How is winning the tie against Shaktar 7-0 an inconsistent result against a minnow? That's one truely mind-boggling opinion.
Klopp Confirmed Liverpool Manager
- Thread starter RedMachine03
- Start date
- Status
I'm really surprised how much Liverpool have failed to build a brand around their success.
Come on now, @Sarni is spot on.
They have greater cash reserves :
They have a greater revenue stream :
Every season Arsenal qualifies for the Champions League, and Liverpool doesn't makes the former even stronger from a financial standpoint. Plus, the Emirates is almost paid for and the debt is at a healthy level, and it is arguably the best stadium in the league after Old Trafford, while Anfield needs an expansion which will further affect Liverpool's ability to spend.
Oh, I wasn't saying he was wrong - just wanted to know background. It seems kind of mental that they make so much less given their historical success.
Drew 0-0 away and won 7-0 home to shaktar. Lost 3-1 to Porto away and won 6-1 home. That's what I mean by inconsistent. My point isn't to insult bayern or pep but I don't see how he would take city several levels up. That's all.
Maybe you should stop with totally illogical comparisons then? We've reached the semifinals twice under Guardiola without too much trouble, topped the groups without any problems and lost only one out of 8 games in the first knockout rounds and quarterfinals. Obviously we fecked up against Real and sadly suffered from a crazy number of injuries against Barca (still won the 2nd leg against the eventual winner in a CL semifinal). If you think that's City's level at the moment, you watch a different game than I do.
Neither Shaktar or Porto are minnows. Both have had squads and players in the past few years that can beat any of the top teams on their day. A bit unfair to judge Bayern and Pep based on those games when they went on to win convincingly.
Stop with the super hyperbolic nonsense you have been spouting in this thread about Pep going to City and the bold part happening when there is zero evidence of that. Grow a pair and think things through before putting them here. What absolute bs!
You think City is the only team which plays attractive football or their academy is better than ours? Who put this stupid idea in your head? Just imagining things up and posting one crap after another is all that you are doing.
City might not even make it out of the group again this season..Sevilla have fantastic European pedigree and will kick on sooner or later..Pep might not necessarily have reached the expectations at Bayern, but this is because those are to win the tournament each season..something City havent come close to achieving at all.
All this big name managers they are being linked with, reminds me of when they got back into the UCL and all the big name players that where supposedly going to sign.
Signing players required agreement from the trio Klopp, Zorc (DoF) and Watzke (CEO), no outvoting possible. Apparently, they have had some controversial debates but in the end, decisions were unanimously, and hardly anything ever made it into the media.
It's relative. On their day they can win sure but among the knockout teams they were amongst the ''minnows".
i wasn't comparing city and bayern. I was replying to someone who said pep to city would be a disaster for United and he would take them several levels up. Which I don't believe he would. I brought up the bayern results only to show that he is going to struggle away in Europe too. And the home atmosphere at bayern is drastically different from city too. Anyway this is all off topic. Peace. Sorry if I offended you which wasn't my intention
Don't worry, you didn't
. I still don't get the point though. If Pep joined City (which I doubt he will) and lifted them to the level Bayern is at the moment (which is no easy feat to achieve), City obviously would be a huge huge problem for United, both in the league and in Europe. It's much more unlikely that Klopp could transform Liverpool into a team of that caliber.I don't think Klopp will get even close to that type of relationship and control at Liverpool and is one of the reasons why he wouldn't be good for Pool. A big part of why Klopp was so successful at Dortmund was due to the special relationships he had within the club and with the management, built on trust and communication. He wouldn't get even a degree of that at Liverpool and I think he would struggle without those opinions and control around him.
They are still good sides. Once you reach the knockout stages there are no easy fixtures. If either of those teams were in the PL they would both be pushing for top four and when in top form could be most teams, especially considering Bayern were in poor form going into the first leg against Porto. Its irrelevant anyway as Bayern deservedly won comfortably by thrashing both teams in question. Its Peps performance against the top teams that should be questioned not weaker teams who they routinely thrash.
I can't recall that Klopp has ever revealed his preference or love for a partcular English club but perhaps some journos got carried away when he touched the sign at Anfield before the friendly (before last season).
not sure the finance gap is as big as you think. Fenway group have deep pockets and Rodgers has spent around £300m no?
The thing Klopp would bring is the element of players wanting to come to L'pool to play for him (something Fergie used to have for us and not sure Louie does). If Klopp does go, can easily see Reus joining them.
I don't see that coming, in fact, I'd say the opposite that Reus would welcome proving himself under another manager or head coach than Klopp.
I'd agree though that van Gaal may not have the pulling power as some other managers have and SAF definitely had.
Well Van Gaal brought you Schweinsteiger and Memphis. Also he raised the chances to sign Müller and Robben from 0% to <1%.
He has a very good reputation in Germany and Holland.
Not really sure that's true. We got schweini and depay only because of our manager(though schweini may have been guided by United too. Klopp has around the same influence as lvg imo
Don't worry, you didn't
No my point is he had a job of maintaining the level at bayern. Bayern were in finals for 3 of the 4 previous seasons. So you could argue that bayern were already at the level they were in(maybe even higher).
But at City, the situation is different. He needs to improve a lot to even get to half of bayern's level there. Which is why I don't think he will make it such a nightmare for United if pep does go to city (even if, as you said, it is highly unlikely that he will manage them)
Whereas at Liverpool, they kind of have players to challenge for a top 4. With the right manager they can get way better results than what they are managing. It's similar to how ozil signing galvanised arsenal to an extent. More than his performance it's the lift that was brought to the other players that was key for them for 4-5 months.
Both the situations imo are way different. City need to reach Bayern Real level whereas Liverpool needs to reach the current arsenal/United level. The latter is easier to achieve is what I feel
That part about klopp yes I agree because at Liverpool most of the owners are non football related. I always wondered how is it that very few of Liverpool's signings were successful irrespective of the manager.
And let's just agree to disagree there regarding minnows
The gap between top 4 and Liverpool at the moment is still quite a big one. The thing is, we don't need top 4 to get into the UCL. A manager like Klopp would get us firing in the Europa League though and with his European experience, I believe we would go far in the competition under him. There are some very good sides in the Europa League this season and more will join in the knockout stages from the UCL. I'd rather have Klopp in charge for European games where we have a much greater chance of winning it than Rodgers who is lacking that vital experience.
Sevilla haven't kicked on for eons.
They're a successful version of Tottenham. Their best players are constantly poached by bigger clubs, just Seville use them to actually win trophies first.
Oh I agree, I was just expressing my doubts at the idea Sevilla will ever transcend their Europa League success (in the league or CL)
Don't agree with those saying that Klopp won't join Liverpool. I think he'll instantly take the offer, however the reports of them not considering Klopp is absolutely bonkers if true. He'll be a great fit for them.
Definitely. The reality is entirely different to the wishful speculation.
Imagine they get Gary Monk. Replacing their own manager with the bloke who replaced him at Swansea, that'll be a proverbial kick in the balls.
The financial disparity argument is valid - as I said earlier - on paper. But in practice it doesn't work out as simply as "top four money wise = top four in the table". Liverpool nearly won the league only a couple of seasons ago. The Premier League is a bit chaotic - and I don't see that changing very soon (it's the same this season).
Overall, the logic is obviously sound, don't get me wrong - the money bags teams will be there or thereabouts almost by default, that's the sad nature of modern football. But in the particular case of Liverpool, this isn't that compelling an argument. Because Liverpool aren't that far off being a money bags team themselves.
Hypothetically, Klopp could boost, motivate and coach them to a great season - which could (or would, I dare say, if the chaotic nature of the PL is to be trusted for a little while longer) earn them a CL place at worst. And then the question becomes to what extent they're capable of building from there. They were hopelessly incapable of doing so after the Great Slip, but that was Rodgers. If we presuppose that with Klopp in charge they're a much more attractive destination per default, then the picture is quite different - whether we like it or not.
Liverpool have the fan base, the basic wealth and the sponsor pull to build on actual success (finishing in the top four IS success in their present state) with the right people making the decisions both on and off the pitch. In that sense, they're in a different category from any other team outside the top four/money bags bracket. You can't compare them to Everton or Spurs - they have a much larger potential than these clubs if you consider their world wide fan base alone.
Overall, the logic is obviously sound, don't get me wrong - the money bags teams will be there or thereabouts almost by default, that's the sad nature of modern football. But in the particular case of Liverpool, this isn't that compelling an argument. Because Liverpool aren't that far off being a money bags team themselves.
Hypothetically, Klopp could boost, motivate and coach them to a great season - which could (or would, I dare say, if the chaotic nature of the PL is to be trusted for a little while longer) earn them a CL place at worst. And then the question becomes to what extent they're capable of building from there. They were hopelessly incapable of doing so after the Great Slip, but that was Rodgers. If we presuppose that with Klopp in charge they're a much more attractive destination per default, then the picture is quite different - whether we like it or not.
Liverpool have the fan base, the basic wealth and the sponsor pull to build on actual success (finishing in the top four IS success in their present state) with the right people making the decisions both on and off the pitch. In that sense, they're in a different category from any other team outside the top four/money bags bracket. You can't compare them to Everton or Spurs - they have a much larger potential than these clubs if you consider their world wide fan base alone.
Any ideas as to why they're not, apparently, considering Klopp?
Poor Michael Laudrup...
Not necessarily win the thing..I mean actually improve from how they arer playing this season which is below their usual standard..Sevilla of last season for example could give City lots of problems, especially in European competition where City really struggle.
Let them dream though..they love that...its an escape for them..they need one badly.
You're making my day infinitely worse
I may just start following you around...I really want them to stick with Brendtan. I hope they win their next few games to given them a false sense of security and then they give him a whopping new 10 year deal.
I think they are worried in the FO that they´d actually have to work hard, if Klopp came aboard. Ancelotti is a bit older and laid back. They give him material and he works with it. Klopp´s approach would probably be much more aggressive and invasive. And their FO seems more like "Sure I can do it on a cold night at Stoke, but feck me I´m not flying to Krasnodar to scout some 21 year old RB."
If they aren't, then the only sensible explanation is that he simply isn't available even for preliminary talks. He did say, apparently, that he would take a full season off - and then consider his options. Perhaps he isn't talking to anyone right now - just enjoying his sabbatical, grooving to heavy metal on the beach, or whatever it is he does for kicks.
I can't see any reason why they wouldn't consider him if he's an option. While he's no doubt a gamble of sorts, they'd be mad not to make that gamble. If they'd rather go for Monk, say, then they're an unimaginative lot.
If they're considering Ancelotti (as has been rumoured too), then they're plain unrealistic. I'd be shocked if he was interested in that gig.
Liverpool should do all they can to secure Klopp. He's probably the best man for the job.
Ancelotti would.
He's managed Madrid, PSG, Milan, Juve and Chelsea. There's not really many big clubs left for him besides Bayern. He could also possibly return to Milan. But Milan financially are weaker than Liverpool at the moment.
I wasn't contradicting, I quoted you as I wanted to add my 2 cents and quoting you made it clear I was talking about Sevilla
Well Van Gaal brought you Schweinsteiger and Memphis. Also he raised the chances to sign Müller and Robben from 0% to <1%.
He has a very good reputation in Germany and Holland.
Obviously, I haven't made myself clear; let me try and re-phrase/explain. There are certain players like Schweinsteiger or Depay who apparently like or at least don't mind working with van Gaal (again). There are others, with previous first hand exposure to van Gaal's philosophy - as a hypothetical example think Miroslav Klose - who wouldn't come at all.
Furthermore, I'm convinced that players who are good enough to chose from a couple of options from elite clubs take the reigning manager or head coach into consideration. Some of those players may prefer another coach/experience than van Gaal. Such a preference is not limited to van Gaal, of course. I doubt, for example, that every player is fond of working under Mourinho.
My main point was that just because Klopp will go to Liverpool, it doesn't mean that the chances of Reus joining Pool will increase, but this is what the user seems to have implied; at least that's what I understood. I'd rather say the opposite: Klopp at LFC would further minimize the already tiny chance of Marco going there.
Edit: OutlawGER, why do you think LvG has a good reputation as manager or head coach among German players?
Last edited:
WTF are you on about? The words about City getting ahead in terms of their academy I actually got them from this forum. That situation is actually alarm bells to me.
Don't put words in my mouth. No, City's not the only one. But they're United's rival in Manchester, and them getting superior football on top of their superior academy is a worry for me, even if its not to you.
You can go ahead and act as if they're not a threat to United. I don't give a feck.
Hyperbole? I can use whatever words I want to express my opinion. What are you going to do? Play the big bully round here?. Don't bother. You're not impressing anyone.
Last edited:
Pep going to City will kill us. That is the crazy hyperbole you have used, twice. That is the one I said was nonsense. Cannot understand how thick are you to not grasp that.
- Status