ENIC

[Lilbaz]

Have you heard his complaints?
That’s my gripe
The bloke is acting like he didn’t want to shift out the 4 players he didn’t play and didn’t want the two he got
I need to read a full transcript of course but that IMO is shockingly weak behaviour being paraded as bravery. A weak manager makes excuses in advance … a great manager deals with the hand he has and makes it better

conte has been done twice now in quick succession by managers being smarter than him. Conte is IMO one of the top 5 in the world but he isn’t perfect.

Read the full transcript. The "quotes" miss out certain important words. Purposefully.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Yet we wouldnt have either of those managers at the helm ahead of Conte ... they have had their day in the sun but Conte is an elite manager.

He is
But he is also fallible
I mean anyone with eyes can see the issues in the last two games and address them mid game … he didn’t. He actually made us worse with his subs vs wolves by sacrificing the area of space to attack … odd
And of course vs Chelsea in every game he was almost proud to say we are crap compared to them. That isn’t motivating the players in that game
The guys record speaks for itself. That’s a fact that cannot be argued with. But also his mouth has a habit of running away with itself which is why he doesn’t last at clubs
I’ve worked with world class geniuses in varying forms. None last anywhere because typically to be that great they have other flaws

 

[Bedfordspurs]

The amount isn’t the issue, it’s the fact he has been funded above

and if you look at the original post their transfer deficit was around 116m prior to their first trophy.

again in my opinion that is not the pie in the sky that you claimed from Dubai’s post

So £30m a season to win the big trophies
That’s cheap isn’t it

 

[RigorMortis]

So £30m a season to win the big trophies
That’s cheap isn’t it

Sorry again I don’t understand your point.

The poster was calling out dubaispur as chatting nonsense, I’m just pointing out it isn’t nonsense and that in my opinion Liverpool’s owners show far more ambition and an aligned strategy than our shower

 

[Lilbaz]

Sorry again I don’t understand your point.

The poster was calling out dubaispur as chatting nonsense, I’m just pointing out it isn’t nonsense and that in my opinion Liverpool’s owners show far more ambition and an aligned strategy than our shower

Was dubspurs £150m number correct? No.

Was the money from the owners or the club? Remember they got to a cl final before they won it.

In the last 5 years we've had a higher net spend than liverpool.
https://www.football365.com/news/transfers-premier-league-five-year-net-spend-man-utd-man-city

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Sorry again I don’t understand your point.

The poster was calling out dubaispur as chatting nonsense, I’m just pointing out it isn’t nonsense and that in my opinion Liverpool’s owners show far more ambition and an aligned strategy than our shower

The pool owners have done a good job
They stuck with a manager who won nothing for a long time and brought in players to replace other players they had brought
What they have down extremely well as we know is buy and sell well
They actually had an ex spurs guy leading that area in Michael Edwards

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Read the full transcript. The "quotes" miss out certain important words. Purposefully.

shock horror

 

[RigorMortis]

Was dubspurs £150m number correct? No.

Was the money from the owners or the club? Remember they got to a cl final before they won it.

In the last 5 years we've had a higher net spend than liverpool.
https://www.football365.com/news/transfers-premier-league-five-year-net-spend-man-utd-man-city

It’s not nonsense but the points you have countered it with in my opinion are

Their transfer deficit of 116m is 35 million less than the 150m which by your admission is it very much.

The context of the argument is correct that Liverpool have given considerable funds above player sales both before the Coutinho windfall and prior to their first trophy win

 

[RigorMortis]

Was dubspurs £150m number correct? No.

Was the money from the owners or the club? Remember they got to a cl final before they won it.

In the last 5 years we've had a higher net spend than liverpool.
https://www.football365.com/news/transfers-premier-league-five-year-net-spend-man-utd-man-city

Also why keep chopping and changing timelines?

The discussion wasn’t about the last five years but about the period of time when Liverpool strengthened and overtook us

as I said it’s disingenuous to try and ridicule another poster when your argument doesn’t stack up and you chop and change it from post to post

 

[Lilbaz]

It’s not nonsense but the points you have countered it with in my opinion are

Their transfer deficit of 116m is 35 million less than the 150m which by your admission is it very much.

The context of the argument is correct that Liverpool have given considerable funds above player sales both before the Coutinho windfall and prior to their first trophy win

The context of the argument is that liverpool owners spent £150m of their own money on players to back klopp when he joined. Which isn't true. The first 4 transfer windows liverpool actually made a profit on player sales. They spent big in 2018/19 with a net spend of £126m. So over 6 windows they spent net about £113m (but we'll go with your £116m). That is considered backing the manager. (£18m a window). Conte has had 1 transfer window, we spent £17m on bentancur and £3m loan fee for kulu. We got back £1.2m loan fee for tanguy. So £18.8m net spend. Which is more than £18m.

So the argument that liverpool backed klopp but tottenham don't back conte is false.

 

[Lilbaz]

Also why keep chopping and changing timelines?

The discussion wasn’t about the last five years but about the period of time when Liverpool strengthened and overtook us

as I said it’s disingenuous to try and ridicule another poster when your argument doesn’t stack up and you chop and change it from post to post

Because you and dubai are talking about different timelines. Him before they won a trophy. You before they sold coutinho. Why those timelines? Why not klopps first transfer window so we can compare to contes first window?

I posted the net spend table because it was easier than working out each transfer window net spend for each team.

 

[DubaiSpur]

Because you and dubai are talking about different timelines. Him before they won a trophy. You before they sold coutinho. Why those timelines? Why not klopps first transfer window so we can compare to contes first window?

I posted the net spend table because it was easier than working out each transfer window net spend for each team.

It's interesting you mention that, because here is the owner financing table, 2010 to 2020 inclusive.



As you can see, FSG have put in about 131m into Liverpool, above and beyond any net spend (of which Klopp has had another 150m+, as @RigorMortis points out).

Compare that to our two gurning deadweights at 18th place. Wolves, Brighton, Leeds, Arse, Spam...there's not an owner in the Prem that is more miserly than our Dan and his boss, save for Delia Smith and whomever owns Burnley. What a great bunch we have.

 

[Bishop]

Steven Caulker
Marko Grujic
Kamikaze Grabara

That was his first window

Again maybe he wanted those players and therefore had no reason to complain. They might not be marquee names but that's not the point. We don't need marquee names either, we just need players than the coach wants.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

 

[Gazza Dazzla]

It's interesting you mention that, because here is the owner financing table, 2010 to 2020 inclusive.

View attachment 13659

As you can see, FSG have put in about 131m into Liverpool, above and beyond any net spend (of which Klopp has had another 150m+, as @RigorMortis points out).

Compare that to our two gurning deadweights at 18th place. Wolves, Brighton, Leeds, Arse, Spam...there's not an owner in the Prem that is more miserly than our Dan and his boss, save for Delia Smith and whomever owns Burnley. What a great bunch we have.

Pretty sure we built a £1 billion stadium and training ground in this period didn’t we?

 

[Bishop]

Pretty sure we built a £1 billion stadium and training ground in this period didn’t we?

He posted a table that's shows owner financing. Your point is irrelevant as they didn't personally finance that either.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

 

[RigorMortis]

Because you and dubai are talking about different timelines. Him before they won a trophy. You before they sold coutinho. Why those timelines? Why not klopps first transfer window so we can compare to contes first window?

I posted the net spend table because it was easier than working out each transfer window net spend for each team.

Actually I have used both timelines

the driver for this is Conte’s comments and the reference to the long term strategy, so why reference just one transfer window there?

Also again you’re response was it’s nonsense and fitting two or three different timelines to justify that.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Again maybe he wanted those players and therefore had no reason to complain. They might not be marquee names but that's not the point. We don't need marquee names either, we just need players than the coach wants.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

Indeed
That would be why he said last week he was happy he had a more balanced squad

 

[RigorMortis]

The context of the argument is that liverpool owners spent £150m of their own money on players to back klopp when he joined. Which isn't true. The first 4 transfer windows liverpool actually made a profit on player sales. They spent big in 2018/19 with a net spend of £126m. So over 6 windows they spent net about £113m (but we'll go with your £116m). That is considered backing the manager. (£18m a window). Conte has had 1 transfer window, we spent £17m on bentancur and £3m loan fee for kulu. We got back £1.2m loan fee for tanguy. So £18.8m net spend. Which is more than £18m.

So the argument that liverpool backed klopp but tottenham don't back conte is false.

Your first point is incorrect
In Klopp’s first four transfer windows they actually had a deficit of circa fifty million ( 150 million spend and just over 100 million recouped)

Im not sure why comparing conte’s transfer window now against klopp’s first is relevant.

the key is conte’s comments which allude to the fact that our strategy is to buy young taleknt and in his view for short to medium term success you need to buy experienced players which is in direct contrast to Liverpool( despite Bedfordspurs view that all they did was buy young and inexperienced), in those four transfer windows they identified targets and strengthened their team( including two who were apperently on our radar in Mane and Wijnaldum ).

 

[Bishop]

Indeed
That would be why he said last week he was happy he had a more balanced squad

Presumably he wanted other than what we got. We know Dias was the primary choice for RWF and we did not get him. Maybe he wanted someone else other than Bentancur and maybe he wanted a RWB. Maybe the players we have added aren't of the be quality he hoped for so now he is speaking his mind.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

 

[Lilbaz]

It's interesting you mention that, because here is the owner financing table, 2010 to 2020 inclusive.

View attachment 13659

As you can see, FSG have put in about 131m into Liverpool, above and beyond any net spend (of which Klopp has had another 150m+, as @RigorMortis points out).

Compare that to our two gurning deadweights at 18th place. Wolves, Brighton, Leeds, Arse, Spam...there's not an owner in the Prem that is more miserly than our Dan and his boss, save for Delia Smith and whomever owns Burnley. What a great bunch we have.

Yes we are all aware lewis doesn't put money into the club. It doesn't change the fact that since klopp joined liverpool our net spend on players has higher than theirs.