If the results have been good then we would all be here singing his praises.
In 2 or 3 years time few people will still care about what happened this season but we will certainly be looking at a better squad of footballers
This may be an unpopular opinion but I think Ole should stay. He's been very unlucky with injuries to be fair. I think his ideas to build this squad are the correct ones but he needs some time. There is no quick fix for this this mess.
What the actual feck is this. The excuses and attempted rationale for Ole are mind bending at this stage.
If Farke had better results Norwich wouldn't be bottom and if Pep had better results City would be top. Would all the 'Ole in brigade' drop the charade, he's utterly woeful and out of his depth. While sticking to views can be commendable, in this case it's downright arrogance and/or delusions of the highest order.
Summary: Ole got a squad, spent $150m+ to make it worse and yet it is somebody else's fault. Got it!So you're gonna blame Ole for those players leaving ? I think it needs to be remembered that the Ole came in by Christmas of the previous year. By then the club was in shambles (worst state I'v ever seen the dressing room ever) and they royally screwed the contract situation with Herrera. Fellaini and Valencia basically retired and tbf they were coming to the end of their professional careers at least at this level.
Ole never hinted he wanted to sell Lukaku during or before the summer, he clearly wanted out since he'd have to compete with Rashy and Martial and no longer had the undroppable status he did during Mourinho's reign. That was unacceptable at the time, we all saw how he injured himself with his first touch. I agree that was also down to him not having any support but again that's down to recruitment in the previous years,.
And yes we only got 3 players in the summer but are you telling me, he a player who was part of a legendary team thought 3 people were enough for that squad, that broke down to bits at the end of the season ? Cmon dude that's laughable, the club is trying to take a stance that they aren't willing to pay premium anymore which essentially cost us missing most of our targets and delaying the Maguire deal until we had to pay over the odds and also why the Bruno deal is in limbo right now. But still I can see all 3 of them playing a big part in our success in the future, if it all goes right. Not a huge stride but definitely players who can be part of the rebuild.
A rebuild for us meant kicking out deadwood, which I believe most of the players you mentioned were, bringing in the youth and building on from there with the players we need for our style of play. This isn't a band-aid fix that will magically work with one transfer window and that too a window where we only got 3 players when we needed at least 6. And that is totally on the board and their screw ups over the past years.
Look, I don't know if Ole is the right man in the long term. I do know you can't judge him or any other manager with this squad, they'd all end up the same Poch, Pep, Mourinho whoever. What matters is the decisions we make now and that it follows a plan. Honestly, look at that squad and tell me that's not a mid-table team
You must even admit yourself that the above is based on pure wishful thinking right?
I think it isn't that unpopular. The haters and clueless people are just louder. They will think changing manager every 2 years will finally turn into something good.This may be an unpopular opinion but I think Ole should stay. He's been very unlucky with injuries to be fair. I think his ideas to build this squad are the correct ones but he needs some time. There is no quick fix for this this mess.
It's fear, mate.
It's fear that we've tried other methods and all have failed, so if this one fails, we are doomed.
Not airing your grievances in public doesn’t make you a yes man to be fair though. I’d hope he’s putting pressure on behind the scenes, which is preferable to what Mourinho was doing.
I keep seeing this but I don't quite get it. Sanchez literally contributed nothing. He was completely useless in basically every way. You can put any youngster there instead of him and they won't do any worse.Sanchez and Smalling are the strange ones. No problem with Sanchez leaving but we needed a replacement first.
What people love about the three year rebuild and why so invested in it is because it puts an end date o this mess. It’s something to cling to, the end is sight.
Problem is it’s a CEO who has presided over complete failure and continues to mess everything up and a manager who never should have been employed overseeing it. That’s the hit you have to ignore if you want to back it.
I keep seeing this but I don't quite get it. Sanchez literally contributed nothing. He was completely useless in basically every way. You can put any youngster there instead of him and they won't do any worse.
He scored 5 goals in 45 games. Three Premier League goals in 32 games. That isn't a contribution that must be replaced. He's not missed at all: we have enough bodies to play in his position. Most of those aren't very good, true, but neither was Sánchez. He was terrible, in fact.That's not true at all, hyperbolic nonsense I'm afraid. He was nothing remotely like what we expected of him, but completely useless in every single way just isn't true.
That's not true at all, hyperbolic nonsense I'm afraid. He was nothing remotely like what we expected of him, but completely useless in every single way just isn't true.
From what you said, the only deadwood I can pick out that has been sold are Sanchez and Darmian. How is that clearing deadwood that Ole is praised for. The majority of deadwood are still in the squad.
Also I'm reiterating, Maguire is an overexpensive defender that doesn't suit the high line Ole plays. Wan Bissaka like you said is a very good defender and I really like him but as boring as it sounds, his attacking games still needs improvement. And like I said, Ole's style of play has the full backs push forward so why sign one that is not good enough in that aspect. James is a squad player at best so I'm not going to complain about that signing. So why did Ole sign two starters in AWB and Maguire who do not fit his ste of play
The Haaland deal was a blow but it's a bit damming for a club of our status to sign a player with a very cheap release clause, even Ole was against it you know. But the most damming thing for me is how we completely pulled out of looking for a striker that we still clearly needed afte the Haaland deal fell through. Until the Rashford injury there was no more news of signing a striker. Why???
Now this notion "No manager can succeed here", is based on Ed not backing his managers. But here's the thing. Ole last summer had a net spend of 70m. In hindsight it looks like enough money was not provided to Ole and the backing was not there. But what would you say about Liverpools board and Klopp. In Klopps first two seasons, he had a net spend of minus 4m and the second season of minus 24m. Imagine if it was Ole that had this net spend. Would you say Klopp was backed properly? Yet look at what he did with the little money provided to him. By his second full season with Liverpool they became champions league runner up. Klopp built a very good Liverpool team in his two full seasons with a fecking minus net spend. This will translate to very poor backing by our board if it was us. The same thing can be said about how Pochettino built his Tottenham side with very low net spend or backing. Look at Inter and Conte now.
How can you say no manager will be successful here because our board won't provide the budget to make it so. Yet the money provided to Ole last summer is more than what was spent by Klopp, Pochettino and Conte to build a very competitive side. We complain about Ole not being backed even after having already a higher budget to work with and spending more than these coaches that built strong sides.
It's clear as day our Board is incompetent, our structure is fecked. But all it takes to get this side competitive again is the right players and the right manager and not many will give a feck about the board anymore. We've had 4 different managers but I believe it was more on the managers abilities that led to this clubs failure because these managers including Ole spent way more than their peers and still couldn't make them as competitive. Can you imagine what Klopp would have done to this team with the money given to Mourinho or LVG. So Don't you think it's a case of Ed's undeniable inability to appoint the right manager which is why we've been failing rather than the right managers being in the wrong structure. Most of them were backed more than their peers for fecks sake and they still couldn't make our side competitive. Again, imagine what Klopp would have done with the money given to Mourinho.
Our managerial appointments have been shit. Moyes and Ole are managers for low tier teams. And LVG and Mourinho were past it. If you don't think so then what did LVG do after he was sacked, where is he now? How good has Mourinho been after he was sacked by us? Same thing even with Moyes. And in the end, Woodward is to blame for all this
I never said he was praised for clearing the "deadwood". I just pointed out that actually, some of the players who have left weren't down to him.
This deadwood argument is childish anyway. Who started using this term? If Ole got rid of all the players people on here label as deadwood, we'd have about 6 players left in our squad...and then people would start calling half of them deadwood as soon as it became clear we couldn't win a game. They are our players and ones we have to use because we have no one else, so they are not deadwood.
Wan Bissaka is still young and his attacking game really isn't that bad at all. It's a lazy criticism. At some point someone has randomly decided it is ok to criticise our right back for being less good going forwards than Ronaldo. The list of fullbacks who are as good going forwards as people seem to think our one should be, has literally no one on it. He suits our style of play just fine...as you would be able to tell if you remember what happens when we play someone else there.
A majority of the goals we concede are from set pieces or come when we are back and in our defensive shape, so the high line argument doesn't really work. I agree Maguire isn't suited to it, and he's been caught out too often as a result, but he is just too slow in any defensive situation. A bigger problem has been him not being near enough to his man from balls played into our box or into the feet of the striker. Ole making him captain is ridiculous to me as it is ignoring the fact he isn't doing his job well enough, and it sends a message to the team that this is ok (which also sends a message that the manager doesn't know what's going on).
I can't defend the Haaland thing. It's completely ridiculous. Ole has said he was against it but Woodward is the one in charge of transfers so it's his responsibility. It's not exactly a secret now that he is good at fecking them up and actually costing rather than saving the club money in the process. I still think it's fair to criticise Ole tbh just for trying to defend it, even if that is all he is doing. He could have just said nothing or made it clear he was disappointed not to sign him.
You are again being ignorant of the situation we are in as a club. Klopp did have good backing at Liverpool. He didn't spend much in his first couple of years, but he didn't come into the job when his CEO had deliberately run the contracts down of half of his squad and acquired a bunch of players who didn't want to be there, and spent the last 6 months deliberately not letting his previous manager do there job properly. Klopp is also probably the best current manager in the world. He also, by his own admission, WAS offered the job here, and turned it down because he didn't think much of Woodward...I mean what more evidence do you want? Not only that, but he also moaned repeatedly about City spending more money than him, and then only started to compete with them AFTER Liverpool started spending shitloads of money.
It isn't as simple as what money is spent either. We pay our players too much, we manage their contracts terribly, we pay significantly more than what other teams would pay for the same players, and take significantly longer to sign them. Years longer in fact. You go on about our net spend this summer, but without Maguire it would be -£10m or more....and Maguire SHOULD have been signed last summer, and for £10m or more less than we paid for him. It's a bit like saying Ole should be able to build a house with half the materials needed because the club paid more for the materials than most people would for a whole house. Get yourself a better builder, first thing they will tell you is they can't build a house with half the materials.
You can't really have it both ways. Claim a majority of the squad is deadwood (as you literally have in your own posts), then claim that it is fair to criticise Ole for not building a successful team out of them because they cost so much money. How do you explain how these two arguments work next to each other? They obviously don't. Pick which argument it is you are trying to make instead of just latching at reasons to be critical.
And you've come right back to the point. Even if you blame the managers entirely for everything, at this point you are still looking at the person appointing them rather than the managers, because when you get it wrong 4 times in a row it means you simply don't know how to get it right. I don't think any of the four have done a good enough job, but I also think all four have been hampered hugely by Woodward...and it's not really theorising at this point. Woodward's press leaks on their own provide ample evidence he is an idiot, without even having to take the word of the likes of LVG or Jose.
I wouldn't say it's unfair to criticise Ole at this point. I think you can make an argument he isn't good enough, just as you can make an argument he has been put in a position where it is impossible for him. You can't really make an argument that he's proven he is good enough because you pretty much have to pick one of the two previous lines, or somewhere in-between. What I find bizarre is this idea that sacking him and replacing him with someone else will magically solve any of the major problems. Shoving all the blame onto the manager just gives Woodward licence to sack them and then carry on fecking things up for another year/2 years until we are back having the same argument again.
He will fail cos 200m of today is not 200m of when he took over liverpool, and is worth even less given the overpaying idiocy we currently exhibit in transfers. Secondly he will likely not get the players he wants when he wants due to Ed and his nonsense indecision and finally (and most importantly), Phil Jones will still be here to fvck things upYour major argument here is that no manager can be successful under Woodward. But let's say Ole is sacked now and Klopp takes over. Ed decides to 'back' Klopp for 3 years by allowing him to have the same net spend as Mourinho did in 3 years - 280m. Do you think he will fail here? Keep in mind that Liverpool current net spend since Klopp took over is 73m. So do you think Klopp would fail here after being provided with 207m more than what he got at Liverpool. If you think he will I would love to know why because that will give me some insight.
There's also Pochettino who built a Tottenham side more competitive than us under a similar management. Yet his Tottenham team were champions league customers and even went on to the final.
I keep seeing this but I don't quite get it. Sanchez literally contributed nothing. He was completely useless in basically every way. You can put any youngster there instead of him and they won't do any worse.
And at any rate, we can consider Dan James to be Sanchez's replacement. But I repeat, someone who contributes nothing doesn't need to be "replaced" before letting him go.
But again, James matched Sanchez's United goal tally (in the league) by the end of August (and never scored since but that's a different discussion).Well I wouldn't argue with his contribution but he still needed replacing. If he had stayed it would be on the basis that he was expected to contribute more/do better. So I was fine with him leaving IF someone else was brought in who again was expected to do better.
We went into the season with only two players we could realistically expect would get us 10 goals. Even presuming both Martial and Rashford had massive breakthrough seasons and actually got 20 goals each, this would still leave us woefully short, which surprise surprise, it has.
I know presuming Sanchez would have helped fill that void is a big stretch, but it is certainly less of a stretch than expecting it to be filled by the absolutely no one we replaced him with.
Your major argument here is that no manager can be successful under Woodward. But let's say Ole is sacked now and Klopp takes over. Ed decides to 'back' Klopp for 3 years by allowing him to have the same net spend as Mourinho did in 3 years - 280m. Do you think he will fail here? Keep in mind that Liverpool current net spend since Klopp took over is 73m. So do you think Klopp would fail here after being provided with 207m more than what he got at Liverpool. If you think he will I would love to know why because that will give me some insight.
There's also Pochettino who built a Tottenham side more competitive than us under a similar management. Yet his Tottenham team were champions league customers and even went on to the final.
But again, James matched Sanchez's United goal tally (in the league) by the end of August (and never scored since but that's a different discussion).
We are short on quality in attack, that is true. But that's not because Sanchez left. We wouldn't have a better attack if he was still here; we'd have one more player who's not very good. We have no shortage of those.
Your major argument here is that no manager can be successful under Woodward. But let's say Ole is sacked now and Klopp takes over. Ed decides to 'back' Klopp for 3 years by allowing him to have the same net spend as Mourinho did in 3 years - 280m. Do you think he will fail here? Keep in mind that Liverpool current net spend since Klopp took over is 73m. So do you think Klopp would fail here after being provided with 207m more than what he got at Liverpool. If you think he will I would love to know why because that will give me some insight.
There's also Pochettino who built a Tottenham side more competitive than us under a similar management. Yet his Tottenham team were champions league customers and even went on to the final.
Based on what?What point are you trying to make? That Klopp is a good manager or that managers can succeed under Woodward? If its the latter then it remains to be seen. Each manager he has hired has been gradually more hamstrung than the previous one was because of the bad choices made. Ole has by far been dealt the worst hand of any his managers, and I'm pretty confident that if they give Ole £280m worth of players. or even half that amount, we'll have a much better team than we do now.
The fact that they are finally clearing out the deadwood but not actually replacing the players they've got rid of?Based on what?
He got the players he wanted, including a world record fee for a defender, and got rid of the players he didn't. How has he been dealt the worst hand of any of Ed's managers?The fact that they are finally clearing out the deadwood but not actually replacing the players they've got rid of?
Based on what?
He got the players he wanted, including a world record fee for a defender, and got rid of the players he didn't. How has he been dealt the worst hand of any of Ed's managers?
He's been backed fully by Woodward, and has made the team worse. He's also been presented a total pass on giving us our worst season in 30 years. He should be counting his blessings.Does it even really need to be explained? The wage bill problem was not of his making. The number of highly paid players not contributing or not wanting to be here was inherited. The lack of balance in the squad was not of his making - people will say on this point that he had money to spend, but I'll bet if he had spent it on midfielders he'd be crucified now for not trying to fix the defence.
There is no doubt at all that he has walked into a much tougher job than anyone since Ferguson was here
Mourinho was told he couldn't sell the players he wanted to, and when he wanted a defender, was told his choice wasn't better than what we had. By a CEO. And after signing a new contract. Ole has had it easy, in comparison.He had probably 6 or 7 problem positions to solve. Doesn't happen in one window.
He got *some* of the players he wanted. He also said it would be ridiculous to let Lukaku leave without replacing him and what did Ed do?He got the players he wanted, including a world record fee for a defender, and got rid of the players he didn't. How has he been dealt the worst hand of any of Ed's managers?
No but I do think it's important to realise that letting Sanchez go wasn't a mistake even if we didn't bring in anyone because he was nothing but a burden on the wage bill, and it would have been completely unrealistic to expect him to contribute more.Well we don't, but you're just arguing over what the word "replace" means really. We didn't have enough goalscorers. It was obvious. Before Sanchez left the plan seemed to me to be an unrealistic one of expecting him and others to contribute more. Once he left the plan was to expect extra goals to magically be scored by no one at all.
He's been backed fully by Woodward, and has made the team worse. He's also been presented a total pass on giving us our worst season in 30 years. He should be counting his blessings.
Sold the player Ole alienated by playing him on the wing?He got *some* of the players he wanted. He also said it would be ridiculous to let Lukaku leave without replacing him and what did Ed do?
I agree, Jose was about to call them out, as he was no way going to take all the blame for the mess we were in, the problem was he is just such a hard person to like when he behaves like that, and the club pulled the trigger before he really said anything too bad, and people were just glad to be shut of him, so bought into the utter crap that happened after then.
To me Ole been here is win win now, if he had made it work then great, but it been a 'club legend' struggling so badly has just focused the attention the right way this time, and long may it continue.
No but I do think it's important to realise that letting Sanchez go wasn't a mistake even if we didn't bring in anyone because he was nothing but a burden on the wage bill, and it would have been completely unrealistic to expect him to contribute more.
