The folly of "more with less" ...

[Paul Marin]

...not even the great Klopp can defy gravity. As X's favourite author says in this article "They bought well last year, but evidently they did not buy enough." I guess "they" (my club) needed bigger "net (positive) spend" and have to do more with more.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/...l-problem-not/

[Rockman]

It has alwats been waaaaay out this world,it is not gravity, it's anti-gravity.

[Sir X]

Even with a greater positive net spend ,it would not come close to the Big 3 and wages haven't been factored in that equation!

Claffy ,still more with less !

[Paul Marin]

Even with a greater positive net spend ,it would not come close to the Big 3 and wages haven't been factored in that equation!

Claffy ,still more with less !

Eedyat - spin all you want - the article nails what I have been telling you for 100 years (other than that you're an eedyat). UNLESS MY SIDE is ON PAR with squad value and wage bill, we will not be able to CONSISTENTLY challenge for the title. It is THAT SIMPLE. Second, the article directly states we "did not buy enough". That's a call for "more with more". Dummkopf. Anyway, welcome back. Me was a worry seh me would haffi fin' summady else fi cuss off in the forum...HL was in the pole position, followed closely by Jangle breath.

BTW - you still neva ansa mi question 'bout Paul Clement - dyam cowad, lyad, eedyat, 5th columnist, traitor, turncoat! Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh...that feels good.

[Sir X]

Where does it say that? What he said was It still looks like BR team ,Klopp didn't buy enough and 2 players which Klopp bought wasn't done so because of their wage bill? They did add squad value based on their performance as I expect any future purchases to do.

You might not have noticed Claffy,I really can't bother answering you.Its a waste of time.

[Paul Marin]

Where does it say that? What he said was It still looks like BR team ,Klopp didn't buy enough and 2 players which Klopp bought wasn't done so because of their wage bill? They did add squad value based on their performance as I expect any future purchases to do.

You might not have noticed Claffy,I really can't bother answering you.Its a waste of time.

Where does it say "that" dingleberry? LOL!! Eedyat - logic is not your strong suit. If we didn't buy enough - that means - we needed MORE. If we needed MORE, and we are doing LESS than expected, then the presumption is that we would be doing MORE if we had MORE. Comprende? Lawd yu fool.

And the reason you won't answer my question is because it RUBBISHES your stupid paradigm. Paul Clement is a British manager, and it bun up u paradigm fi him fi kick my side so. Now (unlike you) I realise that ONE win by a British manager over a supremo like Klopp does not make him the "second coming", but the fact that you won't respond PROVES you can't think beyond this one incident to defend your "paradigm". In other words, you yourself are questioning your paradigm BASED ON ONE OUTCOME at the very time you should be defending it. There - I helped you out...but only because I need you to stick around - where else would I go to kick off people face so easy? Dooofus.

[Karl]

Eedyat - spin all you want - the article nails what I have been telling you for 100 years (other than that you're an eedyat). UNLESS MY SIDE is ON PAR with squad value and wage bill, we will not be able to CONSISTENTLY challenge for the title. It is THAT SIMPLE. Second, the article directly states we "did not buy enough". That's a call for "more with more". Dummkopf. Anyway, welcome back. Me was a worry seh me would haffi fin' summady else fi cuss off in the forum...HL was in the pole position, followed closely by Jangle breath.

BTW - you still neva ansa mi question 'bout Paul Clement - dyam cowad, lyad, eedyat, 5th columnist, traitor, turncoat! Aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh...that feels good.

You assume the greater the spending the more success gained...and along with foregoing you have the companion assumption that it is impossible to put together great top TEAMs on economy budget.

True?
If so, can those assumptions stand up?

Just asking...

[Paul Marin]

You assume the greater the spending the more success gained...and along with foregoing you have the companion assumption that it is impossible to put together great top TEAMs on economy budget.

True?
If so, can those assumptions stand up?

Just asking...

Karl - I assume no such thing. Spending by and of itself is NOT the only factor. If you have the right manager, and a wage bill/squad value on par with other top clubs, your chances of *consistently* challenging for the title increase. In Liverpool's case, we have a top manager, so it is reasonable to think that a deeper squad (i.e. an increase in wage bill and squad value, i.e. greater spend) would *increase* our chances of mounting a sustainable challenge. Empirical data show that you need both money and top management to *consistently* challenge for the title.

[Karl]

Karl - I assume no such thing. Spending by and of itself is NOT the only factor. If you have the right manager, and a wage bill/squad value on par with other top clubs, your chances of *consistently* challenging for the title increase. In Liverpool's case, we have a top manager, so it is reasonable to think that a deeper squad (i.e. an increase in wage bill and squad value, i.e. greater spend) would *increase* our chances of mounting a sustainable challenge. Empirical data show that you need both money and top management to *consistently* challenge for the title.

OK!
I often heard when at 'school', "rules are made to be broken"!
The day shall come when TEAMs at the top do not have to, on relative terms, spend big. It is surely a fact that with numbers of players playing ball there are huge numbers of 'cheap' top quality players hiding in plain sight! TALENT ABOUNDS...world-wide!

[Peter R]

OK!
I often heard when at 'school', "rules are made to be broken"!
The day shall come when TEAMs at the top do not have to, on relative terms, spend big. It is surely a fact that with numbers of players playing ball there are huge numbers of 'cheap' top quality players hiding in plain sight! TALENT ABOUNDS...world-wide!

Can you name a few? just to satisfy my curiosity... Thanks!

[Paul Marin]

Can you name a few? just to satisfy my curiosity... Thanks!

I was just about to aX the same thing. Karl, there is no question that talent abounds, however, the process of creating a top class player is much more complicated than simply having talent. A kid has a better chance of being a doctor than a professional footballer, and even less chance to become a top class baller. Big clubs like Liverpool can't build their future on "more with less" - it simply is not sustainable the way things are currently set up. If it was like the olden days where money was distributed evenly, it would be possible, but them days done.