Read a fantastic article in the Echo that this article will be based on about FSG, their recent reaction at the NHL Winter Classic and the recent Rafa Devers deal:
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/fsg-set-announce-historic-275m-25899399
I think this pretty much exactly sums up my thoughts on FSG currently and speaking to a New England based Red Sox fan in the US they feel exactly the same about FSG's ownership: they and more specifically John Henry are spread too thin.
For context and in the interest of balance, I will say that I've been a staunch support of FSG for most of their tenure at Liverpool. They took a crumbling, backwards club from near oblivion and turned us into one of the most successful commercial organisations in football, gave us Jurgen Klopp and for a number of years got pretty much every decision bang on and most importantly won us the much coveted PL title.
When they took ownership of the Red Sox, they broke the "curse of the bambino" winning the first World Series for Boston in 86 years, winning another one shortly after and had Boston as serial contenders for a number of years.
The issue I've personally felt is that over the last couple of years is that they've lost interest a little and this is certainly a sentiment echoed in Boston. This relative disinterest that I've noticed aligns perfectly with their acquisition of the Pittsburgh Penguins and Red Sox fans you speak to feel the same way (which is why he was booed at the Penguins v Boston Bruins game at Fenway).
In Boston they let a world class team fall apart, lost Mookie Betts, Xander Bogaerts, JD Martinez who were all huge fan favourites and as a ballclub are no longer able to compete with the Yankees, Astros etc in the American League.
However, today it has been announced that they'd signed Rafael Devers for 11 years and $331m. By far the biggest contract in Boston and one of the biggest ever in baseball. Perhaps they have listened to the fans and are showing they are still committed to the club.
What does this mean for LFC? We all know that we are in desperate need of reinforcements in both the short and long term to replace many members of an ageing squad. Will they show the same level of intent here as they have today in Boston?
Will be very interested to see what the January and Summer windows bring at Anfield.
FSG, Devers and the future at Anfield
posted on 5/1/23
My own personal take on FSG is I'll reserve judgement until the summer transfer window passes. As toor has said above, its the same for me, the most successful period in my lifetime so they have some credit in the bank.
At the minute I am putting the squad issues down to more arrogance and naievity as opposed to them being not interested. Last season we came within a whisker of winning absolutely everything on offer. We lost what 4 games in all comps in the entire season.
I think theyve looked at things and went "we can go again here with what we have". Very much so like they did the season after we won the champs league and signed nobody that summer. I think theyve been naive in thinking they could do it again. The difference this time of course is that team 3 years was younger, fresher. Time has caught up with them now and it shows massively.
If we go out in the summer and properly back klopp then that will show their commitment and that it has more than likely been arrogance and naievity. If they fail to back him then yes id be inclined to agree that they have in fact taken us as far as they can.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by Mellor, Lovely Cushioned Header, FOR GERRARD, OOOOOOHHHHHH YAAAAAAA BEEEAAAUUUTTTYYYYY!!!!!!!!! (U1859)
posted 21 minutes ago
My own personal take on FSG is I'll reserve judgement until the summer transfer window passes. As toor has said above, its the same for me, the most successful period in my lifetime so they have some credit in the bank.
At the minute I am putting the squad issues down to more arrogance and naievity as opposed to them being not interested. Last season we came within a whisker of winning absolutely everything on offer. We lost what 4 games in all comps in the entire season.
I think theyve looked at things and went "we can go again here with what we have". Very much so like they did the season after we won the champs league and signed nobody that summer. I think theyve been naive in thinking they could do it again. The difference this time of course is that team 3 years was younger, fresher. Time has caught up with them now and it shows massively.
If we go out in the summer and properly back klopp then that will show their commitment and that it has more than likely been arrogance and naievity. If they fail to back him then yes id be inclined to agree that they have in fact taken us as far as they can.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
agree with this totally. overall, errors aside, FSG have been great . turning us from almost bankrupt to hugely profitable and successful club. as said above, see where we are by the end of he summer to see whether theyre still committed
all id add is in reference to this season. Klopp needs a tactical tweak to get us to the CL spots. as stated above, the mf is nailed and the press has gone. which causes issues for the highline as teams have plenty of time to pick their pass and beat the offside.
so drop off by 10 yds and give us a double pivot cm pairing(hopefully a new signing in jan to go with fab) to give us a bit more solidity. bit harder to break down, then should win more games with our fwd players
posted on 5/1/23
"With regards to the defending issues, are they not down to the fact that our MF has no legs and is unable to press. Our Defence then have to push up higher to compensate for this. A younger midfield should help this with their higher energy levels. That's why is is so important we get a top class MF in the summer be it Bellingham or Fernandez etc"
I would say there's a little bit of truth in this but this is not the case in the main as teams aren't playing through our midfield, they are playing around them and over them. It's got that bad that teams are putting two strikers up against us. Who would have dared risk that before? Why pack the midfield when you can give up the midfield battle and therefore possession and just pump it to quick attackers when you eventually get the ball? And you will eventually get the ball as we have congested the pitch into one half and taken away the space we are known for attacking in to.
We are playing to our opponents strengths at the moment and removing our own. Obviously when we have injured players back or if Gakpo makes a big impact that can change but at the moment we need to drop the defence back.
People look at our squad and think midfield has the weakest individuals and therefore that must be the problem. So we must spend mega money there and problem solved. Individuals in midfield are not the problem. Making it easy for the opposition is the problem. Conceding five one on one chances a game is the problem. Not making space for the wide players by contesting the pitch is the problem.
We seem to have went away from our high energy pressing game with pace and power in attack to trying to play the City game of threading a needle after endless passes and developing space. So you either rip it up and buy City type players in midfield or you go back to your strengths. Getting injured players back will help either way, until then, the system needs tweaked.
posted on 6/1/23
We are playing to our opponents strengths at the moment and removing our own. Obviously when we have injured players back or if Gakpo makes a big impact that can change but at the moment we need to drop the defence back.
——-
Klopp refuses to see what the fans can see. Against Brentford we were huffing and puffing without really looking like we were going to score then as soon as they attacked we were all over the place. It doesn’t help that we keep missing chances to get ahead which would naturally change the game plan of the opposition. Mane made things happen last season, so far Nunez has been having a mare. Yes he worries the opposition but we have to admit he’s a huge disappointment in front of goal so far.
I agree with Toor, we need a little pragmatism and a temporary change of tactics especially with Virgil being on the sidelines for a while.
We have a ton of pace upfront we should be the team soaking up the pressure and hitting teams on the break…
posted on 6/1/23
comment by Aggers Right Elbow (U3402)
posted 27 minutes ago
We are playing to our opponents strengths at the moment and removing our own. Obviously when we have injured players back or if Gakpo makes a big impact that can change but at the moment we need to drop the defence back.
——-
Klopp refuses to see what the fans can see. Against Brentford we were huffing and puffing without really looking like we were going to score then as soon as they attacked we were all over the place. It doesn’t help that we keep missing chances to get ahead which would naturally change the game plan of the opposition. Mane made things happen last season, so far Nunez has been having a mare. Yes he worries the opposition but we have to admit he’s a huge disappointment in front of goal so far.
I agree with Toor, we need a little pragmatism and a temporary change of tactics especially with Virgil being on the sidelines for a while.
We have a ton of pace upfront we should be the team soaking up the pressure and hitting teams on the break…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This.
posted on 6/1/23
Making it easy for the opposition is the problem. Conceding five one on one chances a game is the problem. Not making space for the wide players by contesting the pitch is the problem.
----
But all these problems could all emanate from the midfield problem. A problem in midfield could lead to all of those things, and also have an impact on how the whole team plays.
posted on 6/1/23
comment by No Love. (U1282)
posted 3 hours, 38 minutes ago
Making it easy for the opposition is the problem. Conceding five one on one chances a game is the problem. Not making space for the wide players by contesting the pitch is the problem.
----
But all these problems could all emanate from the midfield problem. A problem in midfield could lead to all of those things, and also have an impact on how the whole team plays.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, they can't. The midfield are not on the half way line meaning one ball around them or over them produces several one on one chances a game. The midfield are not on the half way line, they are up congesting the pitch because the defence are on the half way line. It's so bad at times that our centre backs are our playmakers breaking from the half way line trying to play the killer ball. The midfield are not causing the wide players to have no space as that area of the pitch is congested, again that's because as a system we've congested the pitch into one half, which means teams sit back with nine behind the ball and once they gain possession the play over or around our midfield and defence into quick attackers.
Individuals in midfield are not the problem. The team lack balance as a system. When we are not playing well the opposition seek to exploit this even more as they are not as afraid to do it.
posted on 6/1/23
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 6 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by No Love. (U1282)
posted 3 hours, 38 minutes ago
Making it easy for the opposition is the problem. Conceding five one on one chances a game is the problem. Not making space for the wide players by contesting the pitch is the problem.
----
But all these problems could all emanate from the midfield problem. A problem in midfield could lead to all of those things, and also have an impact on how the whole team plays.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, they can't. The midfield are not on the half way line meaning one ball around them or over them produces several one on one chances a game. The midfield are not on the half way line, they are up congesting the pitch because the defence are on the half way line. It's so bad at times that our centre backs are our playmakers breaking from the half way line trying to play the killer ball. The midfield are not causing the wide players to have no space as that area of the pitch is congested, again that's because as a system we've congested the pitch into one half, which means teams sit back with nine behind the ball and once they gain possession the play over or around our midfield and defence into quick attackers.
Individuals in midfield are not the problem. The team lack balance as a system. When we are not playing well the opposition seek to exploit this even more as they are not as afraid to do it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are playing the same system we always played and before this season it worked very well, no? Unless you're suggesting that we've changed the system this season?
posted on 6/1/23
comment by No Love. (U1282)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 6 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by No Love. (U1282)
posted 3 hours, 38 minutes ago
Making it easy for the opposition is the problem. Conceding five one on one chances a game is the problem. Not making space for the wide players by contesting the pitch is the problem.
----
But all these problems could all emanate from the midfield problem. A problem in midfield could lead to all of those things, and also have an impact on how the whole team plays.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, they can't. The midfield are not on the half way line meaning one ball around them or over them produces several one on one chances a game. The midfield are not on the half way line, they are up congesting the pitch because the defence are on the half way line. It's so bad at times that our centre backs are our playmakers breaking from the half way line trying to play the killer ball. The midfield are not causing the wide players to have no space as that area of the pitch is congested, again that's because as a system we've congested the pitch into one half, which means teams sit back with nine behind the ball and once they gain possession the play over or around our midfield and defence into quick attackers.
Individuals in midfield are not the problem. The team lack balance as a system. When we are not playing well the opposition seek to exploit this even more as they are not as afraid to do it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are playing the same system we always played and before this season it worked very well, no? Unless you're suggesting that we've changed the system this season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We aren't. We have slowly transitioned towards a City style game, away from high intensity, quick attacks towards dominating the ball and passing it around until an opening is found. Of course buying new players to fit this system can work but also going back to what worked best for the players we have can also work. Injuries don't help of course but we're not getting any less injuries now than we were with the high intensity games and quick powerful attacks. Teams know what to do against the high line now and the final straw was when Brentford stuck two players up top to do just that.
posted on 7/1/23
Yeah but only 6 months ago we finished the season strongly winning nearly every game. I agree we have transitioned as you say, but it still worked well even as we transitioned. This season we've just fallen off a cliff and I feel there's something else in addition to what you're saying.