well he hasn't been booed while at Anfield yet, and hes not likely to visit anytime soon so dont expect anything
As i mentioned on tranny thread the red sox will always be JH first love and we are his insurance bankers who are operating on a sustainable model.
How are FSG funding the $331m for this player? Is that from Red Sox revenue or are they getting money out from there back pocket?
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? That's on Klopp and his team surely. The money provided is similar every single year, £80m - £120m. That's their job, not the playing staff, I doubt they know the first thing about football in fact.
In the past two years, where you feel they have lost interest, we have signed half a dozen players 25 and under. We've also just broken our transfer record on a 22 year old.
Would it be fair to say that if things were going better on the pitch it would mean they were more interested?
People do age though, not much FSG can do on that.
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? That's on Klopp and his team surely. The money provided is similar every single year, £80m - £120m. That's their job, not the playing staff, I doubt they know the first thing about football in fact.
In the past two years, where you feel they have lost interest, we have signed half a dozen players 25 and under. We've also just broken our transfer record on a 22 year old.
Would it be fair to say that if things were going better on the pitch it would mean they were more interested?
People do age though, not much FSG can do on that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure there's any merit to having this conversation for the umpteenth time as you and I do not and seemingly never will agree on the subject but in the last 5 years West Ham, Villa, Tottenham and Arsenal have all outspent us as well as the obvious United and Chelsea.
We turn over more than all of those clubs aside from City and United, significantly more than double what Villa and West Ham turn over, £90m more than Spurs and £150m more than Arsenal.
I've excluded Newcastle from the above as the Saudi ownership have obviously hugely skewed that figure.
So how come they all outspend us? The merits of the signings these clubs have made matters not, this is a discussion about investment not transfer prowess.
Our wage bill is very high as a direct result of the success in recent years, I agree with the point I know you'll make but there are owners out there who can allow us to spend more then FSG do.
"We spend absolutely loads". That's just not quite true when you look at it in the context of Liverpool's financial clout compared to competitors.
Potentially aside from Gakpo, I don't look at any signing in the last 5 seasons and think it was an unnecessary buy (some haven't worked out of course) but we needed more players in other positions to keep us competitive.
Side note, City's ownership are actually quite superb, they are far lower on the net spend table than you'd expect considering the sums they've paid for the likes of Grealish.
I'm just saying that spending circa £160m in 12 months on players under 25 seems at odds with what you wrote.
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s not always down to the ownership, though. The people they employ, that are far better equipped to make judgement on the shape of the squad, are the people that let that happen.
Management can find it difficult to move on from experienced players that have provided them with success. And often want to keep them around for the intangibles that they have on the group.
You can accuse every successful club over the years of doing that. Plenty of them have kept around players that are past their sell by date.
I think the bigger issue is why wasters like Gomez, Ox and Keita have been kept at the club. They’re taking up squad places and wages that could have been put to better use. But instead you signed more forwards.
Either way spending £163m on players under 25 in the last 12 months doesn't scream uninterested owners wanting the squad to age.
Last paragraph is spot on Darren. The extention we gave Ox looks mental now for example.
We've also let far toomuch money walk out the door for free. Firmino, Keita and Oxwill be more.
£200m in the last 18 months fwiw, all under 25.
Yeah I think we discussed it before that you’ve been a bit off with your contract management in recent years. It was usually a strong area for Liverpool, especially in comparison to most of the competition.
I get the argument about underinvestment, though like most fans it gets overplayed, but when you don’t have City’s riches you need to make the most of the revenue you do have - Liverpool have taken their eye off the ball in that department in recent years.
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? That's on Klopp and his team surely. The money provided is similar every single year, £80m - £120m. That's their job, not the playing staff, I doubt they know the first thing about football in fact.
In the past two years, where you feel they have lost interest, we have signed half a dozen players 25 and under. We've also just broken our transfer record on a 22 year old.
Would it be fair to say that if things were going better on the pitch it would mean they were more interested?
People do age though, not much FSG can do on that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
£80m gets you 1 World Class player. 1 signing every summer will not work. £80m won't get us Bellingham, Rice or Enzo Fernandez. Hope we get new and better owners in soon!
Well the last two seasons we've spent £240m on Konate, Diaz, Nunez and Gakpo plus some others. We also have the 10th highest wage bill in world football.
I think that's pretty good.
It really is getting a bit like Spurs fans on here where we should apparently spend more... just because.
I think the bigger issue stems from a few seasons back where you didn’t invest adequately when at the top. And this summer clearly ignoring midfield was an error. Now whether that is down to the owners not releasing funds or management being loyal to certain players and, or, patient enough to wait for the players they really want remains to be seen.
I suspect a lot of it is down to the latter. But it shatters the illusion of Liverpool’s management as the bestest of the best, particularly Klopp. Klopp’s got a lot in common with Wenger in that his loyalty and patience can be brilliant for certain things, but there’s a lack of ruthlessness that can leave his squads unprepared at times.
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
Also whilst I disagree with the premise of the article, it was well put forward and encouraged debate.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately with City and Newcastle's endless pot of money and Todd Bowhly splashing the cash, the only way we can go is with a similar owner who can give us a war chest each summer.
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.
comment by 77, 78, 81, 84, 05 and 19. European Royalty �... (U22930)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately with City and Newcastle's endless pot of money and Todd Bowhly splashing the cash, the only way we can go is with a similar owner who can give us a war chest each summer.
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fortunately this isn't true as the club have already demonstrated under FSG's ownership.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by 77, 78, 81, 84, 05 and 19. European Royalty �... (U22930)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately with City and Newcastle's endless pot of money and Todd Bowhly splashing the cash, the only way we can go is with a similar owner who can give us a war chest each summer.
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fortunately this isn't true as the club have already demonstrated under FSG's ownership.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We used to have just City and Chelsea to deal with. We now have Newcastle and United who will surely get better owners than the Glazers. Just imagine how brilliant it would be to be able to see the best players in the world pull on the famous red jersey. Can't see thst ever happening with FSG. Just my opinion though 🤷♂️
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.
———
If your midfield/attack can’t do that then you don’t push up to compensate, you drop deeper. Otherwise you are ripe for counter attacks, as Liverpool show.
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.
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
"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.
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…
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.
Sign in if you want to comment
FSG, Devers and the future at Anfield
Page 1 of 2
posted on 5/1/23
well he hasn't been booed while at Anfield yet, and hes not likely to visit anytime soon so dont expect anything
posted on 5/1/23
As i mentioned on tranny thread the red sox will always be JH first love and we are his insurance bankers who are operating on a sustainable model.
How are FSG funding the $331m for this player? Is that from Red Sox revenue or are they getting money out from there back pocket?
posted on 5/1/23
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
posted on 5/1/23
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? That's on Klopp and his team surely. The money provided is similar every single year, £80m - £120m. That's their job, not the playing staff, I doubt they know the first thing about football in fact.
In the past two years, where you feel they have lost interest, we have signed half a dozen players 25 and under. We've also just broken our transfer record on a 22 year old.
Would it be fair to say that if things were going better on the pitch it would mean they were more interested?
People do age though, not much FSG can do on that.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? That's on Klopp and his team surely. The money provided is similar every single year, £80m - £120m. That's their job, not the playing staff, I doubt they know the first thing about football in fact.
In the past two years, where you feel they have lost interest, we have signed half a dozen players 25 and under. We've also just broken our transfer record on a 22 year old.
Would it be fair to say that if things were going better on the pitch it would mean they were more interested?
People do age though, not much FSG can do on that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure there's any merit to having this conversation for the umpteenth time as you and I do not and seemingly never will agree on the subject but in the last 5 years West Ham, Villa, Tottenham and Arsenal have all outspent us as well as the obvious United and Chelsea.
We turn over more than all of those clubs aside from City and United, significantly more than double what Villa and West Ham turn over, £90m more than Spurs and £150m more than Arsenal.
I've excluded Newcastle from the above as the Saudi ownership have obviously hugely skewed that figure.
So how come they all outspend us? The merits of the signings these clubs have made matters not, this is a discussion about investment not transfer prowess.
Our wage bill is very high as a direct result of the success in recent years, I agree with the point I know you'll make but there are owners out there who can allow us to spend more then FSG do.
"We spend absolutely loads". That's just not quite true when you look at it in the context of Liverpool's financial clout compared to competitors.
Potentially aside from Gakpo, I don't look at any signing in the last 5 seasons and think it was an unnecessary buy (some haven't worked out of course) but we needed more players in other positions to keep us competitive.
Side note, City's ownership are actually quite superb, they are far lower on the net spend table than you'd expect considering the sums they've paid for the likes of Grealish.
posted on 5/1/23
I'm just saying that spending circa £160m in 12 months on players under 25 seems at odds with what you wrote.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s not always down to the ownership, though. The people they employ, that are far better equipped to make judgement on the shape of the squad, are the people that let that happen.
Management can find it difficult to move on from experienced players that have provided them with success. And often want to keep them around for the intangibles that they have on the group.
You can accuse every successful club over the years of doing that. Plenty of them have kept around players that are past their sell by date.
I think the bigger issue is why wasters like Gomez, Ox and Keita have been kept at the club. They’re taking up squad places and wages that could have been put to better use. But instead you signed more forwards.
posted on 5/1/23
Either way spending £163m on players under 25 in the last 12 months doesn't scream uninterested owners wanting the squad to age.
Last paragraph is spot on Darren. The extention we gave Ox looks mental now for example.
We've also let far toomuch money walk out the door for free. Firmino, Keita and Oxwill be more.
posted on 5/1/23
£200m in the last 18 months fwiw, all under 25.
posted on 5/1/23
Yeah I think we discussed it before that you’ve been a bit off with your contract management in recent years. It was usually a strong area for Liverpool, especially in comparison to most of the competition.
I get the argument about underinvestment, though like most fans it gets overplayed, but when you don’t have City’s riches you need to make the most of the revenue you do have - Liverpool have taken their eye off the ball in that department in recent years.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by Boy From The South:. HOUSTON ASTROS WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!!!! (U3979)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robbing Hoody (U6374)
posted 35 minutes ago
I'm only asking but is there anything actually tangible that demonstrates they have lost interest in LFC and if not why do you think this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letting the squad age to the point that it has where we have the joint oldest average age of a starting XI in the PL (that figure excludes Milner fwiw) personally I don't believe an owner with real intent wouldn't have let that happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? That's on Klopp and his team surely. The money provided is similar every single year, £80m - £120m. That's their job, not the playing staff, I doubt they know the first thing about football in fact.
In the past two years, where you feel they have lost interest, we have signed half a dozen players 25 and under. We've also just broken our transfer record on a 22 year old.
Would it be fair to say that if things were going better on the pitch it would mean they were more interested?
People do age though, not much FSG can do on that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
£80m gets you 1 World Class player. 1 signing every summer will not work. £80m won't get us Bellingham, Rice or Enzo Fernandez. Hope we get new and better owners in soon!
posted on 5/1/23
Well the last two seasons we've spent £240m on Konate, Diaz, Nunez and Gakpo plus some others. We also have the 10th highest wage bill in world football.
I think that's pretty good.
It really is getting a bit like Spurs fans on here where we should apparently spend more... just because.
posted on 5/1/23
I think the bigger issue stems from a few seasons back where you didn’t invest adequately when at the top. And this summer clearly ignoring midfield was an error. Now whether that is down to the owners not releasing funds or management being loyal to certain players and, or, patient enough to wait for the players they really want remains to be seen.
I suspect a lot of it is down to the latter. But it shatters the illusion of Liverpool’s management as the bestest of the best, particularly Klopp. Klopp’s got a lot in common with Wenger in that his loyalty and patience can be brilliant for certain things, but there’s a lack of ruthlessness that can leave his squads unprepared at times.
posted on 5/1/23
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
posted on 5/1/23
Also whilst I disagree with the premise of the article, it was well put forward and encouraged debate.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately with City and Newcastle's endless pot of money and Todd Bowhly splashing the cash, the only way we can go is with a similar owner who can give us a war chest each summer.
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.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by 77, 78, 81, 84, 05 and 19. European Royalty �... (U22930)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately with City and Newcastle's endless pot of money and Todd Bowhly splashing the cash, the only way we can go is with a similar owner who can give us a war chest each summer.
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fortunately this isn't true as the club have already demonstrated under FSG's ownership.
posted on 5/1/23
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 30 seconds ago
comment by 77, 78, 81, 84, 05 and 19. European Royalty �... (U22930)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
We were outspending everybody for years and winning very little. When you're below the top teams you have to spend more, both in terms of catching up with those at the top and to get deals done so the top teams don't come in for them. You also take more risks which leads to more spending.
We haven't had to do that in most of the seasons Klopp has been in charge. We make calculated signings, spend big and try to bring in funds to offset it. If we can't get a player we don't panic and get somebody else in, we wait for that player and try again.
This approach has lead to repeatedly challenging for and even winning the PL and CL as well as every other trophies on the way.
Some of the players aged and were replaced or are starting to have less influence and less games and therefore we've spent on younger players to bring in. We're seeing a bit of a transition but should still be competing for everything. This is not through a lack of investment considering we have spent loads and brought younger players in, on top of a squad that competed for every trophy entered last season until the last day of every competition.
Sometimes teams have an off season, it has happened to every team, including City who outspent everyone. Using transfer funding is a very simple minded and lazy outlook on what has went wrong so far this season. Spending money does not stop our defence being on the half way line with opposition players repeatedly being put through on goal with one pass. Spending £80m or whatever on a striker does not guarantee 30 goals in the first season.
Things take time, things can go wrong and things can be fixed going forward. Throwing money at everything doesn't solve all your problems, despite what the spoilt modern fan believes.
The FSG years have been the best of my life so far. If/when they sell I'd like similar owners rather than ones with an endless pot of money.
Although many football fans don't actually understand the roles and structure of the people employeed by the owners and seem to think the owners of the club make decisions on everything. Times have changed from that approach and we finally went with the modern approach we'd lacked for nearly three decades, which began the massive improvement in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately with City and Newcastle's endless pot of money and Todd Bowhly splashing the cash, the only way we can go is with a similar owner who can give us a war chest each summer.
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fortunately this isn't true as the club have already demonstrated under FSG's ownership.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We used to have just City and Chelsea to deal with. We now have Newcastle and United who will surely get better owners than the Glazers. Just imagine how brilliant it would be to be able to see the best players in the world pull on the famous red jersey. Can't see thst ever happening with FSG. Just my opinion though 🤷♂️
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.
———
If your midfield/attack can’t do that then you don’t push up to compensate, you drop deeper. Otherwise you are ripe for counter attacks, as Liverpool show.
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.
Page 1 of 2