Liverpool Thread | 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gorton_Tubster said:
tbh I think liverpool are playing a dangerous game. They scrimped and saved during Klopp and now, really with an untested manager they are going all in. If it doesnt work I cant see their owners throwing that much money at the team again.

Sounds much like American owners who dont understand football.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting they shouldn't have spent money on their 2 positions od need and add one of the best young playmakers?

What would English owners who understand Football have done differently?
 
ninjamonkey said:
Annoyingly, Kerkez is a tremendous buy. I'd take him for £40m over Ait-Nouri for £31m every day of the week, has a much higher ceiling imo. Improves them a fair bit already and future proofs them. Disappointing to see.
Click to expand...
Different players. Ait Nouri is a far far better fit for us than Kerkez was ever going to be.
 
It's funny when you think about the alleged importance of this scouse inspired full back pairing business, and it's importance; City have won 6 out of the last 8 premier league titles WITHOUT a full back pairing.

Kerkez looked very ordinary against us at the Etihad towards the end of last season, in a game they needed to win.
 
Dax777 said:
Are you suggesting they shouldn't have spent money on their 2 positions od need and add one of the best young playmakers?

What would English owners who understand Football have done differently?
Click to expand...
No, I already said. He is an unproven manager, he won the league with the players Klopp bought. Sensible would have been to not spend (I dont know how many hundreds of millions they have spent this year) on a new manager. Smacks of what Chelsea do or United. American owned clubs. Should I mention Arsenal and their wild spending for no comeback?

And English...? What does that have to do with it? Not sure why you talked about American v English..... Our owners are Middle Eastern and have set the template for how to run a club for the long term gain and success. We had Pellers but bought for Pep. We have Pep now and I am sure we are planning for the next manager.

I just dont see that insight from American owned clubs. Maybe I mean Corporate backed football clubs rather than American.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
No, I already said. He is an unproven manager, he won the league with the players Klopp bought. Sensible would have been to not spend (I dont know how many hundreds of millions they have spent this year) on a new manager. Smacks of what Chelsea do or United. American owned clubs. Should I mention Arsenal and their wild spending for no comeback?

And English...? What does that have to do with it? Not sure why you talked about American v English..... Our owners are Middle Eastern and have set the template for how to run a club for the long term gain and success. We had Pellers but bought for Pep. We have Pep now and I am sure we are planning for the next manager.

I just dont see that insight from American owned clubs. Maybe I mean Corporate backed football clubs rather than American.
Click to expand...
Ok, let me rephrase, what would a Middle Eastern Owner have done differently. What would any knowledgeable owner anywhere have done differently?


Your claim is that the Manager is unproven. The dude just walked the league. Something his predecessor couldn't do for 4 years.

He came in and achieved the best results on his first attempt, bit you think its dumb the owners want to invest in him?

You think they didn't vet their Manager before picking him? And now that he has achieved the very thing they could have only hoped he will, you think this is when they should hold back spending?


Your arguments are sounding a little blue tinted
 
Dax777 said:
Ok, let me rephrase, what would a Middle Eastern Owner have done differently. What would any knowledgeable owner anywhere have done differently?


Your claim is that the Manager is unproven. The dude just walked the league. Something his predecessor couldn't do for 4 years.

He came in and achieved the best results on his first attempt, bit you think its dumb the owners want to invest in him?

You think they didn't vet their Manager before picking him? And now that he has achieved the very thing they could have only hoped he will, you think this is when they should hold back spending?


Your arguments are sounding a little blue tinted
Click to expand...
OK if you say so.
 
the blue panther said:
It's funny when you think about the alleged importance of this scouse inspired full back pairing business, and it's importance; City have won 6 out of the last 8 premier league titles WITHOUT a full back pairing.

Kerkez looked very ordinary against us at the Etihad towards the end of last season, in a game they needed to win.
Click to expand...
Judging a player based off one game, against one of the big boys away from home is a fun take. He had a solid season and looks a good player. I'm happy with our left back purchase though and look forward to seeing him play.

Full back pairings might not have been a big thing prior as full backs mostly defended. To be fair to them horrible bastards, they contributed an awful lot going forwards and will be why they stand out as a pair maybe over others. They were important to how they played, especially in the Henderson years where the midfield was plodders so they bypassed them a lot of the time.
 
thegoatsthegoat said:
Judging a player based off one game, against one of the big boys away from home is a fun take. He had a solid season and looks a good player. I'm happy with our left back purchase though and look forward to seeing him play.

Full back pairings might not have been a big thing prior as full backs mostly defended. To be fair to them horrible bastards, they contributed an awful lot going forwards and will be why they stand out as a pair maybe over others. They were important to how they played, especially in the Henderson years where the midfield was plodders so they bypassed them a lot of the time.
Click to expand...
I get that they had two fantastic attacking full backs, but it's still a bit weird to call them a partnership. Partnership suggests that they worked together a lot. How often do you reckon one passed to the other? How often did one cover another? I'd guess the answer is close to never.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
I get that they had two fantastic attacking full backs, but it's still a bit weird to call them a partnership. Partnership suggests that they worked together a lot. How often do you reckon one passed to the other? How often did one cover another? I'd guess the answer is close to never.
Click to expand...
Not a partnership as a link up obviously but they were the dangers from both sides, even from set pieces. It doesn't offend me as much as others that they have been called a pairing. Far more bias and bollocks spoke about that club than getting hung up on their full back coverage.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
tbh I think liverpool are playing a dangerous game. They scrimped and saved during Klopp and now, really with an untested manager they are going all in. If it doesnt work I cant see their owners throwing that much money at the team again.

Sounds much like American owners who dont understand football.
Click to expand...

Did you drink the Kool Aid? ;)

They spent tons of money during Klopp's reign, and their wage bill was above ours at times.

Financially there was very little difference between Klopp and Pep's spending. Klopp inherited a younger squad, so sold players early on (and obviously got very, very lucky with one transfer), and won his early net spend cups. Pep, on the other hand, inherited an ageing squad, so didn't make money on sales, but made money by replacing aging high wage players, with a smaller squad of younger players on lower wages.

Once that was out of the way, they both had similar spends on wages and transfers.
 
bluenova said:
Did you drink the Kool Aid? ;)

They spent tons of money during Klopp's reign, and their wage bill was above ours at times.

Financially there was very little difference between Klopp and Pep's spending. Klopp inherited a younger squad, so sold players early on (and obviously got very, very lucky with one transfer), and won his early net spend cups. Pep, on the other hand, inherited an ageing squad, so didn't make money on sales, but made money by replacing aging high wage players, with a smaller squad of younger players on lower wages.

Once that was out of the way, they both had similar spends on wages and transfers.
Click to expand...
Maybe it was from listening to liverpool fans always complain about how fsg didnt give klopp money to spend. They always moan though I suppose.
 
They've bought well and slot certainly deserves the backing after last season. They are just such insufferable cunts though that desperately need Wirtz et al crowned next season's champions by the media before a ball has been kicked. Just as they are desperate for their team last season to be acknowledged as the best team ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top