Rohit wrote:
Tony Montana wrote:
But you can only buy one Torres. Sure there are other strikers who are similar products but they have too many variables to be seen as the same product. Compare him to Suarez who Liverpool bought as a replacement. Torres is more marketable generally and he is proven in the Premier League. That has to be at least part of the reason Chelsea went for Torres and not Suarez. But those reasons are massive making the "products" too dissimilar.
Torres may not be the only striker who can help them qualify for 4th place though.
Anyways you keep going on about how he is worth it if he helps them qualify for the CL and/ or win the CL. What if his presence doesn't make that difference though just like his presence at Liverpool never made much difference, even at times when he played?
There will be uncertainty in any transfer and whether it was truly a good one or not is something that can only be discussed with hundred percent certainty with the help of hind-sight.
In some cases, like, say, Nani, it looked like the player was going to be shipped up after failing to live up to the expectations when he stepped up and became, arguably, the team's most important player.
However, on the face value, you can not have a deal with lesser uncertainty than Torres. He's a proven goal-scorer in the Premier League, world class striker and also someone who can adequately replace an aging Drogba, who is probably their most important player. Yes, he can turn out to be a crock and he may not make a difference, but, at this moment, you can only judge him on his past achievements and what he can provide, in theory, to Chelsea and that is definitely worth spending some money. How much, that is open for debate.
