Liverpool Thread - 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
flb said:
Liverpool haven't vacuumed many Pl titles for 30 plus years mate despite spending shit loads on the likes of Andy Carrol, and they're quite used to not finishing in the top four as their PL history shows.
Click to expand...
I do know that; it’s the whole point of my post.
 
aminegriffy1 said:
Liverpool is one of the biggest clubs in the world. Top 4 should be minimum, I don't want to go back to the days of winning the top 4 trophy and watching our best player leave to better clubs for trophies.
Click to expand...
The size of a club doesn’t make any difference to anything, it doesn’t even mean anything. There’s no such thing as the word ‘should’ in English football either.

Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland, Leeds and City have all had years in the third tier… I wouldn’t even call those dark days because there are hardcore fans of clubs divisions below that who turn up week-in-week-out who would dream of their club getting up to that division. Whether the expectations of Weds Sund Leeds and City fans are way beyond the fans of clubs who could only dream of being in the third tier are neither here nor there.

League 1 Sheffield Wednesday are traditionally a bigger club than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton who are in the top half of the Premier League. But if they have any fans saying ‘Wednesday should be up where those clubs are, we’re a bigger club than all of them’, they’d be wrong. All clubs are where they deserve to be and are there for a reason (how they’re run; on or off the pitch or both).

Liverpool are currently 8th. Liverpool’s average finishing position in the all-time English league system is 8.1. You said Top 4 should be a minimum, but even in the Premier League era Liverpool’s average finishing position is 4.33.

Liverpool spent eight seasons in the Second Division not all that long before they won four European Cups in eight seasons. Which eight seasons are most representative of Liverpool? I’d argue neither, they were just two sets of eight seasons of Liverpool at their extremes and the reality is neither of them are truly what Liverpool are. The realities are more likely to be the averages, for all clubs.

It’s the average 8.1 finishing position that is what Liverpool are more than they are the team that spent eight seasons in a row in the Second Division or that won four European Cups in eight seasons.

In Liverpool’s 130 years, they’ve had 40 years where they’ve won at least one trophy but 90 years where they’ve won nothing. So it’s far more likely and more common that, even one of the most decorated clubs in England wins absolutely nothing and finishes 8th than it is they win something or even finish in the Top 4.

What gets on everyone’s nerves about Liverpool fans is this ‘should’ mentality. ‘Liverpool “should” be challenging because they’re a big club’… it means nothing.

Shoulda woulda coulda and a lorra lorra laughs. English football is competitive, no team has really won that many league titles, 19 and 20 are very low numbers for a top league’s most league title winners (English football has had 96 years where neither Liverpool or United has won the league, that dwarves even Liverpool and United’s league titles combined), no team’s average finishing position is higher than that 8.1 of Liverpool’s, and that’s all because in English football there’s no such thing as ‘should’.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
flb said:
Liverpool haven't vacuumed many Pl titles for 30 plus years mate despite spending shit loads on the likes of Andy Carrol, and they're quite used to not finishing in the top four as their PL history shows.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't that be £35 Million Andy Carrol, same as it is when the media report on our signings?

THIRTY-FIVE MILLION QUID in 2011!!!

And we're the ones ruining football...
 
Psychedelic Casual said:
The size of a club doesn’t make any difference to anything, it doesn’t even mean anything. There’s no such thing as the word ‘should’ in football either.

Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland, Leeds and City have all had years in the third tier… I wouldn’t even call those dark days because there are hardcore fans of clubs divisions below that who turn up week-in-week-out who would dream of their club getting up to that division. Whether the expectations of Weds Sund Leeds and City fans are way beyond the fans of clubs who could only dream of being in the third tier are neither here nor there.

League 1 Sheffield Wednesday are traditionally a bigger club than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton who are in the top half of the Premier League. But if they have any fans saying ‘Wednesday should be up where those clubs are, we’re a bigger club than all of them’, they’d be wrong. All clubs are where they deserve to be and are there for a reason (how they’re run; on or off the pitch or both).

Liverpool are currently 8th. Liverpool’s average finishing position in the all-time English league system is 8.1. You said Top 4 should be a minimum, but even in the Premier League era Liverpool’s average finishing position is 4.33.

Liverpool spent eight years in the Second Division not all that long before they won four European Cups in eight years. Which eight years are most representative of Liverpool? I’d argue neither, they were just two sets of eight years of Liverpool at their extremes and the reality is neither of them are truly what Liverpool are. The realities are more likely to be the averages, for all clubs.

It’s the average 8.1 finishing position that is what Liverpool are more than they are the team that spent eight years in a row in the Second Division or that won four European Cups in eight years.

In Liverpool’s 130 years, they’ve had 40 years where they’ve won at least one trophy but 90 years where they’ve won nothing. So it’s far more likely and more common that even one of the most decorated clubs in England is a team that wins absolutely nothing and finishes 8th than it is they win something or even finish in the Top 4.

What gets on everyone’s nerves about Liverpool fans is this ‘should’ mentality. ‘Liverpool “should” be challenging because they’re a big club’… it means nothing.

Shoulda woulda coulda and a lorra lorra laughs. English football is competitive, no team has really won that many league titles, 19 and 20 are very low numbers for a top league’s most league title winners (English football has had 96 years where neither Liverpool or United has won the league, that dwarves even Liverpool and United’s league titles combined), no team’s average finishing position is higher than that 8.1 of Liverpool’s, and that’s all because in English football there’s no such thing as ‘should’.
Click to expand...
Outstanding post
 
Maly said:
Outstanding post
Click to expand...
This post just isn't fair. You have resorted to using facts to support your argument.
Psychedelic Casual said:
The size of a club doesn’t make any difference to anything, it doesn’t even mean anything. There’s no such thing as the word ‘should’ in English football either.

Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland, Leeds and City have all had years in the third tier… I wouldn’t even call those dark days because there are hardcore fans of clubs divisions below that who turn up week-in-week-out who would dream of their club getting up to that division. Whether the expectations of Weds Sund Leeds and City fans are way beyond the fans of clubs who could only dream of being in the third tier are neither here nor there.

League 1 Sheffield Wednesday are traditionally a bigger club than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton who are in the top half of the Premier League. But if they have any fans saying ‘Wednesday should be up where those clubs are, we’re a bigger club than all of them’, they’d be wrong. All clubs are where they deserve to be and are there for a reason (how they’re run; on or off the pitch or both).

Liverpool are currently 8th. Liverpool’s average finishing position in the all-time English league system is 8.1. You said Top 4 should be a minimum, but even in the Premier League era Liverpool’s average finishing position is 4.33.

Liverpool spent eight seasons in the Second Division not all that long before they won four European Cups in eight seasons. Which eight seasons are most representative of Liverpool? I’d argue neither, they were just two sets of eight seasons of Liverpool at their extremes and the reality is neither of them are truly what Liverpool are. The realities are more likely to be the averages, for all clubs.

It’s the average 8.1 finishing position that is what Liverpool are more than they are the team that spent eight seasons in a row in the Second Division or that won four European Cups in eight seasons.

In Liverpool’s 130 years, they’ve had 40 years where they’ve won at least one trophy but 90 years where they’ve won nothing. So it’s far more likely and more common that, even one of the most decorated clubs in England, wins absolutely nothing and finishes 8th than it is they win something or even finish in the Top 4.

What gets on everyone’s nerves about Liverpool fans is this ‘should’ mentality. ‘Liverpool “should” be challenging because they’re a big club’… it means nothing.

Shoulda woulda coulda and a lorra lorra laughs. English football is competitive, no team has really won that many league titles, 19 and 20 are very low numbers for a top league’s most league title winners (English football has had 96 years where neither Liverpool or United has won the league, that dwarves even Liverpool and United’s league titles combined), no team’s average finishing position is higher than that 8.1 of Liverpool’s, and that’s all because in English football there’s no such thing as ‘should’.
Click to expand...
It's a bit unfair to be using facts to support your argument.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.