All forumites...Xcept goat mout'

[Paul Marin]

At least the previous managers played the players that they bought whether they made good purchases is another story, however under Rogers it just seem they bought players just for buying sake how can you explain Markovic 20mil,
Balotelli 16 mil, Origi 9mil, Luis Alberto 7mil, Iago Aspas 7mil, Tiago Llori 7mil
Borini 10.5mil Llalana 25mil, Lambert 5mil this is a long list of players that have been bought and not played. This is pathetic did this guy believe Liverpool have unlimited funds to waste?

Most of the players you name were sent out on loan. Balotelli, Llalana, and Lambert not so. However, we see the same thing happening elsewhere. Chelsea has the same issue, they have loads of players they've bought and not used. The thing I really don't know though, is how many of the players he had that he was forced t buy. I can't understand under any scenario how you sell Suarez, and then go for 5 new players with the money. That made no sense whatsoever.

[Paul Marin]

This is my issue with you and its a spear you are now falling on ,its not that Benitez or Klopp fell out of form, it is to be expected given the enormous financial powers you are up against ,unlike Rafa who was sacked and derided as taking the club as far as it could go ,dismissed as punching above his weight, Klopp was embarced as putting Dortmond back on the European map,bringing it in good financial stead,hailed for punching above his weight and encouraged to continue with his good work even though he had the anamoly of falling off par.

You see unlike some, i believe some projects or ambitions fit a manager like a glove and shooting above the par is the norm , not the exception.I will end it by saying Man U was a midtable club when pool ruled the world, they made up for it when POOL had terrible managers wasted money and Fergie was able to consistently punch above his weight and Man U celebrated him.The par not the anamoly for Fergie

As I said in a previous post , LFC cant afford to make the Benitez mistake twice, Klopp will lose form but I prey we have learnt from our past.

You didn't answer the question. You always run off on a tangent of conjecture and opinion. I am simply asking you to state facts.

[Dunny]

Most of the players you name were sent out on loan. Balotelli, Llalana, and Lambert not so. However, we see the same thing happening elsewhere. Chelsea has the same issue, they have loads of players they've bought and not used. The thing I really don't know though, is how many of the players he had that he was forced t buy. I can't understand under any scenario how you sell Suarez, and then go for 5 new players with the money. That made no sense whatsoever.

No point talking about Chelsea here because Chelsea can buy every player in the world if they want. When you are Liverpool and buying 20 million pound players one season and loaning them the next then that means you haven't got a clue

[Assasin]

Was it Rodgers or the Committee. For sure you know he didn't want Ballotelli, he wanted your bwoy Alexis. He wanted your bwoy Ashley Williams. If you notice the profile of these most of these players you mention, u24 and had some talent. I think it was the committee with the baseball mentality that wanted a feeder system. If you notice they pretty much want all the older players making money gone.

[Paul Marin]

No point talking about Chelsea here because Chelsea can buy every player in the world if they want. When you are Liverpool and buying 20 million pound players one season and loaning them the next then that means you haven't got a clue

Now you are switching your argument. First you said, he bought them and didn't play them. Balotelli is the only one you could accuse him of doing that with. Lambert and Llallana (who was injured part of the season) both got decent playing time, plus, Lambert was hired as a stop gap to begin with. Now you are saying he bought "20m pound players and loaned them out". Who did he do that with? We also know from pretty reasonable sources that Balotelli was thrust upon him (and didn't cost £20m)...so other than that - who did LFC buy for £20m and loan out? Markovic? LOL! Wheel an tun'...

Markovic did not cost £20m, was 20 years old and played nuff in his first season. He is is a perfect example of the farmer mentality that i believe the financial owners of LFC are beginning to realise can only go so far. And other than him, there is no one else even close to that valuation that Rodgers brought in one season and loaned out another. Now, I have no issue with you not fancying Rodgers tactics, methods, style, knowledge, haircut etc. etc, but be fair.

[Rockman]

Hehehhe

[OJ]

I agree with Paul , Liverpool is big in name only just like newcastle and Leeds.. Fun and joke aside you cannot win by selling your best assest.. As a gunner i know that. They are a selling club and on top of that dem bandmind.. They should have sold the biter to the real big club and dem sell him to the catalans.. No top four fi unno... god dont like ugly....

[Sir X]

He did say "I will have the 1st and last word and he isnt an idiot" in reference to the transfer committee.I hope that clears it up for you.Please read and watch the inserted video before commenting.

JURGEN KLOPP: STATS THE WAY TO DO IT
by John Gibbons // 13 October 2015 // 5 Comments
Gibbons Ident (1)A MANAGERIAL change is never just a managerial change. Collateral damage is high. When the manager clears his desk, everyone from his coaches to the tea lady worries they will soon be doing the same.


http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2015/1...-way-to-do-it/

[Dunny]

Now you are switching your argument. First you said, he bought them and didn't play them. Balotelli is the only one you could accuse him of doing that with. Lambert and Llallana (who was injured part of the season) both got decent playing time, plus, Lambert was hired as a stop gap to begin with. Now you are saying he bought "20m pound players and loaned them out". Who did he do that with? We also know from pretty reasonable sources that Balotelli was thrust upon him (and didn't cost £20m)...so other than that - who did LFC buy for £20m and loan out? Markovic? LOL! Wheel an tun'...

Markovic did not cost £20m, was 20 years old and played nuff in his first season. He is is a perfect example of the farmer mentality that i believe the financial owners of LFC are beginning to realise can only go so far. And other than him, there is no one else even close to that valuation that Rodgers brought in one season and loaned out another. Now, I have no issue with you not fancying Rodgers tactics, methods, style, knowledge, haircut etc. etc, but be fair.

Paul I am a fan of Rodgers as a coach the problem I have with him is his poor recruitment, I am not having this committee nonsense. I can't see a manager of LFC given players if he don't want them. Brendan was a part of that same committee. Could you enlighten me how much did Markovic cost? Do you think I am unfair with the criticism of his transfer record? Other than Sturridge that he apparently didn't fancy that much who else has been a success?

[Sir X]

So they sold key players and had a drop in the league , does that diminish the work they did , consistently shooting above par ? Is this what you use to justify the position that financial strength would dictate that they could buy players to cover for sales and of course injuries .

Quantatative data says you are right , you cant argue with numbers, but what does the qualatative data say ? Again this is where you fall on your spear ,not now but from 09 ,I have been pointing it out to you that you need to look at qualatative factors.Moyes - Man U wasnt a figment of our imagination and so was Hodgson- Pool ,you can dismiss them as having aging deadwood but that value or worth of the club should not have them in relegation scraps.

This is where you fail to give credit to the Benitezes the Klopps and Simones of the world, who believe that having a certain qualatative element to make that difference is a difference ! and you would foolishly throw your money at average coaches because of quantataive data,ignoring common sense.Quality coaching cost ! Money, league position and good players .


That fall in Man U and Pool is an indication of a qualatative problem like a coach! In your zeal to prove the point , history has shown you to be silly.The Quality of a coach does bear a factor in the outcome of a teams position,why would wealthy clubs seek the best ?

You will always have coaches looking for that special project where they can get that qualatative more out of less to make that quantatave difference ,until it becomes consistency.


Now can we support Klopp and stop hiding behind money.

[Paul Marin]

Paul I am a fan of Rodgers as a coach the problem I have with him is his poor recruitment, I am not having this committee nonsense. I can't see a manager of LFC given players if he don't want them. Brendan was a part of that same committee. Could you enlighten me how much did Markovic cost? Do you think I am unfair with the criticism of his transfer record? Other than Sturridge that he apparently didn't fancy that much who else has been a success?

Markovic cost around £17m. The committee is a problem Dunny, because it undermined his authority...e.g. he wanted Ashley Williams, but was denied b/c Williams was "too old". Many clubs have policies for older players, but usually, the manager is given the benefit of the doubt and are allowed 1 year contracts etc.

Regarding his transfer record...I do believe you are being a bit selective. 12/13 - he brought in Borini, Sturridge, Coutinho, and Allen - 3 of them are regular first team players
13/14 - Sakho, Aspas, Mignolet, Luis Alberto, Thiago Llori - Sakho and Mignolet are first team regulars
14/15 - Lallana, Lovren, Markovic, Ballotelli, Moreno, Origi, Can, Manquillo, Lambert - of these, all were given a chance except Origi who was loaned out. All of them got good looks to first team football. Can, Lallan, Moreno, and Lovren are first team regulars.
15/16 - Benteke, Firmino, Clyne, Gomez - all given first team ball even to Rodgers peril.

As you can see...most of the players that the club (I won't even say "he") brought in have been given a chance...so not sure why you feel the way you do. I think Balotelli is the only one that I feel he should have been more patient with.

[Paul Marin]

So they sold key players and had a drop in the league , does that diminish the work they did , consistently shooting above par ? Is this what you use to justify the position that financial strength would dictate that they could buy players to cover for sales and of course injuries .

Quantatative data says you are right , you cant argue with numbers, but what does the qualatative data say ? Again this is where you fall on your spear ,not now but from 09 ,I have been pointing it out to you that you need to look at qualatative factors.Moyes - Man U wasnt a figment of our imagination and so was Hodgson- Pool ,you can dismiss them as having aging deadwood but that value or worth of the club should not have them in relegation scraps.

This is where you fail to give credit to the Benitezes the Klopps and Simones of the world, who believe that having a certain qualatative element to make that difference is a difference ! and you would foolishly throw your money at average coaches because of quantataive data,ignoring common sense.Quality coaching cost ! Money, league position and good players .


That fall in Man U and Pool is an indication of a qualatative problem like a coach! In your zeal to prove the point , history has shown you to be silly.The Quality of a coach does bear a factor in the outcome of a teams position,why would wealthy clubs seek the best ?

You will always have coaches looking for that special project where they can get that qualatative more out of less to make that quantatave difference ,until it becomes consistency.


Now can we support Klopp and stop hiding behind money.

So, would Klopp be able to bring the current Norwich team to a top 4 position?

[Sir X]

Dortmond did,Valencia did and Athlethico did.Dont sleep on Spurs ,Everton and Southhamptom they have sourced decent coaches willing to work on these kind of projects.Norwich is at the Dormund level before Klopp took it over dem nuh serious.

I hope I answered your questions,without fear ,and being disingenious.

[Sir X]

What are you saying talk straight ,did BR frig up di transfer money or was it a committee fault ? ..keep in mind what you are saying implicitly is having money isnt all ,its how you spend it and who spends it .

[Paul Marin]

I thought I made my self perfectly clear...here goes again:

马尔科维奇花费大约£对不起！该委员会是一个问题Dunny，因为它削弱了他的权威......如他希望 阿什利 - 威廉姆斯，但被拒绝了B / C威廉姆斯是“太旧”。许多俱乐部有政策，老玩家，但通常情况下，经理给出的疑点利益，并禁止1年 的合同等。

关于他的转会纪录......我相信你是有点选择性。 12/13 - 他带来了博里尼，斯图里奇，高天赐，和艾伦 - 3都是普通一线队球员
13/14 - 萨科，Aspas，Mignolet，路易斯阿尔贝托，蒂亚戈Llori - 萨科和Mignolet是一线队的常客
14/15 - 拉拉纳，洛夫伦，马尔科维奇，Ballotelli，莫雷诺，Origi，能，Manquil lo，兰伯特 - 这些，都被赋予不同的Origi机会谁被租借出去。他们都得到了良好的外观到一线队。可以，Lallan， 莫雷诺和洛夫伦是一线队的常客。
15/16 - Benteke，FIRMINO，克莱恩，戈麦斯 - 给所有一线队球甚至罗杰斯危险。

正如你所看到的......最多的球员，俱乐部（我甚至不会说“他”）带来了被赋予一个机会... 所以不知道为什么你觉得你的方式做。我认为巴洛特利是唯一一个，我觉得他应该更耐心。