Of course, you''re right.A good manager can make a huge difference. Klopp is, undoubtedly, a very good manager. But you have to wonder how quick he can change things. Alex Ferguson may have proved himself one of the all time greats, but in his early years he was under immense pressure and nearly lost his job on at least one occasion. That was at a time when United were on a barron run, similar to Liverpool's current run.
However, despite the barron years and even a trip to the second tier, United still had huge support. That, along with the fact that the cash explosion in English football hadn't happened yet, meant that United were still able to compete for the best players of the time. Whiteside, Robson, McGrath and more would have walked into the Liverpool team.
The footballing landscape is very different now in England. More clubs have more money. Even the likes of West Ham have the money to compete for more than decent players. Payet and Mahrez at Leicester are evidence of that. You then have the four big money super powers. City and Chelsea have obviously had their influxes of cash, Arsenal have been very prudent for years and are now a genuinely rich club and United are well, United.
I think Klopp is good enough to deliver a league title at Liverpool, if given enough time. But that's the problem. Time is not a luxury afforded to managers any more. So it all depends on what the Liverpool fans and board consider to be success and how long they are willing to wait to win a league title. I certainly don't think four years is enough.
So in my opinion, for Klopp to win a league title with Liverpool he will have to be still in the job four years from now. So what kind of success would be needed to keep in the job for that long. Would the Liverpool board be happy with consistently being in the top four? Would that keep him in a job for more than four years? I think it would. But even that task won't be easy. Consistently being in the top four at the expense of Chelsea, United, City or Arsenal is an incredibly difficult task. He can do it once, no doubt. Take the season before last for example, when United dropped out. But if any of those four clubs drop out of the top four, they have the ability to spend huge amounts of cash to ensure it was an anomoly. To be a top four team consistently will be nearly as difficult as winning a league.
If he manages that I think his job will be safe beyond his current contract. If he doesn't, what will keep him in a job? A couple of cup wins? Or if he fails to make Liverpool a top four team on a consistent basis, should he lose his job? Looking solely at the finances of it all (I know it's horrible, but that's the way football has gone), is expecting Liverpool to be a top four team every year fair or achievable?
Scolari came as a world cup winner to Chelsea and failed.
AVB failed at Spurs and Chelsea as well. There is always the chance that it won't work for whatever reason.
I would expect him to get a 5th or 6th place this season. They should challenge for Top4 though if Chelsea don't fire Mourinho (here's me thinking that Mourinho will only prolong the plight.) And the latter point may have been the nail in the coffin for Rodgers. The chief execs would probably aim for top 4 now with Chelsea seemingly out of the race. They probably saw Chelsea's problem as a great opportunity. So there was a good chance that they would reach it anyway, but they didn't trust him enough. And looking especially at their Europa League performance quite rightly so.