Deadline day poll: Torres or Carroll?
by Stephen Schmidt on Jan 31, 2012 3:18 AM GMT
in This and That
Email
Print
It's deadline day in London, and I think we all remember the craziness that occurred just 365 days ago. Chelsea finally broke Liverpool's resolve to keep hold of Fernando Torres and pried him out of their cold dead (or clammy rapidly dying) hands for the low low price of £50 million. Liverpool quickly turned around and wisely invested £35 million of that money in drunken caveman Andy Carroll. It's been a full year now and neither striker has gotten on any sort of roll yet, so I'm going to put forth a pretty simple question. If you had to make one of those two deals again 365 days later, which one would you do?
49 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What about....... resale value?
Carroll is only worth about 3.5m (according to me anyways), while Torres, largely due to his repuration, could be resold for anywhere between 15-30m.
Carroll can get on the end of a cross.
We looove to cross.
Have you watched Liverpool this year?
He hasn’t gotten on the end of shit, and we bought Stewie Downing just to feed him crosses.
Bullpen Banter
Fan: Seattle Mariners, Seattle Sounders FC, Liverpool
Twitter
by c_dowley on Jan 31, 2012 7:03 AM GMT via Android app up reply actions
I was just trying to help his image
sheesh. Wifebeaters need all the help they can get (in some ways more than others).
It's essentially like asking
35m for a lamppost or 50million for a sad puppy who used to be a badass pitbull. These are the decisions that keep me up at night…
Sad puppies are cute, but lampposts don't poop on the floor and cry
Hrm
by Graham MacAree on Jan 31, 2012 3:23 AM GMT up reply actions
Carrol has done nearly nothing
Torres was terrible last year, but this season, so far, in all compeitions, he’s tied for second in assists on our squad and has 4 goals (only two less than our other main striker, Drogba).
Plus, love him or hate him, the man sells tickets and jerseys by the boatload.
Clearly Torres.
Neither has scored much, but...
…from where I sit, one has been showing small signs of being a top-class player, and has been somewhat dangerous in attack, and the other hasn’t looked good in any sense, and has huge personal issues.
That said, if I knew what would happen, I’d take neither. If forced, however, I would pick Torres, even at the higher cost and wages. I think the fee difference is minimal when you consider resale value. With the wages, I think Torres looks more likely to justify them than Carroll. When you factor in the marketing revenue and such, Torres’ wages become less of an issue.
All in all, I think Nando has a greater chance to turn his career around than Carroll, and that’s the biggest reason I went for him.
Author and Official Fernando Torres Apologist for We Ain't Got No History!
A good apologist doing his job
by RamStamford on Jan 31, 2012 4:11 AM GMT via mobile up reply actions
But what's worse?
Having a player who you know is terrible and seems like he won’t improve, or a player that shows, however intermittently, that he could turn a corner fairly soon and perhaps get back to his best?
The first one makes the decision to offload him a lot more clear-cut, rather than “hanging in there” for the second one, which could be more detrimental.
You're right.
Working in a pub is a young man’s game.
Author and Official Fernando Torres Apologist for We Ain't Got No History!
by Kevin Kostka on Jan 31, 2012 4:55 PM GMT up reply actions
the way i see it
one player is a little more dangerous and generally works harder for/with the ball. the other is utterly useless. id rather have torres
I'd have Torres any day
New here. Atleast Torres tries his best but has no luck. What does Carroll do? Crash the drinking joints at Liverpool?
by Ali Emmanuel on Jan 31, 2012 4:34 AM GMT via mobile reply actions
Well Torres off course
Even if he hasn’t scored…He has played really well this season (and if you compare that to Caroll’s performance this year, then way toooooo well)
I reckon, had he not missed those sitters, There would have been no need for such a poll !!!
im a red and id choose nando all day long. word from sources at liverpool are that AC is a drunken thug, always out on the lash and has little respect for people. a friend saw him in some toilets of a posh resto in manchester some months back telling the toilet attendent that ‘my shoes cost more than you earn in a month’. he is a thick chav who needs to be sold to stoke asap.
nando will come good in the not too distant future. ‘king’ kenny has already admitted he was wrong signing caveman by offering to swap him for tevez. torres should have stayed to link up with suarez. that would have been as good a front pairing as is possible.
Marketing-wise
Liverpool must be missing the shit outta Torres. The guy farts rainbows and flowers in comparison with the current rumors and stuff from the LFC squad. It says something that the day that transfer happened was the happiest day of the English Press’s life, as they could finally paint him the villian. Their second happiest day, of course, being that awful miss at OT.
Ahh
again we see that the poll being public and the comments not, means a big difference in the typical response of the WAGNH community and that of the Fernando-adoring public.
I was surprised to see the results, until I read the comments and figure it must be the case above. I choose neither! Easy way out! By virtue of my believing the Torres deal should never have been, which would also mean that the Carroll deal would have never happened.
Torres
Torres any day. In terms of profile and shirt sales, marketing Torres has almost repaid his transfer fees. I have friend working at the footie shop in Singapore and they have sold close to 15000 torres shirt from that shop alone, and one shirt here costs close to $50. Can’t imagine how much it sells in other countries. But from a football point of view transfer is not so good. But Chelsea was the big news maker. It help in profile building.
by danishchelsea on Jan 31, 2012 5:35 AM GMT via Android app reply actions
Give me 3mil and you make the same headlines
Chelsea sign journeyman Sunday Footballer. A WORLD RECORD transfer fee for an amateur player! Has Abramovich gone mad?!
DPEEZY shirts fly off the shelves!
Torres
Say what you will. But Now a days club profile has extended beyond England and many more people identify with Chelsea.
More fans the better. And for people watching in TV, sometime what triggers them to love a club can be a player, some incident, sometimes how the stadium looks etc. More fans, more money less reliance on Roman in future.
by danishchelsea on Jan 31, 2012 6:35 AM GMT via Android app up reply actions
Btw, I'm abstaining from this vote
Just like your 10th vodka+RedBull, you just wish you could undo it all.
And by undo it all
you mean never ever drink vodka + RedBull in the first place because of the abomination it is? Yes, I thought so.
Nothing better for straight up
puking. Ugh… I can think of few adult beverages that sound as terrible as that drink.
I don't even need to
but I figure that’s the idea.
The obvious answer is Carrol
If we look at it logically, Carrol was the ideal striker for Chelsea. He’s big, strong and good in the air, very similar to Drogba. The way Chelsea was already setup would have suited him, no need to buy extra players. By buying Torres it meant that we got a new manager, bought mata and meireles and are now chasing more creativity down the wings. Chelsea has had to change to accomodate Torres and in the process become less Chelsea (more prone to conceding stupid goals than before). Liverpool were already set up perfectly for Suarez since he’s similar to Torres.
Stewart Downing would have been brilliant for us.
The Nigerian Perspective!
by Iced O on Jan 31, 2012 7:55 AM GMT via mobile reply actions
Whoa
And I here I thought some of those things you’d mentioned were some of the few positives that came of the Torres transfer, as far as Chelsea is concerned. I suppose some people really do love the way Chelsea played before and winning, no matter how boring it was. ;)
Yeah as I said on another topic once
between the choice of pestilence and the cholera, it’s Ebola for me :D
So Carroll comes probably cheaper which is a heavy argument BUT since both are more or less useless, and all of what we discuss here is entirely arbitrary and theoretical I come with an argument I’m surprised both of the Pro-Torres-fraction have forgotten: Torres at least is good looking, whilst Carroll is an insult to the eye … so if both of them end up sitting on the bench one at least is pleasing to the eye. I’m a bit surprised nobody has mentioned that :P
Tor ilisar'thera'nal!
Hahahha
I was going to make a joke of it, but sometimes I stay away from that, for fear of people beginning to really think that is all I care about. That said, it is very true.
Personally
I just couldn’t justify paying 35 million on a tree
I wouldn't sign either of them
But if I had to chose one it would for sure be Torres at least he looks good and lookslike improving
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on We Ain't Got No History
Related FanShots on We Ain't Got No History
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
