As a Liverpool fan, I'm pretty happy with this transfer... and the reaction to this transfer almost feels like carbon copy of the reaction to when Mane was signed (just replace 'Van Dijk' with 'Mane' and '£75m' with '35m').
There were a lot of defender names thrown around in the summer as players that Liverpool 'should' buy instead of VVD but they all seemed to be defenders suited to playing in a low block defence. I know Southampton are quite a defensive team as well but VVD has always seemed like an an aggressive 'front-foot' defender to me which is important to how Klopp wants to play.
A lot has already been said about Liverpool's attacking football but I don't think people understand just how terrible a player like Lovren can be for this style of play. As has been noted, Liverpool can play 80% of a game with 'good defence' and then just capitulate. And the problem isn't just that Liverpool concede a goal, it's that when they concede, a 2nd or 3rd goal usually quickly follows.
I think a big part of the problem is that at the first sign of danger, Lovren (and Klaven)'s first instinct is to drop deep which is the antithesis of what Klopp wants as it either drags the rest of the team back or it exacerbates the gap between the CBs and the FBs (a common criticism of Liverpool's defence is that the FBs are 'too attacking' - I think that's focusing on the wrong bit as they're meant to be attacking... I think it's the CBs that drop too deep). When Matip was first signed, he came with the notion that he was an aggressive ball playing centre back and that seemed to be pretty much what we got. It was really noticeable to me in the first few weeks of last season how often Matip would look across the line and make a 'push up' gesture with his hands only to be followed by an exasperated look when Lovren inevitably dropped back. He quickly gave up on that idea and now just follows Lovren to try and compensate for whatever harebrained adventure he decides to go on that day. It used to be even worse with Skrtel as he would back off and back off and back off... until he was practically standing on the keeper's toes!
Klopp's transfer record has also been brought up - all his 'big-money' signings (even stretching back to his Dortmund days) look pretty damn good to me. The rest are either on the 'wait and see' list and/or cost less then £5m anyway.
The other issue people seem to have is with the 'huge' price-tag. It's like everyone's forgot there was a massive new tv deal and all transfer prices skyrocketed. I think peoples heads are still stuck in 'old money' and struggling to deal with the fact that every player practically doubled in price overnight. I think part of the problem is that fees generally increased gradually previously but this one was a huge jump.
From BBC:
In 'old money' I would say Van Dijk would be about £30-£35m which seems to be what most people are saying he should cost, but again I think that people just haven't adjusted to the new market.
I also see a lot of comparisons to the Rio Ferdinand transfer in terms of price - except people are saying hes not worth it as hes not as good as Ferdinand. I would argue that this is an incorrect comparison, as again people aren't adjusting to the new market. People just think, "Blimey, £75m is a lot" and aren't placing it relative to the rest of the current market. I don't think Van Dijk's £75m is even close to Ferdinands £30m when looking relative to this summers transfers.
I think people forget that the big thing about £30m for Ferdinand wasn't just that it was a huge amount of money but that it also
dwarfed just about every other transfer going at that time. Here's the rest of that summer's transfers in the Premier League:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_E ... ummer_2002
The next highest was Anelka at £13m (!)
Here is this summer for comparison:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_E ... ummer_2017
Looking relative to other transfers, I would say a 'Ferdinand equivalent' transfer in the current market would be looking at northwards of £170m.
Also, in all the articles I'm reading the media are desperate to drive home the fact the Liverpool have 'smashed' their club record transfer 3 or 4 times this season as if to accentuate the notion that Liverpool are spending 'crazily' and have overpaid - but that would ignore the fact that just about everyone is doing this.
In fact, a quick google tells me that
14 of the 20 Premier League clubs broke their club record this summer (4 of whom broke it multiple times), and the remaining 6 includes the 2 Manchester Clubs because they already set big records in a previous window. This was only the first window where everyone was flush with TV cash too so I suspect club record transfers will continue to be broken.
PS: Did anybody bother reading this ridiculously long post?
Salah and Mane were exceptional buys, the rest nothing special, and you'd think with this awesome judging power he'd have a better Liverpool record than Brendon Rodgers......oh wait 
