|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 679
Under 18 Player
|
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 679 |
klopp...klopp is the reason ..mostly..as to why lfc are doing ok atm.
Without klop lfc would be rudderless.he makes fsg seem better than they are...net spend very little from them.
When they took over, Roy Hodgson was our manager. Who hired him? If they made a good hire, surely that is a credit to them. They hired rodgers and that nosedived as expected despite his half a good season. We are lucky klopp chose lfc and lucky fsg decided not to pitch for another rodgers kind of manager like dyche etc. Klopp says he will be 7 years only at lfc ..4th year now... so who next after him I wonder.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
klopp...klopp is the reason ..mostly..as to why lfc are doing ok atm.
Without klop lfc would be rudderless.he makes fsg seem better than they are...net spend very little from them.
When they took over, Roy Hodgson was our manager. Who hired him? If they made a good hire, surely that is a credit to them. They hired rodgers and that nosedived as expected despite his half a good season. We are lucky klopp chose lfc and lucky fsg decided not to pitch for another rodgers kind of manager like dyche etc. Klopp says he will be 7 years only at lfc ..4th year now... so who next after him I wonder. Klopp said in his book that the Man United board interviewed him, but he didn't join. He said FSG convinced him. Rodgers had his flaws, but he was better than Hodgson, and we did well under him at a time. When it was apparent that he had taken us as far as he could go, they replaced him with a world class manager that United couldn't land. So if Klopp is the only reason we're better, then surely that is a point in FSG's favor. And if Klopp were to leave today, we're a much more attractive proposition than when he arrived. We hired Rodgers at the time because our options were limited. We were a project. Now we are a European fixture and one of the best teams in England.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
FSG are in their eight year here and in that time there's been positive and negative, albeit at a frustratingly slow pace. The major positive has been their financial management. The major negative has been the Stadium tart up and missed opportunity, which will be a drag on the club for a generation. Another positive has been their eventual ditching of the moneyball policy. The positive of which is the signing of a few world class players, and the result is showing in the performances.
If they continue to compete in the market for top quality players, they may yet manage to win something substantial, and therefore prove to be a positive for LFC.
If they revert to the failed moneyball policy, they will almost certainly win little of note, as they have to date, and thereby prove to be a negative for LFC.
Time will tell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
The one decent thing they have done is to appoint Klopp but it's taken a long time to do that with three managers who should never have been near the job. But in the end they got it right. The big negative is the stadium or lack of I can't get past that and Everton are well advanced for moving in the next few years , in twenty years time we might regret that. And before someone says we are ahead of Everton in the league YES i know it's the long term I am thinking of
Last edited by Stanley Park; 31/10/18 09:38 PM.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936 |
I'd be surprised if they haven't drawn up plans for a possible future move if they're staying put? It would be a catastrophe allowing the likes of Everton & Tottenham generate greater match day revenue than us.
What I do find odd is that they have wasted the chance to recoup some money back on the Main Stand renovation by having somebody sponsor it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
The one decent thing they have done is to appoint Klopp but it's taken a long time to do that with three managers who should never have been near the job. But in the end they got it right. The big negative is the stadium or lack of I can't get past that and Everton are well advanced for moving in the next few years , in twenty years time we might regret that. And before someone says we are ahead of Everton in the league YES i know it's the long term I am thinking of How many seats would the Everton new stadium contain? I understand it will be between 50-55k and will cost around 400m, I think it will be even more in the next few years, look what's happening to Spurs new stadium, delayed again costing much more than budgeted. Therefore they will probably have less capacity after spending 3 times what we have spent. I understand we are considering to reach 60k soon. They btw have no other option as their current stadium has around 35k seats. Why would we regret anything, we'll still have bigger capacity after spending much less and keep the legendary Anfield atmosphere. What else?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
The Red Sox just won the World Series, and we are off to our brightest start in quite some time. Over the years I've observed people who love them in all circumstances and who hate them in all circumstances. What is the general consensus of them now?
I have been neutral positive on FSG for quite some time. In my eyes they aren't exactly ideal owners. I wish they had deeper pockets, and it took them awhile to get their bearings, but it seems they have become more effective football organization. They have always seemed like they have been MUCH better than the cowboys who nearly got us put through administration, and better than the poor leadership that has been plaguing formerly large clubs like Leeds, Villa, Newcastle, etc. Even the likes of Arsenal and United have been frustrated with their leadership recently.
Positives? Recruitment (which was previously a major weakness) in the past 2 or 3 years has actually been very good, particularly last year. We've broken records to fix the obvious problems at CB and goal-keeper, and supplemented that with bargain gems in Robertson, Trent, Gomez, etc. Know talent competing in Europe is starting to come here when we make offers (Salah, Fabinho, Keita, etc), and although we have lost Suarez and Coutinho, we seem to have gotten better about rebuffing offers until we are more ready, and are some distance from losing our best players year after year. The likes of Ayre, Commoli and the transfer committee seemed to have issues, but Edwards seems like he knows what he's doing, and hasn't really made a dud signing yet.
Commercially we seem to be healthy. Shirt sales, profits, and advertising is going well. We have increased our revenues from 400 Million to 424 million Euros, moving back into the top 10 richest clubs in the world (ahead of 9th place Juventus and a mere 3.8 million behind Chelsea in 8th). We've increased our stadium capacity slightly, and we recorded healthy profits two years in a row. Still a ways to go to rival the likes of City or United, but certainly improved. And unlike many of our London rivals, we have frozen our ticket prices as Spurs, Chelsea, and Arsenal get only more expensive to watch.
On the pitch we have improved considerably. Comparing the likes of Roy Hodgson to Klopp is perhaps unfair, but we have a much stronger squad that has become an established champions league club again at last and returned to the top 20 in Europe again.
The negatives? The blokes who keep winning the league are 100 million richer than us, and we have only won 1 solitary trophy in their tenure, despite finishing runners up in the Europa league, Champions League, Premier League, League Cup, and FA cup, and a handful of semifinal appearances. The stadium is better, but it is not the Emirates or the Ethihad in terms of sheer grandeur or amenities.
Thoughts? I think they've done great, nobody else has done better during their tenure with the resources available. I would have wished they had money to throw away like the City, Chelsea and PSG owners but we couldn't get any when the club was being sold and twice. I would say only Spurs management have done almost as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
One must also factor in the cost of lost opportunity, which we'll be paying for a generation or more, not to mention all that fuckkinngs around with the silly and failed moneyball shiit, for six or so wasted years.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
One must also factor in the cost of lost opportunity, which we'll be paying for a generation or more, not to mention all that fuckkinngs around with the silly and failed moneyball shiit, for six or so wasted years. They're still doing moneyball, it's just working better now because their organization understands the game better. Sturridge, Coutinho, Suarez, Robertson, Shaquiri, Gomez, Salah, Mane, Milner, Wjinaldum, and Firmino were all acquired for less than their true market value. We have one of the most efficient recruiting teams int he world now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394 |
And to add to it, they’ve proved they will spend especially now they’re raking it in. They didn’t have that kind of money in the early years so had to rely on this mythical moneyball.
|
|
|
|
|
