Richard Hughes may have left Liverpool with plenty of questions surrounding his time at the club.
But there is one transfer that could prove extremely important to his legacy.
According to James Pearce and Greg Evans, sources close to FSG believe the groundwork Hughes put into the Bradley Barcola deal over the past 12 months was vital in ensuring the France international ultimately ended up at Anfield.
Those same sources reportedly believe Liverpool’s decision to trust Hughes to continue leading the way on the deal this summer, despite his impending departure, has been vindicated.
And when you look at how the transfer eventually played out, it is difficult to argue with that assessment.
Hughes started the Barcola work long before the deal was done
One of the easiest things to forget about a major transfer is that the work often starts months before the player actually signs.
Liverpool didn’t suddenly decide to sign Barcola at the end of August.
The groundwork had already been laid.
Hughes had reportedly been involved in the process for around 12 months, building relationships and helping Liverpool position themselves for a potential deal.
That work ultimately put Liverpool in a strong enough position to get the transfer over the line.
And considering the size and importance of the deal, that shouldn’t be underestimated.
Barcola wasn’t exactly a straightforward signing
Liverpool committed a huge amount of money to bring Barcola to Anfield.
The reported package is enormous, with the initial fee understood to be around £100m and potential add-ons taking the total considerably higher.
That isn’t the sort of transfer a club completes without considerable planning.
Liverpool had to be convinced that Barcola was worth the investment.
They had to convince the player.
They had to negotiate with Paris Saint-Germain.
And they had to move at the right moment.
The fact that the deal eventually happened suggests there was a lot of preparation behind the scenes.
And this is where Hughes deserves credit
I’ve been critical of some of Liverpool’s transfer decisions.
I’ve questioned why the club didn’t strengthen midfield.
I’ve questioned the lack of a specialist right-back.
I’ve questioned whether Liverpool did enough to provide cover in certain positions.
So I’m not going to suddenly pretend Richard Hughes got everything right.
He didn’t.
But Barcola looks like a major success for him.
If the reports are accurate and Hughes was instrumental in laying the foundations for the transfer over the previous year, then Liverpool supporters should acknowledge that.
You can criticise the weaknesses in the squad while still recognising when the club gets something right.
FSG apparently believed in his work
This is perhaps the most interesting part of the report.
Hughes was already heading towards the exit, yet Liverpool’s ownership reportedly continued to trust him to lead the Barcola negotiations.
That suggests FSG had considerable confidence in the work he had already done.
They could have decided that a new sporting structure should take over immediately.
Instead, they allowed Hughes to continue driving the process.
And now Barcola is a Liverpool player.
From FSG’s perspective, that decision has apparently been vindicated.
Barcola could become Hughes’ Liverpool legacy
Ultimately, we won’t know the full impact of Hughes’ time at Liverpool for years.
Transfers aren’t judged properly after a few weeks.
Barcola could become a superstar and justify every penny.
Or he could struggle under the pressure of a huge transfer fee.
But the process behind the deal can still be judged separately.
And getting a player of Barcola’s quality to choose Liverpool after a year of groundwork is a significant achievement.
The exciting thing for Liverpool supporters is that Barcola could be exactly the type of player the team needed.
He’s explosive.
He’s direct.
He can beat defenders.
And he gives Iraola another attacking weapon.
After watching Liverpool struggle at times for pace and unpredictability early in the season, his arrival could prove hugely important.
It changes the conversation around Hughes
This is where I think the story gets particularly interesting.
Hughes’ departure means we can now start looking at his Liverpool tenure as a whole rather than judging every individual decision in isolation.
There are decisions I don’t agree with.
There are areas where I believe Liverpool should have strengthened.
But if Hughes spent a year preparing the ground for Barcola and ultimately helped deliver one of the biggest signings of the summer, that deserves recognition.
Especially if Barcola goes on to become a major player for Liverpool.
A complicated legacy
Perhaps that’s the fairest way to describe Hughes’ time at Liverpool.
Complicated.
There have been things I liked.
There have been things I didn’t.
But the Barcola deal is one area where the evidence currently points towards Liverpool getting their planning right.
Hughes did the groundwork.
Liverpool trusted him to finish the job.
And despite his impending departure, FSG apparently believed he was still the right person to lead the negotiations.
Now Barcola is at Anfield.
Maybe we should thank Hughes
It’s far too early to say that Richard Hughes left Liverpool with a perfect legacy.
He didn’t.
Liverpool’s squad still has weaknesses, and supporters will rightly debate some of the decisions made during his time at the club.
But football is rarely completely black and white.
Sometimes you can get things wrong in one area and still get something spectacularly right in another.
Bradley Barcola could be that success story for Richard Hughes.
If the Frenchman develops into the player Liverpool believe he can become, we may look back at the Barcola deal as one of the defining pieces of Hughes’ time at Anfield.
And perhaps, despite everything else, Liverpool should give Richard Hughes some credit for getting this one right.
Jamie (The Kopite View)
Hughes lack of presence and voice – not speaking up for what his work actually involved day-to-day – is a mess of his and the club’s own making.
Compounding that with everything we know and the blatant gaps in the squad means, for critics like me, that his legacy is negative on the balance.
Spent massive amounts and took the squad backwards, despite signing pedigreed players. Most of them have underwhelmed to this point as well.
Trying to say his groundwork in signing Barcola is his legacy is laughable when viewed in line with his wider stumbles.
Him leaving a year before his contract is up saved us an additional year of ‘more of the same’. Even PSG Chairman Nasser al-Khelaifi name-checked Bhatia and Gordon.
That last reference is petty, but this transfer dragged on way too long, and to the detriment of other important areas we needed to address but haven’t.
FSG triumphing over Barcola papers over the gaps temporarily. Kerkez and Frimpong will soon bring them back to reality. Isak being peripheral will compound that misery. Szobo at right back, teams gliding through our unprotected midfield… all are dire situations in waiting.
Hughes failed more than he succeeded and we’re left paying the price.