KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum If FSG want CL football, surely Rafael Benitez is their man

Interesting idea. He won the CL with the likes of biscan, traore, kewell and smicer so maybe he could do something impressive with the equally inept class of 2012? Even the anti-Rafa group should be open to that idea. He did very well with us previously, and like kenny maybe he could be offered the chance to earn a permanent contract?

i love reading your comments just proves rafa is the man. There is no comparison with the expectaion of rafa and kk by fans, as you mentioned rafa was crucified for not winning the league, kenny is being crucified for not getting top 4, BIG BIG difference. If your comparison of rafa to kenny is lowering your expectation of kenny to make it a fair comparison, it says alot about Rafa to kenny.

Good point isn't it, KP?

Chelsea with the Russian is the least attractive, owner meddling and player power.

Spurs have the good owners and a good talented side, but no history or big fan-base, and have a tight budget, a manager would have to accept working with what is available, and making only small changes.

Liverpool have history and a big world wide fan-base, and great supportive owners and fans(YES FANS unless you lose 5/6 and only win 5/15 home games), but their is much work to be done with team building and training.

so a manager who wants an easy job would want Spurs
and a confidant manager who wants a historic club would want Liverpool
only a manager desperate for a Job would want Chelsea

I think you're looking at it as if you are a manager choosing where 'you' would go. I'll try to make this neutral...:

Spurs:
exciting to watch
looked like they had a chance of winning the prem only a month or so back
supportive chairman happy to spend money wisely
london based
does well to retain/develop unhappy players for team benefit

Chelsea:
london based
plenty of money

Liverpool:
new owners wanting to make the club a success
supportive board
money situation unknown


From a neutral point of view you'd have to discard our history and is a wide-fan base a reason for a manager to choose us? I'm not sure. If I was looking at the negatives for each:

Spurs: can't think of any
Chelsea: too much pressure and interference from owner
Liverpool: poor quality and/or ageing squad, knackered stadium, high expectations

If I had no allegiance to either I'd go for Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea... in that order.

I think people underestimate manager's egos. People in that world think they are the best if given a chance to be the best. I don't think the abromavic situation will put off hardly any managers. They will all want a chance with a decent team with crazy money to spend. They will think they can be the one that does well so abramavic likes them and lets them do what they want. Just my opinion anyway.

With regards to Liverpool and spurs, I think it comes down to how much money does Liverpool have to spend. If its 40 mill a season at Liv and 30 at spurs then they would probably choose spurs as they have the better players and the bigger buzz, and are media darlings at the moment. Plus they will be in the champions league most likely, and have been more recently than us.

I think it would be Chelsea, Spurs/Liverpool, Liverpool/Spurs depending on if Liverpool can blow spurs' wages and budget out of the water. If they can't, chelsea spurs liverpool in that order.

Without sounding cynical, managers would know what to expect at Chelsea too. Money to spend and bags of it. If they make it a success, great, if not, they'll probably be there for a nice season in London, and collect £5m for getting sacked.

Without sounding optimistic, I like to think the chance to take Liverpool back to the top would be very attractive for most managers and despite the signings, it's at least clear they're willing to spend big.

I think Tottenham will struggle to improve on 3rd/4th. Redknapp's worked wonders so it will be a tough job to take on. Still, they do have a great team, if they can keep them together. I think Harry would be crazy to take the England job, unless he just wants to kick back for a few £m a year.

Depends on the man I guess but I agree there must be a few managers who jump at the chance to move to the prem, and lfc. I don't really know enough about the potential managers to presume who would favour which club though...?

KP i respect your opinion, buit I have to argue point 3 in your answer. You think that we need speed, width and a good finisher, and you say you like the way KK has the team playing.

To me the most obvious shortcoming of the team is the lack of width, which is mainly down to the fact that Kenny has got us playing with tactics which see our 2 wide men swapping sides game after game after game. We constantly see Kuyt on the left or Bellers and Downing on the right. This leads to the wings cutting inside which automatically cuts down on our width. I haven't seen any of our wingers taking on their men and gowing down the wing to deliver a decent cross, as a matter of fact the only players that have been doing that are Enrique and Kelly/Johnson...

You say the team needs speed, which is something we needed even before KK came in..who did we get? Adam-slow, Carroll -slow, Enrique has added a bit of pace as has Bellers, but he is reaching his sell by date. You say we need a good finisher, who did we get? Carroll-inefficient, Suarez-waste too many oppurtunities.

Suarez does bring a lot to our game, and his role is more in creating chances than taking them, Bellers was an outstanding buy, but Carroll and Downing have been useless for 90% of the time they were on the pitch.

So basically, you say you like the way Kenny has us playing but then say we need all those things which Kenny is taking out of our gameplan by forcing the wings to play out of their natural position and by getting the team to loft long balls towards Andy.

I hope all the guys come good and I am proven wrong, but if you compare Rafa's tactical knowledge to KK's and Rafa's spending to KK's their will only be one winner. Rafa did have some bad buys but they didn't cost 20 million, 20 million and 35 million a piece.

don't underestimate history , prestige is important for a big manager, things are not that bad yet..

and you are over estimating Spurs a bit, their budget is at 20m max, only increase with player sales and calculated risks, and even in London it is not attractive to players, and that in turn will make it less attractive to managers,.

and keen managers will know the team is mainly bad because of bad training and simple tactics, they will fancy

If I was a manager I would definitely choose Chelsea above the two other choices. If I succeed fantastic, If I don't I will be collecting 15m in compensation and happily retire in an exotic Island.