Liverpool thread 2017/18

[squirtyflower]

Ah, so Liverpool were established entitled to spend money... I see.

We always come down to the same thing, the established (read establishment) clubs can do as they please

 

[Neville Kneville]

Yeah, that record was broken in 1977 using record money gained from Hamburg and well after titles and European trophies had been won. I wonder why Everton didnt do the same, seen as Littlewoods were far more involved with them. To compare the investment to Abramovich and others is out of all proportion.

You had money & a good manager. We sometimes had money & not very good managers (like Utd now).

But Liverpool were fortunate enough to have the etability of the pools people behind them, wheras we had a 2nd hand tv salesman & then were very fortunate (& the word is 'FORTUNATE') to be a top, successful club, at the moment the Sky money & the Champions League money came piling in.

A handful of clubs were in position to grab that cash & create a gap between them & the rest, which is still there for the most part. City & Chelsea have bridged it due to outside investment.

If Liverpool were in the same position in the 90s, as they were when Shankley first took over, they would now be Birmingham or West Brom, having been nowhere near the Champions Lg.

 

[mad4city]

We always come down to the same thing, the established (read establishment) clubs can do as they please

It's as regular as clockwork, isn't it?
The sense of entitlement is breathtaking.

 

[squirtyflower]

It's as regular as clockwork, isn't it?
The sense of entitlement is breathtaking.

It’s the lack of self awareness, which then comes over as entitlement or even superiority.

 

[kemlyn17]

Since I hav been on bluemoon, I hav never mentioned money. I hav always stuck to non controversial stuff and left a lot of the bile alone. Bit like if I was in the home end of an away ground. If you are a guest, you take whats what. Lack of Self awareness and entitlement is what you want.

 

[mad4city]

Since I hav been on bluemoon, I hav never mentioned money. I hav always stuck to non controversial stuff and left a lot of the bile alone. Bit like if I was in the home end of an away ground. If you are a guest, you take whats what. Lack of Self awareness and entitlement is what you want.

Lookit, by and large, you seem a decent enough lad. I'm sorry if some of the language I used was out of order (actually, not if, it was - sorry, again) but it's nonsense to suggest that the timing of the Littlewood's original investment and final withdrawal chiming perfectly with Liverpool's rise and eventual demise is coincidental.
If Shankly could freely admit it how much of a game-changer the Littlewood's money was, I don't know why Liverpool fans - all of whom seem to strike their breast in reverie at the mere mention of his name - can't take his word for it.
There's a reason why, for instance, Ian Rush turned down City (who, if you're not old enough to remember, in the grand scheme of things, would have been placed say, where Spurs are today - but having had success at home and abroad too, in recent memory at that time) and went to Liverpool. He may well have had his bedroom papered in posters of Anfield greats, as the story goes now but, at the time, nobody had any compulsions about admitting that City couldn't live with the money Liverpool were offering for a player from the lower divisions. (Not one if Swales better decisions admittedly - and please don't ask whom he did spunk money on. It's quite painful).
Similarly, Paul Lake was being strongly linked with a £1m move (huge money for a kid, at that time) to Anfield before his injury. A year later, whilst he hadn't even kicked a ball, Liverpool were reportedly offering double that. I know 2m sounds like chicken feed today but, believe me, very few clubs were in a position to resist that kind of money, back then. So, please don't tell me what I lived through and saw with my own eyes. Liverpool were a huge financial force throughout their successful reign. Ironically, their own greed in setting up the Big 5 Deal with ITV allowed other clubs (albeit only the other four of the five who shared half of all TV revenue between them) compete with them - then Sky came in, needed a Man Utd winning team to ensure reward on Murdoch's investment - and Liverpool have never been quite the same force since.
Now, City (and Chelsea) are rolling in it and Liverpool, despite playing at their best level in a long time probably (!) won't be able to sustain a challenge because there'll have to be more mega-sales out of the club to keep up and nobody is lucky in the development of players and dabbling in the bargain bin of the transfer market all the time (ask Southampton).

 

[kemlyn17]

I am old enough to remember, but the things I remember are on the pitch. City for example, is Buchan on Bell, Tuert, Corrigan being hit by a bottle from the Kop, Paul Power at Villa Park, Kinkladze slaloming goals, Dickov, Ageueroooo. Everyone knew Peter Swales, Ken Bates and the high profile owners, but now we know more about owners than players half the time!!! Liverpool failed to capitalise on our success when Sky came in. Whilst United embraced the commercial and corporate, we didnt even extend the ground for 25 years and even now FSG are not keeping up.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

Its not a secret that Eric Sawyer was brought in to help with transfers and Yeats and St John came in after he was appointed to the board. But that isnt the point I made. The myth is that Liverpool were outspending everyone else and that isnt true. Whilst we were paying less than 40,000 for St John, United were paying over 100,000 for Law.

£40000 for St John was the third highest fee paid for anyone in Europe that Summer and you were in the Second Division

It’s like Leeds spending £100m on someone this Summer

 

[Vienna_70]

Yeah, that record was broken in 1977 using record money gained from Hamburg and well after titles and European trophies had been won. I wonder why Everton didnt do the same, seen as Littlewoods were far more involved with them. To compare the investment to Abramovich and others is out of all proportion.

I don’t think it is at all.

Dalglish might have been bought with the proceeds of KK's sale to Hamburg, but that doesn’t explain where the money to buy Peter Thompson, Emlyn, Tony Hateley, Alun Evans, John Toshack, Ray Kennedy, David Johnson, Craig Johnston, Peter Beardsley, and Ian Rush back from Juventus, plus numerous others, including Graeme Souness, who weren’t club record fees, but still cost a substantial sum to bring to Klanfield, came from.

 

[VOOMER]

£40000 for St John was the third highest fee paid for anyone in Europe that Summer and you were in the Second Division

It’s like Leeds spending £100m on someone this Summer

And paying a british record for a defender Ron Yates also while in the second division. The hypocrisy is laughable.