LFCMadLad Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 Both Klopp and Pep are out of this world managers. I dont think anyone can touch them atm. I'll always lean towards Klopp as the best because hes had success at clubs that were the underdogs. For me, Klopp currently is the best manager any club could hire. I totally get it though if people think that Pep is better. Imagine Klopp with unlimited money though?. He would absolutely take the piss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 2 hours ago, RandoEFC said: Yeah but again, this is the case of the England goalkeeper position being held to higher standards than the others for no apparent reason. It's a phenomenon that has existed going back to David Seaman so at least as long as I've been old enough to pay attention. Pickford lets one in that he probably could have saved and people are like "if someone else was world class and English Pickford wouldn't get a look in". Well yeah, and? You could say that about every other England player apart from Kane and Sterling. We don't have this conversation about "England's number three" every time Danny Rose gets shown up to not be as good as Roberto Carlos. Not having a go at you mate just find it a really odd phenomenon that just seems to be accepted as part of following English football. The goalkeeper position has always been a poisoned chalice but let’s be real in terms of how good they are at their respective positions Pickford is below most of our starting eleven...only really similar to Barkley and I think we’re all waiting for Dele to find his form again and for Foden to break through to see him out. Pickford is good for his level but I think after years of people letting Joe Hart off for his constant errors before he was ousted at City and England and the rise of that age group that won serious silverware expectations have risen again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 9 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said: Both Klopp and Pep are out of this world managers. I dont think anyone can touch them atm. I'll always lean towards Klopp as the best because hes had success at clubs that were the underdogs. For me, Klopp currently is the best manager any club could hire. I totally get it though if people think that Pep is better. Imagine Klopp with unlimited money though?. He would absolutely take the piss. There’s a reason he chose Liverpool when he could have gone to any big side with massive resources...I don’t think he has the motivation to win with the money available straight away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 9 minutes ago, Danny said: There’s a reason he chose Liverpool when he could have gone to any big side with massive resources...I don’t think he has the motivation to win with the money available straight away Hes said it publicly. He has absolutely no interest in clubs that can just buy the league. It's why he turned down Man Utd and why he will never manage Man City, Barcelona, Real Madrid or PSG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 20 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said: Hes said it publicly. He has absolutely no interest in clubs that can just buy the league. It's why he turned down Man Utd and why he will never manage Man City, Barcelona, Real Madrid or PSG. Irony is Liverpool are now one of those teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 10 minutes ago, Danny said: Irony is Liverpool are now one of those teams Are we hell. Seen in the summer what a big window did to us. We can’t do 100m windows year in year out like City, PSG or Madrid can. Im by no means saying we are underdogs and spend small in any way, but we aren’t throwing money around like it’s going out of fashion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 11 minutes ago, Danny said: Irony is Liverpool are now one of those teams Take a look at the spending table since Klopp took over. Hes spent absolutely fuck all Him and Edward's have been fucking brilliant together. Their signings are near enough faultless, and our out going business has been just as good. We spend what we earn basically. We are one of the lowest net spenders in the league. Proper Oil club us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 Jokers You lot spent £300m over two seasons, not many clubs can do that regardless of net or oil Klopp isn’t buying these players with his coal reserves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairy In Boots Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 Klopp has spent £416 million before this summer when fees inflated even more. This bs that he’s working on a budget sticking to the rich like a plucky underdog is bs, the keeper is £65m ffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 Start comparing net spend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 16 minutes ago, Cicero said: Start comparing net spend Of course there net spend is different between the two clubs and no ones saying Liverpool have spent as much as City...or have an oil baron backer....but the myth that Klopp doesn’t spend is gash. Liverpool are the second biggest spenders in the league by now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ Posted September 28, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted September 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Danny said: The goalkeeper position has always been a poisoned chalice but let’s be real in terms of how good they are at their respective positions Pickford is below most of our starting eleven...only really similar to Barkley and I think we’re all waiting for Dele to find his form again and for Foden to break through to see him out. Pickford is good for his level but I think after years of people letting Joe Hart off for his constant errors before he was ousted at City and England and the rise of that age group that won serious silverware expectations have risen again I cant be arsed getting into a thing over this and part of it may be my Everton bias but that's an absolutely horrendous shout for me mate. Pickford is a very good shot stopper who does something erratic every few games, generally gets away with it but sometimes doesn't. Barkley is an absolute passenger in 90% of his appearances for club and country unless it's against Grimsby or Faroe Islands. I also don't get why people talk about Pickford's England spot at all. I can barely recall any occasions where he's made mistakes for the national side or conceded goals he shouldn't and has tended to deliver in key moments, particularly a couple of penalty shootouts. If anything his England form is better than his Everton form which makes it all the more odd that it's even a topic of conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 13 minutes ago, Danny said: Of course there net spend is different between the two clubs and no ones saying Liverpool have spent as much as City...or have an oil baron backer....but the myth that Klopp doesn’t spend is gash. Liverpool are the second biggest spenders in the league by now? Net spend shows context, especially when people continue to push this false equivalency. Liverpool had to sell to buy. City don’t have to. Since 2015, Liverpool have a net spend of £18 million. City's is almost £500 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 Just now, RandoEFC said: I cant be arsed getting into a thing over this and part of it may be my Everton bias but that's an absolutely horrendous shout for me mate. Pickford is a very good shot stopper who does something erratic every few games, generally gets away with it but sometimes doesn't. Barkley is an absolute passenger in 90% of his appearances for club and country unless it's against Grimsby or Faroe Islands. I also don't get why people talk about Pickford's England spot at all. I can barely recall any occasions where he's made mistakes for the national side or conceded goals he shouldn't and has tended to deliver in key moments, particularly a couple of penalty shootouts. If anything his England form is better than his Everton form which makes it all the more odd that it's even a topic of conversation. His England form hasn’t been bad all I’m saying is I think he’s limited and won’t be consistently playing for a side playing for top silverware. I wouldn’t put Pickford in the same bracket as Rose, Maguire, Walker, Henderson, Sterling, Kane, Sancho...even Stones and Gomez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, Cicero said: Net spend shows context, especially when people continue to push this false equivalency. Liverpool had to sell to buy. City don’t have to. Since 2015, Liverpool have a net spend of £18 million. City's is almost £500 million. Yes shows the context behind where the money came from, but the money is still spent...Liverpool are still massive spenders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ Posted September 28, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted September 28, 2019 Even net spend is a silly way to judge investment, especially when fans always choose arbitrary time periods to make their club seem better than others. It's a better metric than outright spending for sure but it still doesn't take into account wages, the massive fluctuations in the market in recent years, whether managers were forced into spending because they inherited an aging squad. Also using it to compare managers is flawed when most clubs have several people who contribute to decisions about who to scout and who to sign and how much to spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ Posted September 28, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted September 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, Danny said: His England form hasn’t been bad all I’m saying is I think he’s limited and won’t be consistently playing for a side playing for top silverware. I wouldn’t put Pickford in the same bracket as Rose, Maguire, Walker, Henderson, Sterling, Kane, Sancho...even Stones and Gomez I wouldn't put Rose in the same category as the others but I wouldn't argue too hard with most of the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 Just now, RandoEFC said: I wouldn't put Rose in the same category as the others but I wouldn't argue too hard with most of the rest. That’s all I’m saying, you look at the players coming through now...Sancho, Foden, Mount alongside the likes of Kane, Sterling...if a goalkeeper of that level comes through then that position is theirs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 1 hour ago, Danny said: Yes shows the context behind where the money came from, but the money is still spent...Liverpool are still massive spenders I have to 100% agree with this, whether it be from sales, sponsors, or cash injection, spending is spending. Just because a club like Liverpool makes a pretty penny from a player sale doesn't mean the money will be, or has to be reinvested into the squad. The club chooses to spend that money. If I have $500 in bank account, spend $50 all week, and earn $100, I may have more money by the end of it but I still spent $50. All the same if I have $0, earn nothing, and borrow $50 to spend. Still spent $50 but the difference is one is a wee bit smarter than the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Gold Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 Can't believe what I'm reading. There's a massive difference between mostly spending what you raise from sales vs. pumping money into the squad year on year. A good manager should be able to raise their players' levels to where they can be sold for a profit to be reinvested. They should then be able to target that reinvestment by identifying players on the market who can fill gaps in the squad. Both of those things require skill. It takes zero skill to go cap in hand to the owners, especially when you know there's plenty more where that came from, so it's no big deal if this signing doesn't pan out. It's silly to pretend we're not big spenders (although I think the two 2018 windows gave unrealistic expectations of what we can spend) but it's downright moronic to pretend we're in the same ballpark as the Man Citys of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 2 hours ago, Danny said: Yes shows the context behind where the money came from, but the money is still spent...Liverpool are still massive spenders They are. Except they have to sell to buy, City don’t. So again, false equivalency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 People get wrapped in where the money comes from and the consequences of that. Spending is spending. Whether it is sustainable, ethical, or sourced from the ass of a human rights violating nation, it is still spending. I really don’t give two fucks if Liverpool get their money from Alistair Crowley’s black magic they still choose to spend it how they see fit. Now, people might get their anuses wound up about the ethical sourcing of money and having their dick measuring contest won by means of ‘our money is earned’ but I don’t care about that because all I see is Liverpool’s hardwork scouting out the unknown centreback Virgil van Dyke costing £90,000,000 and Manchester City throwing hard cash on the table like it is sand for whatever player they like. Congratulations your multi$million corporation earned it’s money in a more traditional manner. I respect Liverpool and what they did to form this team, it is impressive and I have said nothing that is contrary to that, but money is money when it is all done. Hit me up when Liverpool find a star in the middle of Estonia plying in the 2nd league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber Dan+ Posted September 29, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted September 29, 2019 Liverpool have shown the value in successfully ripping teams off. Can't think of anyone better at consistently managing to get over a players value than Liverpool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Blue Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 It's always nice to beat these vile cunts, the scummiest club in all the land! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 1 minute ago, Happy Blue said: It's always nice to beat these vile cunts, the scummiest club in all the land! What's Manchester Utd got to do with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.