Really though, who says that? Feels like you are arguing against no one here because our league finishes are there for all to see.
Klopp to leave Liverpool at the end of the season
- Thread starter RonaldoVII
- Start date
There's a bit of a narrative around Klopp suggesting as much, rather than anyone outright stating it.
However, the post I responded to there literally said "He lost the league on multiple occasions to complete cheats". While twice is technically "multiple occasions", it's also the same number of occasions as a dysfunctional, underperforming Manchester United.
Someone responded to that post with "Klopp would have had 3 more titles for sure" if City weren't in the picture, which simply isn't true.
The league finishes are there for all to see, but they're often ignored in favour of this idea that Klopp has been fighting hammer and tongs with Pep and City. You only have to look at the recent hyping up of their "rivalry" on Sky Sports to see as much.
So he would have had 3 or 4 titles overall in 8 years, depending on how things swung if City weren't there, at a club that operated like a 'normal' big club in terms of finances. Seems pretty extraordinary to me. Also had pretty bad injury issues for some seasons too. I don't get the point of trying to downplay him as a manager.
You're on a Manchester United forum, of course people are going to downplay anything to do with Liverpool.
A lot have acknowledged that he's clearly among the best ever to manage in the league. He's top five for me, Fergie top, Wenger a distant second, then you can take your pick from Mourinho, Klopp and Guardiola for the next three spots depending on how much you want to caveat Jose and Pep's success with the obvious financial doping.
That narrative is also fuleled by the fact that we lost to them twice in a thrilling and unprecedented way, while you guys were never in a title race with them after Aguerooo as far as I can remember.
2nd is 2nd, of course, but it does help that narrative. People actually remember our title races with them because it were proper title races.
I don't disagree with why they're remembered, but the fact of the matter is that he hasn't actually made the league the two-horse race it's portrayed as.
No he hasn't, especially not in the league. But he's also not as inconsistent as some (I think you included) make him out to be by solely focusing on the league.
I think (haven't checked this) that he's finished top four or took us to a cup final in like 7 of the 9 seasons he's been in charge? That's a very good track record and one I would've signed for beforehand.
That's decent but not outstanding. You could probably get that record from having Conte in charge.
Does that record show consistency? Notoriously inconsistent Manchester United have managed that.
2014/15 - 4th
2015/16 - 5th, FA Cup winners
2016/17 - 6th, League Cup and Europa League winners
2017/18 - 2nd
2018/19 - 6th
2019/20 - 3rd
2020/21 - 2nd, Europa League finalists
2021/22 - 6th
2022/23 - 3rd, League Cup winners, FA Cup finalists
Which proves more that United have not been as terrible as many fans pretend than that Klopp's Liverpool haven't been consistent. The difference is Klopp having two amazing PL seasons and one CL title, United never peaked as high in the last decade. Besides that the club performed relatively similar. Things never went so bad for Klopp that he had to be sacked, and sometimes he made his team click in a way we didn't see it happen at United.
That's a matter of standards, surely?
You can't present Klopp as a constant presence in the PL title picture, only missing out because of Pep and City, but then judge his consistency on the basis of being a team looking for a spot in the top four.
Klopp's greatest achievement was to reverse Liverpool's fortunes in the big picture, bringing them back to having an undisputed seat at the top table after a point when many people had genuinely begun to wonder if they would ever be viewed as one of the top clubs in the world again.
I think one PL (if they don't win this year) and one CL will always be seen as a slightly disappointing return given the quality of the side. People focus on the competition with Pep and City depriving them of two PL titles when they had points totals that would have been champions in any other season. But you also have to say that his European final record was disappointing. In particular, Liverpool really should have beat Real Madrid the second time and that second CL would have had a big impact on his resume, maybe even more than winning an extra PL or two. It was more common in older eras, but the list of more modern (ie, post 1990) managers who have won multiple European Cups/Champions League with the same team is very small (Carlo, Zidane, SAF, Pep at Barca, del Bosque, Sacchi) and represents some of the most iconic sides in modern football.
I think one PL (if they don't win this year) and one CL will always be seen as a slightly disappointing return given the quality of the side. People focus on the competition with Pep and City depriving them of two PL titles when they had points totals that would have been champions in any other season. But you also have to say that his European final record was disappointing. In particular, Liverpool really should have beat Real Madrid the second time and that second CL would have had a big impact on his resume, maybe even more than winning an extra PL or two. It was more common in older eras, but the list of more modern (ie, post 1990) managers who have won multiple European Cups/Champions League with the same team is very small (Carlo, Zidane, SAF, Pep at Barca, del Bosque, Sacchi) and represents some of the most iconic sides in modern football.
Thought it was including pre Prem as well.He had an amazing start in the PL, he won the fecking thing
Twice? same as us.
The premier league has only been around for 30 years so of course he’s among its better managers along with Sir Alex, Wenger, Jose, Pep etc but when the gap between number 1 and Klopp is 12 friggin league titles “one of the best ever” as if they’re anywhere in the same stratosphere loses all meaning.
Liverpool had amazing >90 point totals that, without City, would still have made them undisputed winners. Its very hard to construct any kind of counterfactual in which another PL club acts somewhat differently with City out of the equation and challenges that level.
If City hadn't existed, I don't think we can confidently say United would win a league on 74 points, a total lower than any other PL winner. Maybe not even on 81 points, given two other clubs were close to that number and everybody knew from about November that they were all playing for 2nd place. Other clubs would act differently, both in terms of trying to build squads to compete for the title that season (something that most saw as essentially impossible with City around) and in terms of how much they prioritized the league vs other competitions during the season. Maybe United wins but who really knows.
Exactly this. Big difference in finishing one point behandling fighting for the title until the last fixture, as opposed to finishing >10 points behind and basically fighting for second. Not really comparable.
This works when you ignore context, so feel free if that makes you feel better.
What context would that be?
That Klopp finished 21, 27, 25, 1, 17, 1 and 22 points behind the eventual champions in years he did not win the league?
Or with the added context of the fact that he only finished second twice in that whole timeframe (the two single-point seasons behind City) and therefore, nowhere near the duopoly the Scouse-lovers in the media want to portray the rivalry as?
This works both ways though. Without the target of City motoring through a season at a seemingly unstoppable pace, we can't say with any certainty that Liverpool would have achieved their 90+ runners up totals. They might have taken their foot off the gas, rotated more, or crumbled under the pressure of leading the pack.
Their runners up seasons were certainly more impressive than ours, but they didn't get an extra prize for them, and they had the same number as us in that timeframe.
The context that finishing 1 point behind City with ridiculous points totals is far more impressive than our 12 and 19 point gaps. But of course you already knew that.
They don't get an extra prize but those were legitimately great sides - by point totals, goal differential, XG, just the overall quality of play - that just lost out in two of the great title races of the PL era.
United's two second place sides were basically run-of-the-mill top four PL sides that were pretty good but miles away from anything resembling greatness and just happened to finish 2nd. They're really not comparable to the Liverpool teams in any meaningful way beyond the simple point of finishing second.
I did but the nuance I’m highlighting is Klopp has only finished inside 10 points to the eventual champions twice in nine seasons.
Every other season (bar their solitary league title win), he finished a country mile behind the eventual champions: an average of 22.4 points separated Klopp from the league winner in seasons where he didn’t finish second to City (five seasons).
That is an indefensible statistic and one which obliterates any notion of him being in the same stratosphere as Ferguson, an equal to Wenger, Mourinho or Guardiola, or as some mentalists are claiming, the greatest Premier League manager of all time.
The two ‘close-run’ title tilts against City have clouded a lot of people’s judgements on this issue but I think Klopp’s ‘other’ seasons are far more indicative of his legacy and where it places him in the Premier League pantheon. You simply cannot ignore those five appalling seasons when he’s only managed in the league for nine. Ferguson and Wenger barely had five poor seasons in total between them and both had 20+ Premier League campaigns, for instance. It’s utter lunacy to suggest Klopp belongs in their company.
Last edited:
Still no sign of @el_loco_bielsa since Sunday. Hope you're doing okay bro.
And how do we know Brandt wouldn't have succeeded in his system?
If he had more resources he would pick better players and not players that will fit the budget
This is probably the most sensible Liverpool-related post you've ever made, well done.
Hard to disagree with the points you've made. For what it's worth, I don't need Klopp to be in the same league as Pep, Ferguson, Wenger or Mourinho to appreciate the job he's done at Liverpool. He's made us regularly competitive again.
There're plenty of things that bring him down (I think he's overly emotional and this negatively impacts the team in high pressure situations as one example (finals)). Nothing wrong with admitting that.
You can't go "other clubs would act differently" to suggest United may not have won the league in the seasons they finished runners up to City, but then ignore the other side of that coin with Liverpool (or indeed United) in that they may have acted differently. All we have to go on is that we finished second to City as many times as they did. I agree, their runners up seasons were more impressive, but if you're extrapolating that to mean Liverpool would have been champions, you have to do the same to United.
At this point, I think people are talking past each other a bit, but my point (and I think the point of others) isn't that Liverpool weren't impressive in 2018/19 and 2021/22, but that Klopp's legacy is upheld by a false narrative relating to his non-existent rivalry with Pep/City.
We've all seen the Sky Sports (and other outlets) bigging up this supposed City/Liverpool, Pep/Klopp rivalry, but it simply hasn't existed. From a Liverpool perspective, he'd have done an excellent job even if his legacy was simply reestablishing them as one of England's better sides; the fact that he's managed to win a league title and a Champions League just elevates that further. However, within the wider context of the Premier League's history, he's simply not in the conversation when it comes Ferguson and even Wenger, and it takes heavily caveating Pep's time at City with the financial doping to put him in the conversation there. If he can't get them over the line this season, he'll leave Liverpool with as many Premier League titles as Kenny Dalglish, Carlo Ancelotti, Roberto Mancini, Manuel Pellegrini, Claudio Ranieri and Antonio Conte, and with as many Champions Leagues as Rafael Benitez, Roberto di Matteo and Thomas Tuchel.
He couldn't have wished for a better environment to establish Liverpool as the second team in England, even if you accept that City are essentially an insurmountable force.
Manchester United have been in turmoil, bouncing in and out of the top four seemingly every other season, Chelsea have had a managerial merry-go-round revolving so fast that they've ended up giving Frank Lampard the job twice, Arsenal finished in the top four for the first time since 2016 just last season, and Spurs completely shat the bed after enjoying a period of stability under Pochettino. Since Klopp was hired as Liverpool manager, (in at least some capacity) Manchester United have had six different managers, Chelsea have had nine (ten if you count Lampard twice), Arsenal have had four, and Spurs have had seven (eight if you count Ryan Mason's two stints as interim/caretaker), and yet he's conspired to finish third (behind Solskjaer) and fifth (behind Arteta, ten Hag and Howe) after making Liverpool English and European champions.
Ultimately, those third and fifth place finishes (particularly the latter) post-title win are big black marks on his record.
"Hey!! Pool came 2nd twice. They could have won two more if not for City"
"Just like United who came 2nd twice"
"No. Don't look at positions. We need to look at the points that 2nd placed teams scored"
"Ok. Let us look at the points Pool got when United came 2nd"
"No. Don't look at the points of those seasons. They came below United on points only because City were there"
"But City were there for United too in those seasons"
"No. Dont look at that. Look at how the teams play. The beauty of it"
The constant need to shift goalposts to prop up Klopp is hilarious, especially on a United forum.
"Just like United who came 2nd twice"
"No. Don't look at positions. We need to look at the points that 2nd placed teams scored"
"Ok. Let us look at the points Pool got when United came 2nd"
"No. Don't look at the points of those seasons. They came below United on points only because City were there"
"But City were there for United too in those seasons"
"No. Dont look at that. Look at how the teams play. The beauty of it"
The constant need to shift goalposts to prop up Klopp is hilarious, especially on a United forum.
nailed it.Overall I agree with your points on his bad seasons, even though there is some context to some of them. I personally think he's made Liverpool the most exciting team to watch in the league since his arrival(painful to admit), I think he's (of course) under SAF by a distance, Wenger obviously had longevity and some very good highs, but a lot of mediocrity as well, I'd probably have him on the same level as him.
Salah had scored 6 in 16, 14 in 34 and and 15 in 31 in his time in Serie A before signing for Liverpool. Obviously it's to Klopp's credit that he translated that (and improved upon it) in the Premier League, but considering Brandt has yet to hit double figures in Bundesliga, I don't think it's a massive stretch to say he wouldn't have been remotely as effective as Salah.
I've also seen it reported that Salah was actually fourth on Klopp's list (although I can't remember who the other two were).
I think this is where people are talking past each other in this thread, and is something I alluded to in a post just after you made this one. He's done an excellent job, particularly from a Liverpool perspective, but that doesn't necessarily equate to putting him among the absolute best the Premier League has seen (which isn't necessarily being argued for either).
2009/10 - 7th
2010/11 - 6th
2011/12 - 8th
2012/13 - 7th
2013/14 - 2nd
2014/15 - 6th
That title charge in 2013/14 looks very much the outlier there. When you consider that Rodgers was averaging 1.5 points per game when he was sacked in 2015/16, and Klopp only managed to improve that to 1.6 points per game and guide you to 8th, it's quite obvious that the job he had on his hands was a large one, and a lot of people (me included) expected Klopp's time at Liverpool to end sooner rather than later. The support he received from the club has obviously been crucial, but to follow 2015/16 with 4th, 4th, 2nd, 1st, 3rd, 2nd, 5th (and then 1st-3rd), reaching three CL finals and winning one, is a remarkable turnaround, from a Liverpool perspective.
For what it's worth, if you're ranking Premier League managers, I think Ferguson is in a league of his own, and Wenger in another one after that. Third to fifth is Guardiola, Mourinho, Klopp, with Klopp potentially moving up depending on how much you want the financial doping to detract from Guardiola's and Mourinho's respective successes (some might include Wenger here, but I disagree due to his longevity). After that you can let the other league winning managers scrap it out among themselves, before moving onto the best of the rest.
I know you said you don't necessarily care for comparisons to Ferguson, but two things he excelled at were keeping the motivation there after winning, and using a near miss to motivate the team to a higher level the next season. He missed out by a point in 94/95, 97/98, and 2009/10, and goal difference in 2011/12, and won the title in each of the following seasons. He followed winning the treble with two more league titles, and winning a Premier League and Champions League double with a further two league titles. Klopp won two titles with Dortmund, then fell off 25 and 19 points behind Bayern (and 15 and 10 points off his own highest total) in the two following seasons, before the wheels fully came off. The run from 2017/18 through 2019/20 was excellent, but fell off massively in 2020/21. Bounced back with the quadruple hunt in 2021/22, missed out on the two biggest prizes, and dropped off massively in 2022/23.
I think that does a massive disservice to Wenger. He didn't just have longevity, but also remarkable consistency.
Arsenal's record pre-Wenger:
1991/92 - 4th
1992/93 - 10th
1993/94 - 4th
1994/95 - 12th
1995/96 - 5th
Arsenal's record with Wenger:
1996/97 - 3rd
1997/98 - 1st
1998/99 - 2nd (by a point)
1999/00 - 2nd
2000/01 - 2nd
2001/02 - 1st
2002/03 - 2nd
2003/04 - 1st (unbeaten)
2004/05 - 2nd
It dropped off after that, but they didn't actually finish outside of the top four until 2016/17, despite the emergence of City and Spurs to establish the "big six" we hear about today.
As a man utd fan it hates me to say what a fantastic manager, didn't have the money to compete with city but from day one he knew what he wanted. Talented pacy wingers and and excellent full backs. He only signed players that were absolute work horses. The business they did last Summer replacing the midfield and getting rid of older players is something we seriously need to look at. Scott would of been gone the first season under Klopp or Pep and casemeiro would of never happend under those two managers unless on a 12 month deal.
If anyone says he isn't a good manager need to cop on. There midfield went to utter shit last season and sorted it in one transfer window. Our midfield has been absolute chronic for the last 11 years. Theres a big reason why they won a champions league and premier league trophy and we have nothing.
If anyone says he isn't a good manager need to cop on. There midfield went to utter shit last season and sorted it in one transfer window. Our midfield has been absolute chronic for the last 11 years. Theres a big reason why they won a champions league and premier league trophy and we have nothing.
Last edited:
Y.NWA.
Is anyone saying he isn't a good manager?
Also, surely he has to actually shoulder some of the blame for allowing their midfield to get into the state it was in last season? Milner, Henderson and Thiago were all north of 30, the latter being a perma-crock. Fabinho and Oxlade-Chamberlain were about to turn 30, the latter being a perma-crock. Naby Keita was also a perma-crock. After that, you're looking at Curtis Jones and Stefan Bajcetic. You can't have a midfield heavily reliant on workrate and enter a season with that age-profile and injury proneness, and be surprised when it goes a bit tits up.
It's like when he was getting excused for that shite run with the defensive injuries when he chose to enter a season with Gomez (injury prone), Matip (injury prone) and Nat Phillips (shite) as his only senior centre-backs not called Virgil van Dijk.
I personally think it's a lot harder to have that kind of consistency in the last 10 years vs the 90s.
He's clearly done wonders there and been unlucky to come up against a roided up City outfit.
While he hasn't had City money, it shouldn't be ignored that the super questionable size of that Coutinho fee allowed them the room to get in world records at the time for keeper and centre back. You can't claim poverty when breaking the world record twice in one short space of time.
While he hasn't had City money, it shouldn't be ignored that the super questionable size of that Coutinho fee allowed them the room to get in world records at the time for keeper and centre back. You can't claim poverty when breaking the world record twice in one short space of time.
Brought a tear to my eye. Just wanted to say, some ability you have in typing when both of your hands are busy in firmly greasing his cock. YAWN.
I think the managerial merry-go-rounds at United, Chelsea, Spurs and (to a lesser extent) Arsenal mean that Klopp's time in the Premier League has been a perfect environment to establish a top two, in the exact same way Wenger managed with Arsenal.
Frankly, I think it's bollocks to suggest that a team that finished with 97 and 99 points in the previous two seasons should have had difficulty finishing with 75 points the season after, or that a team that was chasing the quadruple and finished with 92 points should have had difficulty finishing with more than 76 points the season after.
I'm not suggesting he gets within a point of City every time, but the drop offs have been massive, and shown wild inconsistency.
Xg?
I’ve seen it all