FSG

[Frogfish]

I covered that in the last sentence, it might not work for them. Don’t put words into my mouth that I’m admiring anything, I’m pointing out their ability to formulate a strategy and move forward with it when we seemingly can’t do that.

Your words : " currently better run than us ", that's not putting words in your mouth. And it's bollocks. Sorry mate but it is despite the issues we've had over the past year.
And of course it's massively different to FSG (not an apologist) but it's insane and destined to be a major fuck up so making a comparison is utterly flummoxing.

 

[Markeh]

Your words : " currently better run than us ", that's not putting words in your mouth. And it's bollocks. Sorry mate but it is despite the issues we've had over the past year.
And of course it's massively different to FSG (not an apologist) but it's insane and destined to be a major fuck up so making a comparison is utterly flummoxing.

You’re the one that brought up admiration, not me. I see a distinction between the day to day running of a club and the overall strategy they’re employing to get back on top which i have clearly acknowledged might not work out twice now. I can’t be arsed arguing with you any more about it though.

 

[StevieM]

Well, I'm happy to listen to specific alternative suggestions, and I promise to say so if I reckon they seem convincing.

I’m with you on most of this JJ - but something in the middle doesn’t add up.

We’ve consistently sought out young players that we can sign at that low end price - Doak, Carvalho, Elliot, Ramsey - but in a ver restrained way.

If we’re not spending big on ready made replacements and we’re renewing or seeking to renew underperforming players because of, why were we not loading up on youngsters in that £5m-£15m range?

They can’t have contributed less than some of older players we retained.

There’s something wrong at a strategic level that doesn’t add up - it’s like Klopp & FSG are fighting internally against each other to prove a point.

Maybe Ward wasn’t actually that good at his job once he reached the peak - after playing for Larne, that is.

Maybe Edwards was burnt out.

Maybe, for all the things Klopp is good at, and there are many, he has taken on too much or there are things he’s not good at.

Maybe people he backed - playing and non-playing didn’t deliver what they should.

Maybe Hogan is a brilliant Commercial Director but not a great CEO - I mean, who do you blame when we lose a whole stack of key people and we always seem to struggle to replace unless we’re promoting internally.

This doesn’t feel like a “Rafa moment” where he’s fighting the owners (albeit not publicly), but also, if the default is to double down on what you have - that’s an equally bad strategic decision.

I sometimes wonder when Klopp was talking about “taking more chances” he was referencing himself as much as the club management & owners.

 

[tomasjj]

What about Nunez, our most expensive signing since Allison?
Firmly on our bench.... Carvalho, bombed out.

 

[Judge Jules]

JJ, respectfully, what is on the record is that he greenlit renewals for a number of stalwarts, and express statements to the press that "we have eight midfielders, we still have enough midfielders. It is not that we lack midfielders, but it’s just that some of them are injured.

Everything else, including the whole of your option B is a matter of conclusion and conjecture. I don't say this to persuade you otherwise; you've long made your positiin clear on this and you're perfectly entitled to stick to your opinion despite the record, but if true, then we'd have to question whether Klopp is just a duplicitous corporate slave prepared to lie to the fans in service of his capitalist overlords.

With equal respect, it's simply wrong to characterise what I'm saying as "despite the record". Nothing I'm saying is inconsistent with that record. What I am saying, and stand by, is that merely taking Klopp's words at face value and looking no further is naïve and superficial and conflicts with everything else we've learned about him.

 

[Judge Jules]

I’m with you on most of this JJ - but something in the middle doesn’t add up.

We’ve consistently sought out young players that we can sign at that low end price - Doak, Carvalho, Elliot, Ramsey - but in a ver restrained way.

If we’re not spending big on ready made replacements and we’re renewing or seeking to renew underperforming players because of, why were we not loading up on youngsters in that £5m-£15m range?

They can’t have contributed less than some of older players we retained.

There’s something wrong at a strategic level that doesn’t add up - it’s like Klopp & FSG are fighting internally against each other to prove a point.

Maybe Ward wasn’t actually that good at his job once he reached the peak - after playing for Larne, that is.

Maybe Edwards was burnt out.

Maybe, for all the things Klopp is good at, and there are many, he has taken on too much or there are things he’s not good at.

Maybe people he backed - playing and non-playing didn’t deliver what they should.

Maybe Hogan is a brilliant Commercial Director but not a great CEO - I mean, who do you blame when we lose a whole stack of key people and we always seem to struggle to replace unless we’re promoting internally.

This doesn’t feel like a “Rafa moment” where he’s fighting the owners (albeit not publicly), but also, if the default is to double down on what you have - that’s an equally bad strategic decision.

I sometimes wonder when Klopp was talking about “taking more chances” he was referencing himself as much as the club management & owners.

We have signed youngsters though, Stevie. You list them yourself above. I'm not sure if you're saying we should have signed even more of them and used them to replace those older players altogether. If you are saying that, I don't agree. IMO we need - as all teams need - a balance of youth and experience. One can perhaps argue about which of the older players should have been retained, but that argument was defo complicated by the owners' financial restrictions.

I don't think Klopp and FSG have been fighting. I do suspect Klopp and the departed backroom guys have tried to get FSG to loosen up on spending but have been told "no dice", after which I think Klopp's bust a gut to try and make his instructions work without publicly dissenting from the policies they're based on. I realise that some posters I like and respect don't agree with me about this but I've explained why IMO this is, by a distance, the most likely explanation for Klopp's statements about having enough midfielders.

 

[tomasjj]

Even if Klopp wasn't happy about his midfielders and FSG are pinching, still he went out and bought a striker, one who is now on the bench.
Our second most expensive signing, who now seem to be reduced to being an impact player and we are left to wonder where he fits in or if we did actually plan a formation change. Not a good look for anyone involved.

Gakpo I can understand, due to price and as replacement for Firmino, but a midfielder was still even more urgent at the time he was brought in.

As for who is retained of the old guard and why, I agree that owners reluctance tie Klopp's hands a bit here. But there is also a bit of a catch-22 here, as the old are typically the high earners, and we tie down our budget on them, rather than free up budget to buy. Murmurs say he pushed for Hendo's renewal a couple of years ago, and he wanted him to stay now when the offer came in from the Saudi league, and also wanted to keep Milner now.

Anyway, it is a tough job, as he has to manage the squad, and protect the players as well as the owners, and keep the group together and get them to perform in one of the highest competitive environments. I guess that is why he is one of the best.

So, in sum, as I see it, it is also a bit of his own making due to how spending has been prioritised.

 

[Judge Jules]

Mate, I've never understood the "we bought a striker" criticism. For sure we needed MFs, but we also needed options up front and the one we wanted (rightly or wrongly) became available. It makes absolutely zero sense to me to argue that we should have passed up the opportunity because we had other needs as well.

 

[tomasjj]

Mate, I've never understood the "we bought a striker" criticism. For sure we needed MFs, but we also needed options up front and the one we wanted (rightly or wrongly) became available. It makes absolutely zero sense to me to argue that we should have passed up the opportunity because we had other needs as well.

We did need options up front too, but with limited resources, priorities have to be ranked and made?
Of course this "opportunity taken" is now in more the spotlight, as he is not a regular in the side, which you should expect at that price.

 

[Judge Jules]

If Klopp had had the resources to buy the necessary quality in both positions I'd certainly agree about priorities, but he didn't. He badly wanted Bellingham and, it seems, didn't think any of the alternatives would be adequate replacements. (BTW those criticising him for that need to remember we held out for Virgil in the exact same way, and look how that turned out.) Against that background the decision to sign the striker we did want stands up IMO.

As for Nunez himself, I agree the jury's out so far, but I'm not losing hope yet. Yes, he cost a packet, but the price has to be seen in the context of an insane market and he's in his second new country and league while still in his early 20s. I also wonder if, when he's being played, it's in his best position - in Portugal he drifted out to the left and struck infield from there more often than not. I do agree the situation needs watching though.

 

[darkstarexodus]

If Klopp had had the resources to buy the necessary quality in both positions I'd certainly agree about priorities, but he didn't. He badly wanted Bellingham and, it seems, didn't think any of the alternatives would be adequate replacements. (BTW those criticising him for that need to remember we held out for Virgil in the exact same way, and look how that turned out.) Against that background the decision to sign the striker we did want stands up IMO.

As for Nunez himself, I agree the jury's out so far, but I'm not losing hope yet. Yes, he cost a packet, but the price has to be seen in the context of an insane market and he's in his second new country and league while still in his early 20s. I also wonder if, when he's being played, it's in his best position - in Portugal he drifted out to the left and struck infield from there more often than not. I do agree the situation needs watching though.

I was cautiously ok with holding out for Bellingham as the chosen one. But then, like we did with Virgil, you have to actually land the player.

Not getting him was not acceptable. And not having a well defined fallback option is even less acceptable.

 

[binomial]

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/spo...sg-liverpool-investors-talks-acquire-27522765

 

[tomasjj]

If Klopp had had the resources to buy the necessary quality in both positions I'd certainly agree about priorities, but he didn't. He badly wanted Bellingham and, it seems, didn't think any of the alternatives would be adequate replacements. (BTW those criticising him for that need to remember we held out for Virgil in the exact same way, and look how that turned out.) Against that background the decision to sign the striker we did want stands up IMO.

As for Nunez himself, I agree the jury's out so far, but I'm not losing hope yet. Yes, he cost a packet, but the price has to be seen in the context of an insane market and he's in his second new country and league while still in his early 20s. I also wonder if, when he's being played, it's in his best position - in Portugal he drifted out to the left and struck infield from there more often than not. I do agree the situation needs watching though.

I don't agree on the first part really. And the Bellingham-case is a weird one, as we didn't have back ups in case the deal didn't work out. We wasted much time waiting for him, and much of the team got closer to the end of the cycle. That is poor planning to me, and the "all or nothing" approach is very risky.

Anyway, Nunez I like, and I think he will be a success if only Klopp decides to play him regularly.
As you say, his best position is then something to figure out and to fit him into an attacking set up. Diaz and Jota are the current options on the left, but I would like to see Nunez starting out wide, with Gakpo as the 10, and Salah as the right forward. We can also invert that triangle and play Nunez at the apex, with Diaz and Salah as the wide forwards.

 

[Judge Jules]

I was cautiously ok with holding out for Bellingham as the chosen one. But then, like we did with Virgil, you have to actually land the player.

Not getting him was not acceptable. And not having a well defined fallback option is even less acceptable.

Not getting him certainly wasn't acceptable but the reason things turned out that way is that the owners wouldn't stump up the moolah. As for a fall-back option, agree in theory but, if the manager genuinely doesn't think the other available options cut the mustard, I definitely don't think we should buy for the sake of buying.

 

[Judge Jules]

I don't agree on the first part really. And the Bellingham-case is a weird one, as we didn't have back ups in case the deal didn't work out. We wasted much time waiting for him, and much of the team got closer to the end of the cycle. That is poor planning to me, and the "all or nothing" approach is very risky.

Anyway, Nunez I like, and I think he will be a success if only Klopp decides to play him regularly.
As you say, his best position is then something to figure out and to fit him into an attacking set up. Diaz and Jota are the current options on the left, but I would like to see Nunez starting out wide, with Gakpo as the 10, and Salah as the right forward. We can also invert that triangle and play Nunez at the apex, with Diaz and Salah as the wide forwards.

The "all or nothing" approach is indeed risky, but during the barren years we kept going for the "near enough" option and got nowhere fast (other than on one unforgettable night in 2005). Klopp put a stop to that and I don't think it's a coincidence that we then started to make some real progress for the first time in far too long.

Agree with your second para 100%. Nunez would be a far better option on the left-hand side than Jota IMO. Jota's our best finisher and needs to be in the middle - out wide, or starting from there, he's no more than ordinary.

 

[darkstarexodus]

Not getting him certainly wasn't acceptable but the reason things turned out that way is that the owners wouldn't stump up the moolah. As for a fall-back option, agree in theory but, if the manager genuinely doesn't think the other available options cut the mustard, I definitely don't think we should buy for the sake of buying.

Now the owners are prepared to spend once it's all gone sideways. It just reeks of mismanagement.

And while I don't want to panic buy either, it's a farce that we're in a state to have to consider it. This has been a car crash in slow motion over 3 seasons.

 

[tomasjj]

The "all or nothing" approach is indeed risky, but during the barren years we kept going for the "near enough" option and got nowhere fast (other than on one unforgettable night in 2005). Klopp put a stop to that and I don't think it's a coincidence that we then started to make some real progress for the first time in far too long.

Agree with your second para 100%. Nunez would be a far better option on the left-hand side than Jota IMO. Jota's our best finisher and needs to be in the middle - out wide, or starting from there, he's no more than ordinary.

We were never getting Bellingham when we missed out on the CL and were in rebuilt mode.

Agree that Jota is the best finisher, but not sure if he can find his feet in the middle, or is better drifting more.

 

[King Binny]

I still can't understand why we couldn't bring in a permanent option for DOF role. How much trust, pressure and time constraint are they putting on a temporary appointment made in end May, esp. ahead of what was heralded as a rebuild? Besides, this temporary appointment isn't even a "big shot"...

 

[tomasjj]

There has been talk that the new DOF is currently at Monaco, and cannot take up his new position before 1. sept.

 

[The normal one]

Even if Klopp wasn't happy about his midfielders and FSG are pinching, still he went out and bought a striker, one who is now on the bench.
Our second most expensive signing, who now seem to be reduced to being an impact player and we are left to wonder where he fits in or if we did actually plan a formation change. Not a good look for anyone involved.

Gakpo I can understand, due to price and as replacement for Firmino, but a midfielder was still even more urgent at the time he was brought in.

As for who is retained of the old guard and why, I agree that owners reluctance tie Klopp's hands a bit here. But there is also a bit of a catch-22 here, as the old are typically the high earners, and we tie down our budget on them, rather than free up budget to buy. Murmurs say he pushed for Hendo's renewal a couple of years ago, and he wanted him to stay now when the offer came in from the Saudi league, and also wanted to keep Milner now.

Anyway, it is a tough job, as he has to manage the squad, and protect the players as well as the owners, and keep the group together and get them to perform in one of the highest competitive environments. I guess that is why he is one of the best.

So, in sum, as I see it, it is also a bit of his own making due to how spending has been prioritised.

You are a bit obsessed with prices, remember Klopp said in his eyes all players are treated the same whether 60m or a free transfer, also we have only played one game this season so far too soon to be making statements about players being on the bench.

 

[King Binny]

There has been talk that the new DOF is currently at Monaco, and cannot take up his new position before 1. sept.

I hope so. Paul Mitchell's replacement was announced in Jun but still no word on where he's going (if he's not taking a break).

That begs another question though - could we have/would it have been better to try and persuade Ward to stay on for another few months (or maybe even get Edwards' help - unless bridges have been burnt?), which is what Mitchell has been doing since announcing his decision to step down in Mar this year.

[article]Foot Mercato have revealed that Mitchell has elected someone with whom he has already worked, but it’s not Aviña. Mitchell worked with Scuro whilst he was in the Red Bull system, with the pair collaborating closely during the 2019/20 season. Since arriving at the club back in 2013, he has taken the club from the third division in Brazil to the Copa Libertadores in 2021.[/article]

 

[StevieM]

We have signed youngsters though, Stevie. You list them yourself above. I'm not sure if you're saying we should have signed even more of them and used them to replace those older players altogether. If you are saying that, I don't agree. IMO we need - as all teams need - a balance of youth and experience. One can perhaps argue about which of the older players should have been retained, but that argument was defo complicated by the owners' financial restrictions.

I don't think Klopp and FSG have been fighting. I do suspect Klopp and the departed backroom guys have tried to get FSG to loosen up on spending but have been told "no dice", after which I think Klopp's bust a gut to try and make his instructions work without publicly dissenting from the policies they're based on. I realise that some posters I like and respect don't agree with me about this but I've explained why IMO this is, by a distance, the most likely explanation for Klopp's statements about having enough midfielders.

The point is, if FSG are not loosening up the purse strings for lots of expensive players who can go straight into the first team and we are intent on holding on to aging players then we should have been more creative and directed what resources were available to signing more and better players under the age of 21 that could have filled out the squad and replaced older players leaving on a free.

If you have £100m for your primary target and you don’t get him - if Plan B is to do nothing, it’s not a good plan.

Where I will always agree with you, is Plan B shouldn’t be just signing anyone available, but it should have included investing in more younger players with high ability ceilings.

As an example, when we failed to land Tchouameni at £80m or whatever the cost was - not going out and blasting £40-50m on Matheus ahead of Wolves was the right decision, but not being all over £15m Enzo Fernandes, who would have been classified as an U21 player when Benfica snapped him up 2 weeks after Real sealed Tchouameni, was a terrible decision.

We agreed the Nunes deal 2 days after Real Madrid agreed the Tchouameni deal, and 10 days before Benfica announced the Enzo deal.

There’s no creative strategy there to make whatever restrictions are in place work.

It’s one thing to wait 6 months on a Van Dijk when you pretty much have an agreement in place with the player and you know he’ll sign, but quite another to hold out for, at best, a player you don’t have an agreement in place with, or, at worst, an as yet unspecified player to emerge as our next primary target.

Like I said, there’s something missing in the middle there that’s not stacking up.

 

[tomasjj]

You are a bit obsessed with prices, remember Klopp said in his eyes all players are treated the same whether 60m or a free transfer, also we have only played one game this season so far too soon to be making statements about players being on the bench.

You think so? My point is just that we have to be smart with our limited funds, particularly in this environment when richer clubs are throwing money around.
A big money signing like that should be integrated quickly into the team and improve it. I like the player, but it seems we are not sure how to best use him.

 

[Judge Jules]

The point is, if FSG are not loosening up the purse strings for lots of expensive players who can go straight into the first team and we are intent on holding on to aging players then we should have been more creative and directed what resources were available to signing more and better players under the age of 21 that could have filled out the squad and replaced older players leaving on a free.

If you have £100m for your primary target and you don’t get him - if Plan B is to do nothing, it’s not a good plan.

Where I will always agree with you, is Plan B shouldn’t be just signing anyone available, but it should have included investing in more younger players with high ability ceilings.

As an example, when we failed to land Tchouameni at £80m or whatever the cost was - not going out and blasting £40-50m on Matheus ahead of Wolves was the right decision, but not being all over £15m Enzo Fernandes, who would have been classified as an U21 player when Benfica snapped him up 2 weeks after Real sealed Tchouameni, was a terrible decision.

We agreed the Nunes deal 2 days after Real Madrid agreed the Tchouameni deal, and 10 days before Benfica announced the Enzo deal.

There’s no creative strategy there to make whatever restrictions are in place work.

It’s one thing to wait 6 months on a Van Dijk when you pretty much have an agreement in place with the player and you know he’ll sign, but quite another to hold out for, at best, a player you don’t have an agreement in place with, or, at worst, an as yet unspecified player to emerge as our next primary target.

Like I said, there’s something missing in the middle there that’s not stacking up.

There were at least as many signals that Bellingham was Anfield-bound as there had been with Virgil though. The hints dropped on Tw@tter (by Stevie G among others), the apparent cooperation with all that from Bellingham himself, the club's offer of a job to Bellingham's dad...there was easily enough smoke floating around to indicate that there was a genuine fire behind it. I have some sympathy with the point about the lack of back-up targets, but if we didn't rate the ones available you're back in danger of signing the nearest warm body. There were arguably a greater number of viable-looking CB options when we held out for VvD than there are for Bellingham now.

For me Fernandez is a moot point BTW. He looked good in the World Cup and against us at the weekend and he may well benefit from Pochettino going there, but until now he hasn't been pulling up trees in the Prem, so for me it's too soon to say whether or to what extent we missed a trick in his case.

Overall I do agree there's something missing. My guess (and I freely admit that's what it is) would be that the gap results from a combination of the owners' spending restrictions, Klopp's and others' frustration with those restrictions, the pressure all this has put on our decision-making processes (leading maybe to more mistakes) and the damage this has done to the club's internal cohesion. My hope is that FSG's willingness to finance our attempt to leapfrog the Chavs for Caicedo shows that things are starting to fall into place again, but I doubt we'll see the benefit of that in this transfer window.

 

[StevieM]

There were at least as many signals that Bellingham was Anfield-bound as there had been with Virgil though. The hints dropped on Tw@tter (by Stevie G among others), the apparent cooperation with all that from Bellingham himself, the club's offer of a job to Bellingham's dad...there was easily enough smoke floating around to indicate that there was a genuine fire behind it. I have some sympathy with the point about the lack of back-up targets, but if we didn't rate the ones available you're back in danger of signing the nearest warm body. There were arguably a greater number of viable-looking CB options when we held out for VvD than there are for Bellingham now.

For me Fernandez is a moot point BTW. He looked good in the World Cup and against us at the weekend and he may well benefit from Pochettino going there, but until now he hasn't been pulling up trees in the Prem, so for me it's too soon to say whether or to what extent we missed a trick in his case.

Overall I do agree there's something missing. My guess (and I freely admit that's what it is) would be that the gap results from a combination of the owners' spending restrictions, Klopp's and others' frustration with those restrictions, the pressure all this has put on our decision-making processes (leading maybe to more mistakes) and the damage this has done to the club's internal cohesion. My hope is that FSG's willingness to finance our attempt to leapfrog the Chavs for Caicedo shows that things are starting to fall into place again, but I doubt we'll see the benefit of that in this transfer window.

My old boss used to say - you don’t earn your money when things are easy and everything’s going in your favour.

However - and I absolutely stunned here - if there was anyone on this site I would have bet my left testicle on not believing a thing he read on Twitter - it would be you Sir.

I mean, I’m just shocked you know what Twitter is - I thought you were still getting your news listening to the wireless or fumbling through the small print of The Daily Mail by candlelight!!!

 

[Judge Jules]

Cheeky get. It isn't as if you're some spring chicken yourself, though you're going to have to try to be with a young 'un to care for. Old doesn't equal dead - at least you'll have to hope not. 😛

I rarely read Twitter and mentioned it only as one example. Neither, though, do I automatically discount what's being said there, especially when it's corroborated elsewhere. The Bellingham talk was all over the print media as well and some of those who were repeating it are generally reliable.

 

[StevieM]

Cheeky get. It isn't as if you're some spring chicken yourself, though you're going to have to try to be with a young 'un to care for. Old doesn't equal dead - at least you'll have to hope not. 😛

I rarely read Twitter and mentioned it only as one example. Neither, though, do I automatically discount what's being said there, especially when it's corroborated elsewhere. The Bellingham talk was all over the print media as well and some of those who were repeating it are generally reliable.

Fucking hell JJ - you’re doubling down on print journalists telling the truth now!!! 😛

 

[Judge Jules]

Sometimes they do, sometimes they brew. 🙂

 

[bluebell]

I created the post with the belief that FSG would back Klopp after having a £111m bid accepted and then rejected, now it seems they have decided to backtrack and put the money elsewhere. I'd sell if it meant we got CDM and a CB.

 

[King Binny]

I created the post with the belief that FSG would back Klopp after having a £111m bid accepted and then rejected, now it seems they have decided to backtrack and put the money elsewhere. I'd sell if it meant we got CDM and a CB.

Longer version of the article: