Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
1 league title in 8 seasons and a couple of diddy cups, spent £605million on players.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 69
|
By:
1 European Cup aswell. He got Liverpool to punch above their weight. They shouldnt be competing with the likes of Man City,Man Utd, Chelsea, and even Newcastle now.
|
|
By:
Can't compete with teams buying 15-18 players.
Klopp has done the job, but how can they stay ahead of man city long term? Same as Arsenal and just about anybody else these days, win an odd title, qualify champs league and you are performing. Pep... Hold my beer |
|
By:
England not Europe. You can't spend 60 million on a goalkeeper, 70 million on a centre back, 70 million on a striker plus a few 40 mil midfielders like Jota and Diaz and 40 mil for Konate and say they shouldn't be competing, seems to me Klopp's playing style has burnt them out, couple with the promotion on youngsters not quite good enough, Carvalho and Jones look like mid table players, Harvey Elliot however looks good enough to make the grade.
|
|
By:
Mes out fishing again.
|
|
By:
Very much they are burnt out, or close to it.
If they ain't in contention why get up every week in league?... Its gone, more or less. Big effort in cups, try to get in contention in league again next season. Oh, and World Cup is coming up, don't want to be injured for that either. Thing is, of course, if they don't pick up soon, they'll be at max effort simply to make top 4. Its a big loss to these teams if they miss that. |
|
By:
in a word, no.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
(amusing to see an Arsenal fan of all people avoiding net spend and going with the gross figure btw)
|
|
By:
Klopps diddy double was when he was goin for the quad, to beat fergies perfect tweble back in '99
Now it's all very much mid-table mediocrity that will always rattle in a kopite 'ead. (just ask porkypine) Klopp should just keep on comparing all the brave docs n nurses whom refused the Jab as drunken drivers |
|
By:
net spend is political speak, you can't spend hundreds of millions on players, moving on dead wood, and say 'we can't compete Guv'. There was Coutinho, one player, went for 150 mil, Liverpool bought 4 players with it, Robertson, Salah, Van Dijk and Ox.
Klopp's left a big mark on the club, but in terms of raw success, 1 title and 2 cups in 8 years in England has been underwhelming, City bought Grealish for 100 mil, but he's largely been inconsequential. Foden much more important and he's homegrown. I would think that if Fergie had of been in charge the last 8 years he'd have won quite a bit more silverware. |
|
By:
Aah, it's a trolling expedition. Feel a bit daft now. Over and out.
|
|
By:
Not counting Champions League performanc as if it is a footnote invalidates this thread (if there was anything genuine about it to begin with).
Were Real Madrid disappointing in the 2010s because they only won 2 titles? They won 4 CLs and they wouldn't have wanted to swap that around. In any case Klopp won his 1 title against probably the most dominant team in English league history. And took it to the last day twice. Also, you judge the success of a manager not just on what he won or competed for, but against what he was expected to win or compete for. I recall on here, summer 2015, arguing with Liverpool fans who were saying that if Brendan Rodgers consistently finished 5th, with the occasional 4th, he should continue indefinitely, as that was the ceiling of Liverpool's potential, given the clubs who had more money. |
|
By:
which part of England do people not understand, not Europe, England. Klopp has not flopped at Liverpool, but in England 1 meaningful trophy in 8 years doesn't seem good enough, they've proven they can indeed compete with City with precious title races given the huge expenditure on players, Pep loses a lot of battles against Klopp but more often than not, wins the war.
|
|
By:
No idea why you're singling & digging out Klopp.
Liverpool have done well keeping so close when Citeh are effectively state owned. |
|
By:
his constant whinging and excuse making has started to grate, nothing against the club. Pep is just a chequebook manager, Klopp less so, but he's managing a club knowing full well what the competition is all about, then starts to complain about them when he starts to fall away, poor form.
|
|
By:
Bug English clubs are judged on what they do in the premier league and the CL, not just one or the other.
But even just taking the league only, how has Klopp been a flop? Which clubs have done better than Liverpool? City have 4 titles. Liverpool have 1 with 2 other title challenges that went to the wire. Chelsea have 1 title, in 2017, and have not been a factor since. No challenge at all from United or Arsenal. |
|
By:
Exactly tobe.
Mes can only be fishing. Concedes that "Pep is just a chequebook" manager but expects Klopp to compete (why just him btw?). Does Mes think that that every other manager in the EPL didn't rate Haaland or was it the £500k per offered by the oil state why he ended up at Citeh? |
|
By:
*per week
|
|
By:
And we lost one title with 97 points, which was painful. And klopp has a won a few things that wenger can only dream about.
|
|
By:
Liverpool under Klopp have more than enough money to compete. They made over £100m from last year's CL alone and not the first time he's got them to a final. Spending is not a guarantee of success. The likes of Klopp and Pep are. Newc don't have that and are still miles away from those two. City didn't before Pep and may not after he's gone. Pool should do everything to hold onto Klopp. He's worth about £200m a year to them.
|
|
By:
He's tactically not great, but he did win a European Cup and he transformed an average team into World Champions.
I don't even think it's about players not "being up for it", they just aren't as good as people think they are VVD for e.g. being touted as the world's greatest ever defender, one knee injury and he's a different player Trent "the best right back of all time" cannot defend, and it's questionable even how good he is at passing etc. they're still having to play Milner, he wouldn't get in a lot of PL teams. The kids I agree, Jones, Elliott, Carvalho, all look good in isolation, one at a time, but 3 of them on the pitch at the same time is overkill. Carvalho and Elliott I see as forwards playing in midfield Really the main issue is the midfield. Henderson's legs went a couple of seasons ago. The team seems tired, fatigued, bored, Salah is on the decline, the new forwards look ok. Nunez is a handful Diaz I think is too selfish, he does have quality, but he'll never be on the same level as Sadio Mane in terms of goalscoring. we're basically seeing a decline in every area. Even Robertson doesn't look as good now. Alisson is the only one maintaining his level. That said, the money that City have, cannot be competed with. The Premier League should introduce a salary or transfer cap to try and preserve the competitivity of the Premier League, however they won't do this. |
|
By:
They made over £100m from last year's CL alone
Maybe, but doesn't mean they get it to spend on players. FSG don't do that. |
|
By:
Yes, Liverpool might've made £100m but that was due to success on the pitch.
Citeh are state owned; their business model isn't reliant on continued success on the pitch. Of course "spending is not a guarantee of success" but it certainly is the major factor in winning. Why do you think Haaland ended up at Citeh rather than Liverpool? Do you think Liverpool offered to pay him more than £500k a week & he opted for Citeh instead? As for Newc, give them time. Took Citeh 4 years to win the EPL after being nationalised. |
|
By:
Klopp has been a huge asset to the Prem, his style of play, the only team to challenge City, without him the image would have been Pep coming over here and pissing over the league when in reality all the trophies he's won are perched up on top of a mountain of oil money. The point being this, Klopp has proven given what he has spent, 605 mil, is that he can assemble a team that could compete year in and out, but has 1 league title from 8 to show for it, City kept edging them. Therefore you can only reflect that his time in England in terms of trophies is poor and underwhelming, even the two cup wins were draws, only won on pens. If you want to talk about Europe then yes, the 2019 win was a great win as they came through a difficult group, they beat Munich away in the knockouts, thrashed Barca 4-0, thrashed Porto and were even the better team in 0-3 away loss strangely enough, the final was a given however.
He's won as many league titles as Ranieri and only 1 more than Hasenhuttl. |
|
By:
Stop fishing mes ffs.
Why you singling out Klopp? How many EPLs have Arsenal, ManU & Spurs won having spent similar amounts to Liverpool? |
|
By:
In the Pep/Citeh era obviously.
|
|
By:
.
https://www.footballtransfers.com/en/transfer-news/uk-premier-league/2022/02/manchester-united-news-man-utds-10-year-net-transfer-spend-tops-1bn |
|
By:
I don't think Liverpool were interested in Haaland and vice versa. Haaland is on a reported 800k+ a week if you include bonuses, partly because of the low release clause in his Dortmund contract (Nunez cost the same). Just because they can't compete with City financially doesn't mean they can't compete on the pitch, they have done that for the last few years.
I wouldn't say money is the biggest factor in the Pep/Klopp era, the manager is. Nobody else can compete with those two. And Klopp was able to compete with Pep on a net spend of something like £20m a year average by the time he won the league. United are the biggest spenders of the lot and haven't won the league in a decade. |
|
By:
Hence why mes was talking bollocks.
Couldn't understand why the finger was pointed just at Klopp when he has been the best of the also-rans. Like slagging off anyone who came 2nd to Usain Bolt. |
|
By:
Haaland is on a reported 800k+ a week
Might explain why LFC weren't interested don't you think? They don't have the oil & gas money of state behind them. |
|
By:
ffs United have had manager after manager after manager, each one wearing the clothes of the previous one, no stability, no time to mould the club into their own shape, Arsenal moved onto Emery then Arteta, the time and the money factor doesn't compare to Klopp's who's been afforded time and money, he can be compared directly to Pep, similar amounts of time charge, huge sums of money spent, 1 title in 8 years is a poor return, they should have won more, they already proved they could compete on the pitch for the last few years, but as said before, Pep kept edging him whilst picking up a bucket load of cups. Klopp fanboys need to reign it in.
|
|
By:
So in short, an Arteta is great thread ffs
|
|
By:
1 title in 8 years is a poor return, they should have won more,
Why should they? |
|
By:
I didn't make the point that Liverpool can compete with City in the transfer market, so I don't know why you keep harping on about Haaland not going to Liverpool.
I said they can compete with City which they clearly have done on the pitch for years. Liverpool can't afford and wouldn't pay those wages even if they could. But I'd say Haaland living in Manchester as a young kid while his influential father played for City might have had something to do with it too. City also offloaded the wages of Sterling, Zinch, Jesus, Fernandinho and Torres in Jan, so it's not as if they are bankrolling the wages from the owners. That's prob upwards of 600k a week they offloaded to make way for Haaland's wages. Liverpool elected to keep Salah and bump up his wages instead. They were never going to do that and sign Haaland. The real fee for Haaland is prob about €150m but with a €60m reported release clause you just pay him the extra €90m in wages over 5 years, that why the wages are so high and that's why Raiola negotiated those clauses. He did the same when he moved from Molde to Salzburg and apparently why United lost interest when he moved to Dortmund. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
lurka,
& as I've asked, why are you & mes singling out Klopp? Klopp has given Citeh a greater challenge than any of the other so-called big clubs. Have a look at what I posted at 3:21. |
|
By:
So basically, although Citeh are a state owned club who can afford to pay well over the odds in transfer fees & wages to secure the best players, other teams without such resources, especially Klopp & LFC, should be ashamed for allowing them to monopolize domestic football?
|
|
By:
Nobody said it was his fault they changed manager, you're not following.
The point is that because United have so many different managers and none them given as long as Klopp to build their own squad, you cannot then compare expenditure and success with Liverpool. The only two clubs you can do it with, is City and Liverpool, both manager have completely their own squads, been at their respective clubs for 7/8 years and spent hundreds of millions, that's the fair comparison. Comparing them to United where each manager has had to keep working with the previous managers' players, is a false comparison. |
|
By:
Finally mes you have answered your own question. Klopp is still there while other clubs managers have come and gone. So the answer is YES. End of thread.
|