braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
I obviously rate him quite a bit higher than you do...
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Victimpool FC - Klopp leaving, grown men crying
- Thread starter southstand1882
- Start date
I obviously rate him quite a bit higher than you do...
Rorschach
Ricky Villa
He's better than Rodgers (which is not too hard), and his Dortmund teams have been frequently been brilliant and very watchable. I'd absolutely hate him to go there.
Baleforce
Les Bennett
I think he did brilliantly in Germany, there are some clubs in the PL which could be a good fit for his MO, Liverpool isn't one of them imo.
He could well go there and be brilliant, but generally I agree with you, it's not a foregone conclusion.
And..... it's Liverpool, they like pulling that trigger before taking it out the holster as much as we do.
Legohamster
Ian Walker
I think he has done a fantastic job at BD, but Ramos did brilliantly in Spain, AVB in Portugal!
It might not be a decent fit, I actually think we would be a better fit.
Anyway. Back to laughing at Liverpool
Bloke on TS today
Superted
Jonathan Woodgate
I agree with the caller. They need Jurgen Klomm in charge.
LFC's Lowest Points Tallies In 38 Game PL Seasons:
1. 52 - 2011/12 (Manager Kenny: sacked)
2. 54 - 1998/99 (Manager Evans/Houllier: Evans left mid-season)
3. 58 - 2010/11 (Manager Hodgson: sacked mid-season)
3. 58 - 2004/05 (Manager Benitez: Won Champions League and stayed on)
5. 60 - 2003/04 (Manager Houllier: sacked)
6. 61 - 2012/13 (Manager Rodgers: no trophies and stayed on)
7. 62 - 2014/15 (Manager Rodgers: ?)
8. 63 - 2009/10 (Manager Benitez: sacked)
9. 65 - 1997/98 (Manager Evans: lost sole control)
Only 3 times have these 9 finishes not resulted in a change of manager either during, or at the end of, the season in question.
One of those 3 times was a season in which they became European champions.
The other 2 times the manager was Brendan Rodgers.
1. 52 - 2011/12 (Manager Kenny: sacked)
2. 54 - 1998/99 (Manager Evans/Houllier: Evans left mid-season)
3. 58 - 2010/11 (Manager Hodgson: sacked mid-season)
3. 58 - 2004/05 (Manager Benitez: Won Champions League and stayed on)
5. 60 - 2003/04 (Manager Houllier: sacked)
6. 61 - 2012/13 (Manager Rodgers: no trophies and stayed on)
7. 62 - 2014/15 (Manager Rodgers: ?)
8. 63 - 2009/10 (Manager Benitez: sacked)
9. 65 - 1997/98 (Manager Evans: lost sole control)
Only 3 times have these 9 finishes not resulted in a change of manager either during, or at the end of, the season in question.
One of those 3 times was a season in which they became European champions.
The other 2 times the manager was Brendan Rodgers.
What? not sure where you got that from, Pool's expenditure on buys & wages in last 5 years (3 of Rodgers) is double ours and very close to Scum's ..
You could just look at last season's buys, plus the wages on offer for some of their younger players .. stupid money, brick results
stinkfoot
Eidur Gudjohnsen
That is absolutely fudging priceless.
Cheer up pal. I imagine you're in the top four for possession.
you cant just look at expenditure on players alone. firstly, liverpools transfer activity this seasons was largely offset by the suarez sale. but more importantly, like us, the season we sold bale, liverpool bought players who are in the 40-70k p/w category. and their current squad is largely made up of players in that quality bracket. the total amount spent on the players is largely irrelevant. thats what made rodgers' comment on us so ridiculous/delusional a couple of seasons ago (im referring to the "100m..challenge for the title"). whatever we spent that summer, our sqaud was still made up of 40-70k p/w players. the 'problem' for us ad liverpool is that we cant really afford to have those 100-140k p/w like arsenal do, or even the 250k players that the top 3 have. we simply cant afford to take on that kind of risk. at the start of the season, i pointed out that liverpool would be in an almighty fight if they were to finish in the top 4, despite what the media and rodgers and liverpool fans were saying/hoping for (another title challenge). liverpool's financial structure means that even a 4th place finish is a massive acheivment.
in addition, you can quite clearly see that fsg are trying to reduce expenditure at liverpool. liverpool have been making significant operating losses over the past few years. and its only this season that they have managed to break even. *my source is the swissramble blog. rodgers has had to offload high wage earners like pepe reina and replace him with the cheaper but weaker option that is mignolet. also in terms of transfer activity, fsg dont really seem to be investing like previous owners (espeically when compared to rafa benitez' reign). most of their acitivty seems to be balanced by player sales.
in short, liverpool's best players are the likes of coutinho and sterling. to expect this kind of squad to constantly challenge teams made up of players like {ozil, alexis}, {silva, yaya}, {hazard, fabregas}, {rooney, mata, di maria} is delusional. the difference is that all those players are quite obviously 100k+ p/w players (and they have many more of this level of player), whilst liverpool arguably have no players that are in the 100k plus bracket (perhaps apart from sterling). when liverpool have had this calibre of player over the past few seasons, they have not been able to afford them, so have sold them off. much like they will probably end up having to do with sterling. so it doesnt matter how much a team like liverpool spend net in transfer fees. the more important thing to look at is the calibre of player they are bringing in. and quite honestly, i dont think rodgers has been given the license to get a much better bunch of players than the ones he has done.
Someone did the research of cost +wages over last 5 years here, Pool was at 800M, we were about 400-ish. Didn't work out the last two years specifically, and saying net spend by balancing players sales is heavily skewed by Suarez sale.
I'm not sure the trend you see if cost control or the fact that Pool is now out of the regular CL group, add in a manager no one outside of England has a fudging clue about, they simply don't have the draw for top level, so they are badly overpaying. When you look at Lovren, Lallana, Balotelli, Markovic, Moreno, Can, Origi = 110M+ bitching about cut spending hardly seems true.
I'm not sure the trend you see if cost control or the fact that Pool is now out of the regular CL group, add in a manager no one outside of England has a fudging clue about, they simply don't have the draw for top level, so they are badly overpaying. When you look at Lovren, Lallana, Balotelli, Markovic, Moreno, Can, Origi = 110M+ bitching about cut spending hardly seems true.
Thats a good point, and i think it more highlights how well we have done, as opposed to liverpool doing badly. i think us and arsenal are two sides that have figured out big transfer fees are not needed if you can develop your own players. as the ability to spend big on wages is the real determining factor of on pitch performances. with arsenal, you can quite clearly see that they have moved a big part of their transfer budget to their wage budget to enable themselves to hang ono players better than the likes of us and liverpool. i think we are also moving in a similar direction, and this is a good thing for us imo.
Another good point, but i think this is just one of the factors that shows that fsg are brining in a level of austerity at liverpool. i think it is quite obvious from the outside that fsg are moving liverpool towards a more sustainable business model, and this no doubt will hurt their level of performance on the pitch. fsg are quite clearly only at liverpool to make a profit, so surely its reasonable to assume that liverpool are going to be operating under a tighter budget?
those are just transfer fees though. they can spend £500m, but if all those players are on 40-70k p/w, they will still finish 5th/6th. liverpool's ability to spend big on wages has been reduced since fsg have taken over, and that cut in financial power is why the very top players dont go to liverpool anymore (and dont stay at liverpool anymore).
the thing with transfer fees is that often a player can retain the majority of that value if they are young enough. but wages are like sunk costs (you cant really get this back). This is why i believe levy and fsg were 'happy' to let their managers/management spend the bale/suarez money; particularly on young-ish players a la lamela/chiriches/chaldi or markovic/sakho/moreno etc. i doubt levy wouldve allowed us to go for just ozil and alexis instead and put them on 140k each. taking risks like that can lead to a leeds utd situation.
anyway rodgers should know all of this, which is why his comments are either delusional, or outright classless when he tried to put pressure on us by creating unrealistic ambitions.
Gilzeantoscore
Justin Edinburgh
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
Real problems for Liverpool and Rodgers in the transfer market now, if he stays. Caused in part by Rodgers never figuring out over 3 seasons what kind of system and formation he wants to play.
Do they need a 3rd centre back alongside Skrtel and Sakho? No actually, Can could be the right man. But in a back 4 he's probably not the answer, perhaps Skrtel and Sakho are good enough. But they definitely need a solid right back, but perhaps rather they need a proper wing back for a back 3 formation to function well. Moreno looks good going forward, but is he solid enough for a back 4? Perhaps a solid left back, but what then if they go 3 at the back and Moreno is out? No real cover?
And so on and so on... They essentially have no idea what roles they need filling and even where on the pitch some of their successful players will be playing next year. Never mind not knowing which club Sterling will be playing for.
I rate Rodgers, but he's gotten himself into a real mess here by looking to be the tactical genius changing it up every other month I think. They could have finished 6th playing a much more set system and formation like he did at Swansea and had much more of an idea what they need for the summer. I think this has been part of the problems in the transfer market they've had before too.
Do they need a 3rd centre back alongside Skrtel and Sakho? No actually, Can could be the right man. But in a back 4 he's probably not the answer, perhaps Skrtel and Sakho are good enough. But they definitely need a solid right back, but perhaps rather they need a proper wing back for a back 3 formation to function well. Moreno looks good going forward, but is he solid enough for a back 4? Perhaps a solid left back, but what then if they go 3 at the back and Moreno is out? No real cover?
And so on and so on... They essentially have no idea what roles they need filling and even where on the pitch some of their successful players will be playing next year. Never mind not knowing which club Sterling will be playing for.
I rate Rodgers, but he's gotten himself into a real mess here by looking to be the tactical genius changing it up every other month I think. They could have finished 6th playing a much more set system and formation like he did at Swansea and had much more of an idea what they need for the summer. I think this has been part of the problems in the transfer market they've had before too.
2nd try .. the table below shows the disconnect between Pool's version of reality and what is actually happening to them in the real world.
With effectively double the spend over the period of time, here's the result
And if needed .. the quote from RAWK "It's just dawned on me that we've finished below Spurs. They are bloody mediocre and we've somehow finished below them. Quite embarrassing"
What's quite embarrassing is the mongrel doesn't realize they have finished below us 5 out of last 6 seasons ..
With effectively double the spend over the period of time, here's the result
And if needed .. the quote from RAWK "It's just dawned on me that we've finished below Spurs. They are bloody mediocre and we've somehow finished below them. Quite embarrassing"
What's quite embarrassing is the mongrel doesn't realize they have finished below us 5 out of last 6 seasons ..
Last edited: