buy back clause either. Brewster is too expensive at that price and King is 28 not nearly 30 and would cost much less so you aren’t expecting the return.
Brewster great for 2-3 years time, King great now.

King is 30 in 16 months. That's nearly 30.

His wages are likely to be a big stumbling block too.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

King is 30 in 16 months. That's nearly 30.

So we'd get 1 and a half seasons out of him before he's 30 for less money than Brewster, and with no buy back clause.
You would have thought that we should get at least 4 seasons at the very top of his ability out of him for what we pay.

Wages are a separate issue, we either can afford them within what our structure is going to be, or we can't. Wilson took a paycut to go to Newcastle, King may have to do the same.

 

[S64 Blade]

So we'd get 1 and a half seasons out of him before he's 30 for less money than Brewster, and with no buy back clause.

Why would it be less money? Don't just think in terms of transfer value, it's the whole package.

We'd likely have to pay King in excess of £50k per week (his current salary). Add on other probable higher fees, when compared to Brewster - agent, bonuses etc. Brewster will be on considerably less and we can offer him a deal in line with our other strikers (let's say 20k per week like McBurnie).

So over two years on salary alone, we can save in excess of £30k per week, that's £3.12m. So already that's brought the deal on financial parity with signing Brewster. That's excluding any likely differences in agent fees, bonuses, signing-on fees.

We'd then be unlikely to sell King for anything higher than £18m, given his age, so there's a financial loss there.

I think Brewster would have to do considerably well for Liverpool to activate the buy-back clause. They are likely to remain one of the top clubs in the World and to sign someone like Brewster, you'd think they'd only be interested if he's hitting 20+ goals per season. Even then, given the wealth of options they have, it's not guaranteed they'd come back for him.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Why would it be less money? Don't just think in terms of transfer value, it's the whole package.

We'd likely have to pay King in excess of £50k per week (his current salary). Add on other probable higher fees, when compared to Brewster - agent, bonuses etc. Brewster will be on considerably less and we can offer him a deal in line with our other strikers (let's say 20k per week like McBurnie).

So over two years on salary/benefits alone, we can save in excess of £30k per week, that's £3.12m. So already that's brought the deal on financial parity with signing Brewster.

We'd then be unlikely to sell King for anything higher than £18m, given his age, so there's a financial loss there.

I think Brewster would have to do considerably well for Liverpool to activate the buy-back clause. They are likely to remain one of the top clubs in the World and to sign someone like Brewster, you'd think they'd only be interested if he's hitting 20+ goals per season. Even then, given the wealth of options they have, not guaranteed they'd come back for him.

I think you've sewed your figures to suit your argument but even at 30k/week difference (Brewster will want more than 20k) it's only £1.5 million/season.
The last figures rumored, and I get that's paper bollocks but at least they're comparable was King for £16M and Brewster was starting at £20M and they're expecting a bidding war. You're already 3 years into King's deal before you've covered his fee. Of course from purely a financial perspective Brewster is more likely to give you a return, however you seem to be ignoring the fact that King is by far the superior player right now, and in all likelihood will be for the next 2-3 seasons.
No issue with buying potential but we can get a player we really need who's the finished article, over a work in progress player with potential but significant risk.

 

[Seth Rollins]

If we can get Brewster for £20 million I say go for it. And I hope we get him.

 

[FTPE]

Playing devils advocate with this buy back.

A successful stint with us doesn't mean Liverpool are going to be clambering for him back.
He did well at Swansea and it sounds like they want to sell him.

If he gets 10-15 goals for us that would be fantastic, but that doesn't automatically get you a move to the Premiership Champions.

If he gets 20 plus goals, that's a different matter, but how good would it be having one of our strikers getting 20 odd goals for the next 2-3 years??

 

[SufcBilly]

Playing devils advocate with this buy back.

A successful stint with us doesn't mean Liverpool are going to be clambering for him back.
He did well at Swansea and it sounds like they want to sell him.

If he gets 10-15 goals for us that would be fantastic, but that doesn't automatically get you a move to the Premiership Champions.

If he gets 20 plus goals, that's a different matter, but how good would it be having one of our strikers getting 20 odd goals for the next 2-3 years??

i would rather him be consistently between 10-15 and fly under the radar and stay with us than bag 30 in one season and piss off

 

[Moan? Nope-I saw Longhorn]

As far as I’m aware United don’t do release clauses, whether that changes in the future I’m unsure.

so not sure if United would go for this buyback clause deal but you never know, to me if it’s the only way we get Brewster I’d take a chance

Purely conjecture on my part - just aware that (other) clubs (increasingly?) appear to utilise 'release' clauses to encourage players to (re) sign

Wholly agree re the specifics re Brewster - as I've said 'afore assuming / expecting that the 'buyback' price will be higher than initial purchase price we will make a profit (assuming he 'performs')
Certainly appears no more / less risky than a loan a la Henderson

 

[Cerberus Blade]

i would rather him be consistently between 10-15 and fly under the radar and stay with us than bag 30 in one season and piss off

It's not just about the number of goals though, although that does help to raise a player's profile no end. It's about his performances and if he performs like a top Prem striker in his all round game he'll become sought after whether he scores 15 or 30 goals.

The way I think about it is all these players will come and go eventually. Some may stay awhile, some will just be passing through. Buy low, sell high and enjoy them whilst they are here.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

If we can get Brewster for £20 million I say go for it. And I hope we get him.

If we can get him for £20m, I hope we get him and King.

 

[S64 Blade]

I think you've sewed your figures to suit your argument but even at 30k/week difference (Brewster will want more than 20k) it's only £1.5 million/season.
The last figures rumored, and I get that's paper bollocks but at least they're comparable was King for £16M and Brewster was starting at £20M and they're expecting a bidding war. You're already 3 years into King's deal before you've covered his fee. Of course from purely a financial perspective Brewster is more likely to give you a return, however you seem to be ignoring the fact that King is by far the superior player right now, and in all likelihood will be for the next 2-3 seasons.
No issue with buying potential but we can get a player we really need who's the finished article, over a work in progress player with potential but significant risk.

Don't get me wrong, I really like King and agree, I also think he'd make more of an immediate impact. But, I really don't think the club can afford him.

I think an educated gamble on Brewster is less risky, financially.

 

[SufcBilly]

If we can get him for £20m, I hope we get him and King.

and how do you propose we do that

 

[Nah den]

Whilst a buy-back might not be optimal, and i'd hope/expect there to be profit in it for us, we should bear in mind that it'll only be activated by Liverpool if he's a success for us. Which means he'll have helped us improve our standing in the league, which in turn helps our financial position and ability to attract other, better players etc.

I don't really see the downside (unless he's a complete flop of course). We might have to sell at an agreed price rather than market value in a few years, but if it's been activated it's because he's done his job for us at least, more likely surpassing expectations (if the like of Liverpool want him back).

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

and how do you propose we do that

Similar process for both I would think. I guess you'd probably talk to the agent first to see what they're wanting and then the club, but outside of that I'll leave them to it.

 

[SufcBilly]

Similar process for both I would think. I guess you'd probably talk to the agent first to see what they're wanting and then the club, but outside of that I'll them to it.

i did walk into that ill admit

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

i did walk into that ill admit

To answer the question I think you were asking, I believe we have the money to do it (depending on wage demands), but to be honest I'm not convinced we've any real interest in King.

 

[Balham]

i would rather him be consistently between 10-15 and fly under the radar and stay with us than bag 30 in one season and piss off

If Brewster comes to us and gets 20 goals then on the Watkins scale he'd be worth £70m. Chris Wilder could do some proper damage to the Premier League with that kind of money.

 

[CopenhagenBlade]

Playing devils advocate with this buy back.

A successful stint with us doesn't mean Liverpool are going to be clambering for him back.
He did well at Swansea and it sounds like they want to sell him.

If he gets 10-15 goals for us that would be fantastic, but that doesn't automatically get you a move to the Premiership Champions.

If he gets 20 plus goals, that's a different matter, but how good would it be having one of our strikers getting 20 odd goals for the next 2-3 years??

It is possible that although Klopp rates him as a player, he doesn’t fit into the system that he wants to play. Klopp has also said that he will stop in a couple of years and probably knows that the new manager might change style and Brewster could be a good fit again. This gives the new manager the possibility to buy Brewster back at a sensible price.

 

[JPSharpy93]

If Brewster comes to us and gets 20 goals then on the Watkins scale he'd be worth £70m. Chris Wilder could do some proper damage to the Premier League with that kind of money.

“Watkins Scale” that could catch on!

 

[bonnet de douche]

Yeah but it’s shows that we will sign players for big money who are un-proven at premier league level for big money

Your point being ? ...is that a plus point ..

 

[LondonBlade89]

Nixon saying Liverpool haven’t quoted a price, but any bids (one of which is seemingly us) have fallen well short of what they’d like.

What do we reckon? Liverpool probably thinking £25m and we went for £15m to test the waters?

Suspect this one will take a while, not least because Liverpool don’t seem to have any idea right now of what they want to do with him.

 

[bonnet de douche]

It’s worrying they are prepared to sell him...small shades of Ibe and Solanke ....they only have origi as back up ( voted worst centre in France ) and they are willing to flog him...Hmmmm.....Red flags all over ....and at £20 plus mill..I for one would be worried ...loan of course as no massive risk ......

 

[SufcBilly]

It’s worrying they are prepared to sell him...small shades of Ibe and Solanke ....they only have origi as back up ( voted worst centre in France ) and they are willing to flog him...Hmmmm.....Red flags all over ....and at £20 plus mill..I for one would be worried ...loan of course as no massive risk ......

Liverpool need to sell to buy, its a risk they are willing to take. Origi is a perfectly sound back up and Brewster seems more sellable than Origi

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

It’s worrying they are prepared to sell him...small shades of Ibe and Solanke ....they only have origi as back up ( voted worst centre in France ) and they are willing to flog him...Hmmmm.....Red flags all over ....and at £20 plus mill..I for one would be worried ...loan of course as no massive risk ......

Massive risk in that if he's a success we can't retain him past the end of this year we're left with a huge hole to fill in our squad, he's not likely to be starting straight away, and it's still going to cost us a couple of million.
I think it'll be at least the new year before we see the best of him.

 

[Houso]

Nixon saying Liverpool haven’t quoted a price, but any bids (one of which is seemingly us) have fallen well short of what they’d like.

What do we reckon? Liverpool probably thinking £25m and we went for £15m to test the waters?

Suspect this one will take a while, not least because Liverpool don’t seem to have any idea right now of what they want to do with him.

The fact that we're bidding actually gives me hope. We know full and well he's not going to be available for a small fee. Means we have some cash to spend.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

It is possible that although Klopp rates him as a player, he doesn’t fit into the system that he wants to play. Klopp has also said that he will stop in a couple of years and probably knows that the new manager might change style and Brewster could be a good fit again. This gives the new manager the possibility to buy Brewster back at a sensible price.

I think Klopp told him he would be out on loan this season, he then missed that pen and Klopp said scrap that lad i'm selling ya.

 

[Withington Blade]

Would prefer a loan with an option for us to buy, much less risk from our point of view, as oppose to the other way around. But I can see how Liverpool are in a strong position to dictate things.

Overall I’d like us to spend the £20 million if that’s what it takes, if he goes in 2 years for £40 million after smashing it week in week out then fair enough. If he leaves us for £5 million, at least we showed some ambition and gave it a go for one of the most highly rated prospects.

Agreed. Ideally we could buy him with no option or clauses in place but that looks unrealistic based on reports. We also have to be honest with ourselves, if we sign Brewster and he’s successful, he will come under the radar of a top club and we’ll struggle to hold onto him and that will be the case whether or not there is a buyback clause in his contract.

The key is making sure the agreed price is set at a sensible level given that we would be taking a fair amount of risk signing a kid with promise but limited experience - they don’t all work out as seen with Jordan Ibe, Solanke and Ben Woodburn who all left Liverpool with big potential that they have so far failed to live up to. Is also hope any option could not be activated for 3 years or so. All in all, in my opinion, it is much better to sign him with an option than not at all.

 

[Bladesman]

I was really excited about Brewster until finding out he’s a West Ham fan

He gives HammerInPeace a reason to be here.