Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 69 comments are related to the topic:
Has Klopp flopped in England
Has Klopp flopped in England
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 69
|
By:
Or NO rather looking at the original question.
  |
|
By:
Liverpool could not defend for toffee pre Klopp or they would have won the title in 2013/14 season under Brendan Rodgers.
Mignolet, Lovren and other low grade defenders and keepers in squad would too often implode and result in the loss of points against lesser opposition, the teams City would nearly always brush aside. Liverpool even with arguably the best player in the league at the time in Suarez were still thwarted by their shortcomings in defence. So Klopp came in and the issue with a bit of patience was sorted with VVD and Alisson.Robertson was picked up for peanuts and TAA obviously came through the ranks. All of a sudden the defence was transformed. In TAA's case his main attribute was the transition from defence to attack which was potent in a high pressing high energy brand of football Klopp installed. Salah 36.9 mill which was a club record transfer lol that tells you the vast chasm that has developed between Liverpool, City,Chlesea,Utd. Mane 34 mill from southampton at the time in 2016 relative peanuts compared to other clubs. Diaz 37 mill up to 45 mill add ons more recently and of course the big one Nunez 64mill with around 21 potentially in add ons are these in the context of pretty low spends over last few seasons really meaning Liverpool should be winning titles regularly?? The FACTS of spends and net spends over the past 5 seasons 2018/19 to 2022/23 inclusive... 1. Manchester United Spent: £701.39m Received: £156.09m Net spend: £545.3m 2. Arsenal Spent: £563.77m Received: £123.39m Net spend: £440.38m 3. Chelsea Spent: £808.19m Received: £425.17m Net spend: £383.02m 4. West Ham Spent: £478.71m Received: £123.02m Net spend: £355.69m 5. Tottenham Hotspur Spent: £472.32m Received: £140.87m Net spend: £331.45m 6. Newcastle United Spent: £394.34m Received: £78.27m Net spend: £316.07m 7. Aston Villa Spent: £431.79m Received: £171.83m Net spend: £259.97m 8. Wolves Spent: £442.31m Received: £193.95m Net spend: £248.36m 9. Liverpool Spent: £408.56m Received: £191.94m Net spend: £216.61m 10. Manchester City Spent: £616.96m Received: £413.06m Net spend: £203.9m I suppose the OP is going to tell me that despite City spending over 200 mill more on players in last 5 seasons it's a slightly better net spend which makes them a more efficient club let alone most of the other clubs in that list that have spent more total and net expenditure. Klopps missed out on 2 titles by 1 point getting 90+ pts in the process which would always previously win the competition pre Man City/PEP.He's got to 3 champs league finals the first before the defence was sorted then the win and a disappointing final last season which should have been winnable. I think all in all this is a pretty ludicrous thread on any real logic. If I were the OP I'd just enjoy the season with his team after their spending spree in recent times, Perhaps Aresenal need to be winning titles and champs leagues on those figs with the OP's logic. |
|
By:
Net spend is fine, but then you need to add in wages.
And agents fees.. |
|
By:
I think mes has garnered a decent haul tbf.
Klopp is a failure cos he's stayed in his job 7 years & although he's brought relative success to LFC, he hasn't been more successful than state owned Man City. City were an average/mediocre outfit until 2008. Now they dominate English football. What do you think changed mes? |
|
By:
I put forward the simple notion up for debate that Klopp may not have been as successful in England as people make out after winning 1 solitary league title in 8 years after spending 605 million on players (incl add ons etc) and people come back at waving a bit of paper with Net spend on it and selective 5 year timeframes
I'd rather Liverpool win the league than City, Chelsea, spuds and United, nothing personal people. Klopp's brand of football has been an asset to the league, but I remember one German journalist saying when he took over when asked the question about how Klopp is perceived in the country, that he was seen as a 'less intelligent version of Mourinho' (Jose had peak credibility back then), and when you look at lack of plan B's, you do wonder, he's now started to change formation and dropped TAA to steady the ship, which takes out a huge attacking threat, he'd be better off just deploying Trent as a winger as the legs in midfield that used to fill in for him are getting older and more injury prone. Van Dijk hit a worldy of a pass cross pitch in the City game, but his movement doesn't look the same as it did still. Kind Regards. |
|
By:
It's hardly selective timeframes but what matters is usually the most recent rather than the past the last 5 years spending in football is a lot more relevant thatn 10 years ago.
What do you think the figs show going back 10 years that liverpool total or net spends are bigger than city,chelsea or utd ROFL. One fo the worst arguments and illogical arguments for a thread on here for sometime which takes some doing |
|
By:
the legs in midfield that used to fill in for him are getting older and more injury prone.
I think the above from your post is spot on though added to mane's missing pressing energy. |
|
By:
There is NO argument logically about the money side of things MES , Liverpool have punched above in that regard in challenging City.
You can have your own opinion about JK tactically that's fine but I can't have on any level the finances argument. |
|
By:
Fair play to mes, he's bagged a decent haul.
|
|
By:
lewague title, European cup, fa cup, league cup and you say he is a failure
His net spending and wage budget well below the likes of City, Chelsea and Man Utd. |
|
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,
cart before horse logic here. United have had manager after manager because none of them did a good enough job. Klopp is there after 7 years because he has done a brilliant job. Unless you think that if Van Gaal was still there he would have won a couple of titles by now. |
|
By:
Klopp/Pool's recruitment has been generally excellent but they have made a big mistake in not reinforcing the midfield since Wijnaldum left. They have an elite pairing in Fabinho and Thiago and are a different team with those two in there. But they are injury prone (Thiago especially who only plays about 1 in 2 league games). The cover in midfield is nowhere near the same level. They have spent big on defence and attack in that period but the midfield has been somewhat neglected.
|
|
By:
It is all about money and what we see from Liverpool now is a perfect example, Klopp built a great side and was successful but the money spent on players was always funded by selling first.
Liverpool can't throw 80 millions around here and there to stock up the team again as nation state and United can, they have to be far more selective and gradual and they can't sell all their best players as it's just a case of 1 step forward and 2 back as the Mane sale has shown. Consequently it means that the side that was so successful is having to be rinsed way past its sell by date. A poorer manager could succeed if money is no barrier but not at Liverpool, Klopp is a great manager who has worked wonders competing with the other big clubs who have a bottomless pit of funds but it is impossible for him to mimic something like fergie did in creating numerous teams without inhibiting success because they can't afford to create the depth needed and can't afford to spend big money without selling top players to create the finance. Coutinho was one shining jewel in an otherwise largely unsuccessful team so by selling him their was a big upside unlike mow. Klopp could very well create another great side but with less money there will likely have to be a fallow period as it is built. |
|
By:
just in terms of the players Klopp inherited - this was his first starting eleven
Simon Mignolet, Alberto Moreno, Martin Skrtel, Mamadou Sakho, Nathaniel Clyne, Adam Lallana, Lucas Leiva, Emre Can, Philippe Coutinho, James Milner and Divock Origi. Pep inherited Aguero, David Silva, Kevin De Bruyne, Ferndhino so we can all agree that Klopp had the biggest rebuilding job with less resources to do it Man Utd's net spend is jaw dropping but I suppose the owners have always backed the managers in the transfer market |
|
By:
This fred needs to be binned & forgotten along with mes's Haaland EPL top scorer fred.
|
|
By:
One of the few discussion threads on the forum.
Whatever the intent of the op, there's been some decent contributions. Cheers. |
|
By:
United have had manager after manager because none of them did a good enough job. Klopp is there after 7 years because he has done a brilliant job.
None of them were afforded the time two do a good job like Klopp was, that's the point, Klopp finished, 8th, 4th and 4th in his first 3 seasons. All those United managers never had the 3 years to get all the players they wanted in, and all the players they wanted out, is Ole's case, he was doing fairly well until he had Ronaldo foisted upon him, even had a great record against Pep compared to most, fist sign of a blip and he was out the door. Every club in Europe would have sacked Arteta last season, now Arsenal are reaping the rewards for 'trusting the process'. All United to do is hit panic stations at first sign of trouble because they're worried about their share price. |
|
By:
there's been some decent contributions.
Unlike that from the Arse team tonight... |
|
By:
OP must be desperately bored to persist with this obvious wind-up...either that or clueless
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
1-2 at home to Leeds. A new low.
|
|
By:
I put it to you, that a man who's spent 8 years in England, spent hundreds of millions of pounds on players, has won 1 single league title, is a flop, and you ask ME if I'M on the wind up
are you all smoking crack?it's time people came to the realisation that Klopp's high octane football simply burns his players out, Pep's tippy tappy football is more productive in the long run, and I say that as someone who can't bare his style of football, but it's worked better. Klopp's won many battles against Pep but Pep often wins the war as born out in the number of league titles won. As said before, this is just an observation and nothing against the club, I'd rather see Liverpool win the league than Man United, Chelsea, City, Tottenham, but it's looking like they will struggle to finish top 6 at the moment nevermind top 4. Why is Jurgen beyond reproach exactly - and especially odd coming from fans of other clubs on here leaping to his defence. Kind Regards. |
|
By:
to be fair they did create lots of chances and didnt put them away. Mane a huge loss to the team. but yes you make fair points.
|
|
By:
think Klopp might be due a change
|
|
By:
current form has alomost nothing to do with this thread.
|
|
By:
some very valid points there mes
|
|
By:
utter bollox imo
|
|
By:
Liverpool to win the 2022/23 Champions League, Premier League, FA Cup and EFL Cup 2000/1 William Hill
|
|
By:
"1 title in 8 years is a poor return, they should have won more,"
... "Why should they? " what's the average outright price for the league they have been under Klopp? Not least this fallacy that at different points in the era XYZ player has been the best in the world // best player in that position in the world |
|
By:
Freedom of the city. You dont get that by being a flop.
|