Michael Edwards’ $85 Million Decision That Liverpool May Regret | OneFootball

Liverpool’s success has always come from sharp timing and clear decisions. Under Michael Edwards, every move used to feel precise. That’s why selling Luis Díaz for around $85 million caught so many off guard. On paper, it made sense. It balanced the books and opened space for new signings. But as the season has gone on, it looks more like a misstep. Before the 2-0 win over Aston Villa, Liverpool had lost six of seven in all competitions, even after spending over $526 million on fresh talent. Former midfielder Andy Reid summed it up bluntly, calling the summer “an expensive mistake.”

Fans Saw It Coming

Liverpool fans don’t need headlines to tell them when something’s off. They watch closely. They compare notes. Sites like FBref and Squawka are part of the routine now, updating pressing stats and touch maps almost as fast as the games finish. When Díaz started pressing less and drifting wider, people noticed. The numbers only confirmed what the eyes had already caught.

That habit of digging deeper goes well beyond club channels. Fans who follow wider data sources, including sports betting sites not on Gamstop, which pull figures from operators outside the UK, often notice shifts in form or market trends before they appear anywhere else. Their feeds move with the markets, showing when form or sentiment starts to shift. The breadth of that data gives an early indication of how form and value are being read across the football world, adding another layer to the conversation supporters are already having.

Then comes the noise that makes Liverpool what it is. Threads on X, late-night podcasts, pub chats replayed online. Homegrown voices like The Redmen TV and The Anfield Wrap take all that chatter and give it shape. By the time Díaz was sold, no one was surprised. The signs had been there for weeks. What hurt was seeing the club ignore them.

What Liverpool Actually Gave Up

Díaz was never only a scorer. He was the energy that stretched defenses and the spark that turned counter-pressure into attack. According to The Guardian, he contributed 17 goals in all competitions during the title-winning campaign and was key to Liverpool’s transition play. His ability to receive under pressure, carry the ball through tight spaces, and recover possession high up the field made him irreplaceable on the left side.

Without him, the attack has looked easier to contain. The replacements have yet to match his direct running or chemistry with the full-backs. Matches that once swung Liverpool’s way now feel slower and less threatening in transition. When supporters say the team has lost its rhythm, this is what they mean. The tactical gap is visible in every move that ends where Díaz would once have driven forward.

The Logic Behind the Sale

Michael Edwards’ return to FSG and the arrival of Richard Hughes promised a new start. Multiple reports called it a record-spending window, focused on younger, adaptable players like Florian Wirtz and Alexander Isak. One recent analysis noted how introducing too many new faces at once can unsettle a side’s rhythm, especially when key players are moved on during the same window. On paper, selling Díaz at 28 made sense. Cash in at his peak, reinvest, and refresh the squad.

But timing matters. Letting go of an established starter during a tactical reset under Arne Slot felt risky. The rebuild needed anchors, not more moving parts. Díaz already understood Liverpool’s pressing rhythm and how to keep it alive. Losing him made the project look efficient in finance, but fragile in football. That’s the contrast frustrates supporters now.

Early Evidence from Germany

If Liverpool hoped the deal would fade quietly, Díaz’s fast start in Germany made that impossible. Reuters reported that he scored in his Bayern Munich debut during a 2-1 Supercup win, instantly showing what Liverpool had lost. His work rate and drive fit seamlessly into Bayern’s attack, where he added pace and purpose down the flank. The contrast is hard to ignore. While Liverpool continue to search for fluency, Díaz has found it straight away.

For many supporters, that debut goal became proof that the issue was never Díaz himself. Selling him to a team that immediately revived his best traits made the decision look even worse. It felt as though Liverpool had forgotten how to use a player who was still performing at an elite level.

What the Numbers Say

A glance at the data reinforces the argument. Premier League statistics show that Díaz’s goal contributions last season outstripped those of any left-sided replacement so far. His expected-goals figure and ball-recovery numbers placed him among the league’s top performers in his position. Removing that output without a direct successor has left Liverpool chasing balance instead of building on strength.

Reid’s comments about “poor spending choices” mirror what the numbers already reveal. The rebuild has created depth but not cohesion, and cohesion was the foundation of Liverpool’s earlier success under Edwards.

Why It Matters

Transfers at Liverpool have always carried emotional weight. Supporters trust the club to make tough calls when the timing is right, but they also expect decisions that keep the spirit of the team intact. The Díaz sale feels different because it touched both the technical and emotional sides of the club. It disrupted the pressing structure and unsettled the sense that Liverpool’s recruitment machine always knew best.

This is not a demand for nostalgia. It is recognition that football decisions are judged not just by numbers but by how they fit the pulse of the dressing room and the confidence of the crowd. Selling a player who embodied that connection was bound to sting, especially when the replacements needed time to adjust.