Why Mo Salah, Trent Alexander-Arnold and Virgil van Dijk are VICTIMS of BRUTAL FSG model

They’re probably sat scratching their heads in Boston.

When Fenway Sports Group bought Liverpool Football Club, they spotted an opportunity. The club were a distressed asset at the time and available for a bargain price. The potential was massive.

It turned out to be a shrewd purchase. Their £300million investment is now worth £4.2billion.

The model throughout their time as custodians of the Merseyside club has been consistent. They want the Reds to be self-sufficient. They want to look at all options to spot possible marginal gains.

READ MORE: Mohamed Salah FINALLY set for DREAM move

And, perhaps the biggest one, they want to ensure players grow old elsewhere. In other words, they don’t want to be paying a player on the decline the big money. That is what destroys the model. After all, it is all about getting the best value for your money.

This approach is something they have been largely loyal to.

It is why they have allowed the likes of Adam Lallana, James Milner, Gini Wijnaldum, Roberto Firmino and Joel Matip all leave for nothing.

It is why they would’ve let Sadio Mane depart on a free transfer had he not pushed for a move to Bayern Munich one year prior to his deal expiring.

It is also why they were in no hurry to renew Jordan Henderson’s deal at Anfield, even after he went public and threatened to leave. It was only after Jurgen Klopp intervened that the then-skipper was given the new contract he so desperately wanted.

What FSG's history means for Virgil van Dijk, Trent Alexander-Arnold and Mohamed Salah

The point is, Liverpool’s stance on contracts with ageing players has been, generally speaking, unwavering. So their handling of Virgil van Dijk and Mohamed Salah should not come as much of a surprise.

It is seemingly why they’re not scrambling to tie the duo down to new deals.

The pair are in unbelievable form and for other clubs, a new deal for both would be a no-brainer. But Liverpool are reportedly reluctant to keep them as the two highest earners now they’re well into their 30s.

READ MORE: Liverpool coach makes HUGE Rio Ngumoha prediction

And selling them just simply isn’t an option. It makes no business sense.

Yes, Liverpool would receive a transfer fee and that could go towards a replacement but how beneficial is that? The club loses a top-class player during a season they can definitely still contribute. The Reds have software that tracks everything and makes long-term predictions. It helps with contract situations. Of course, there will be exceptions, but, generally, if Liverpool give someone a new four-year deal, they’re confident they’ll be able to perform at the required level for that period. The only way they’ll sell that player before then if is an offer comes in that is too good to refuse or there’s been a dramatic decline.

Had the Reds sold Salah for £100million last summer, they could’ve lost out on guaranteed Premier League output and probably overspent on players due to selling clubs knowing about the cash windfall. Liverpool don’t lose Salah for nothing but they’re worse off, on and off the pitch. In this scenario, keeping him for an extra two seasons before potentially allowing him to leave on a free is better than £100million in the bank.

That is the model.

That is why Liverpool often find themselves letting valuable players leave on a free. Because they’re too valuable to the team to sell prior to this but not valuable enough to extend their deals. This has always been the model and will always be the model.

READ MORE: Mohamed Salah delivers ‘UNIQUE’ Omar Marmoush verdict amid Liverpool transfer talks