• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Klopp

Status
Not open for further replies.
Given that in similar circs.we've signed sooooo many players who have failed to improve us in the 90s and since, I don't agree.
 
Sigh.

For the zillionth time, "better than our lot" is not the point. The point is value for money - would the improvement one or more of these player might (MIGHT) make be worth the money we'd have to pay for them, especially given the fact that we'll have to pay a shedload for van Dijk when we go back in for him, hopefully in January? Klopp's clearly taken the view that, taking all those things into consideration and decided that the answer is "no", and none of us is qualified to think we know better.
Sorry but better than our lot is definitely the point. How can we not be prepared to settle for second best when it comes to signing a new centre half but we are prepared to settle for the poor defenders we currently have. As far as value for money is concerned then how often do we get that anyway? Other teams manage to buy players without breaking the bank so why not us? Klavan cost 4 million and matip was a free signing so they were certainly cheap but does that represent value for money when neither of them are good enough. We overpaid massively on Lovren but he's still shit as well.
And all this might not be good or might not be worth the money, well you could say that about any signing at any club so I don't think it's a valid argument. No signing comes with a guarantee that they will play well and that goes for VVD as well. The club were supposed to be prepared to play 60 million plus for him and he'd have to be the second coming of christ to represent value for money at that price wouldn't he?
 
You may be right, but I'd be less confident than you that my judgment of that was better than Klopp's.

People make this argument all the time and i think its peurile, and its ironically usually made by the same people who make the ' all managers make mistakes in the transfer market' argument.

How people reconcile both is a mystery
 
Sigh.

For the zillionth time, "better than our lot" is not the point. The point is value for money - would the improvement one or more of these players might (MIGHT) make be worth the money we'd have to pay for them, especially given the fact that we'll have to pay a shedload for van Dijk when we go back in for him, hopefully in January? Klopp's clearly taken the view that, taking all those things into consideration, the answer is "no", and none of us is qualified to think we know better.
Sorry I don't agree at all. We didn't need ox and that money could have gone towards buying a 2nd CB. How you can say that buying another CB even if he cost over 40m wouldn't be value for money when we have klavan starting games is beyond me.
 
Sorry but better than our lot is definitely the point. How can we not be prepared to settle for second best when it comes to signing a new centre half but we are prepared to settle for the poor defenders we currently have. As far as value for money is concerned then how often do we get that anyway? Other teams manage to buy players without breaking the bank so why not us? Klavan cost 4 million and matip was a free signing so they were certainly cheap but does that represent value for money when neither of them are good enough. We overpaid massively on Lovren but he's still shit as well.
And all this might not be good or might not be worth the money, well you could say that about any signing at any club so I don't think it's a valid argument. No signing comes with a guarantee that they will play well and that goes for VVD as well. The club were supposed to be prepared to play 60 million plus for him and he'd have to be the second coming of christ to represent value for money at that price wouldn't he?

We're not "settling" for anything though. Klopp knows the defence needs to improve - that's why he's made such a point of insisting on van Dijk. What he's not having, rightly in my view, is this kind of unthinking "there must be someone better than" argument for going out and spending yet more money on second choices, soooooo many of whom have failed us over the years. It's true that there are no guarantees with transfers, but that's all the more reason not to fritter money away on panic signings which end up achieving bugger all.
 
Okay let's look at it from a slighty different perspective. If we were unable to add VVD in the summer and decided to stick with the current centre halves that we have why are they so poor?
Is it or style of play which puts so much empasis on attacking and seems to neglect the defensive side of the game?
Is it that Klopp or whoever trains the players doesn't know how to organise a team defensively? I have no idea but so far it hasn't been good enough i know that.
Is it that the players either don't understand what Klopp's trying to coach them or they can't because they aren't good enough? Quite possibly but then he's backed these players many times either by signing them or rewarding them with a new contract in Lovren's case.
Is it that the 3 players we have at centre half (I'm not counting Gomez as he plays predominantly at full back) can't cope with the english style of play which is much more physical and competitive than in other countries? I think this explains some performances but not against city or sevilla as they play a more pass and move style than having a bullying centre forward.
It's a mess at the moment and we have until January before we can add new personnel to change it so until then Mr Klopp needs to get his defensive act together and sort it out.
 
People make this argument all the time and i think its peurile, and its ironically usually made by the same people who make the ' all managers make mistakes in the transfer market' argument.

How people reconcile both is a mystery

No, it isn't. The fact that everyone makes mistakes doesn't dilute the need to have decisions made by those best qualified to make them. If anything the opposite is true.
 
We're not "settling" for anything though. Klopp knows the defence needs to improve - that's why he's made such a point of insisting on van Dijk. What he's not having, rightly in my view, is this kind of unthinking "there must be someone better than" argument for going out and spending yet more money on second choices, soooooo many of whom have failed us over the years. It's true that there are no guarantees with transfers, but that's all the more reason not to fritter money away on panic signings which end up achieving bugger all.
Okay I understand that he wanted VVD desperatley and is still hoping to sign him at some future date but if none of the centre halves we currently have are good enough and that seems to be the case as they all have looked poor this season and in past seasons (Lovren) then why were we only after 1 centre half? One player isn't going to make up for 3 shit ones is he? Klopp doesn't seem to like the idea of having a bigger squad which is madness considering how low on players we were at times last season when we didn't have European football.
 
Okay let's look at it from a slighty different perspective. If we were unable to add VVD in the summer and decided to stick with the current centre halves that we have why are they so poor?
Is it or style of play which puts so much empasis on attacking and seems to neglect the defensive side of the game?
Is it that Klopp or whoever trains the players doesn't know how to organise a team defensively? I have no idea but so far it hasn't been good enough i know that.
Is it that the players either don't understand what Klopp's trying to coach them or they can't because they aren't good enough? Quite possibly but then he's backed these players many times either by signing them or rewarding them with a new contract in Lovren's case.
Is it that the 3 players we have at centre half (I'm not counting Gomez as he plays predominantly at full back) can't cope with the english style of play which is much more physical and competitive than in other countries? I think this explains some performances but not against city or sevilla as they play a more pass and move style than having a bullying centre forward.
It's a mess at the moment and we have until January before we can add new personnel to change it so until then Mr Klopp needs to get his defensive act together and sort it out.

Good post and I agree with a lot of it. I do think Klopp has questions to answer about the defence and about the balance between our defence and our attack, and I understand - because I share - the frustration about aspects of our performance at the moment. What I think I'm saying essentially is that these questions won't be answered overnight and that I've seen enough improvement overall under Klopp to trust his judgment rather than any of ours at this stage.
 
I don't buy this idea that we shouldn't settle for anyone other than our top target either. By all accounts Mane was our second choice to Gotze and Salah was our second choice to Pulisic and they have worked out quite well so why should it be different with defenders? And what we did under previous managers and previous scouting systems should have no relevance on who makes decisions at the club at the moment, that's just scaremongering.
 
Sorry I don't agree at all. We didn't need ox and that money could have gone towards buying a 2nd CB. How you can say that buying another CB even if he cost over 40m wouldn't be value for money when we have klavan starting games is beyond me.

We expected to bring van Dijk in as well though. Klavan was supposed to be only a 4th choice, and he will be when van Dijk arrives, quite possibly in January.

I don't see the Ox as an automatic starter but I don't agree he's an unnecessary signing, not with the number of games we're going to have to play.
 
Good post and I agree with a lot of it. I do think Klopp has questions to answer about the defence and about the balance between our defence and our attack, and I understand - because I share - the frustration about aspects of our performance at the moment. What I think I'm saying essentially is that these questions won't be answered overnight and that I've seen enough improvement overall under Klopp to trust his judgment rather than any of ours at this stage.
I agree that we have seen plenty of improvement in an attacking sense under Klopp and it makes the games generally more exciting than they used to be but that shouldn't mask that we are still as poor at the back now as the day he took over and no matter what players he picks or teams we play against we rarely look solid at the back. Football is essentially about attacking and defending and no team prospers without both being able to do both.
 
I don't buy this idea that we shouldn't settle for anyone other than our top target either. By all accounts Mane was our second choice to Gotze and Salah was our second choice to Pulisic and they have worked out quite well so why should it be different with defenders? And what we did under previous managers and previous scouting systems should have no relevance on who makes decisions at the club at the moment, that's just scaremongering.

I'm not saying we shouldn't ever go for anyone other than our top target. I'm saying that, if Klopp decided in this particular case that doing so wouldn't be worthwhile, I'm prepared to trust his judgment.

By no means everyone at the club dealing with transfers is new since Klopp's arrival, so I disagree with that last bit.
 
No, it isn't. The fact that everyone makes mistakes doesn't dilute the need to have decisions made by those best qualified to make them. If anything the opposite is true.

No, any right thinking person would notice the overwhelmingly difficult and massively risky process that transfers are and realise you'd have to be daft to trust anyones opinion without question.
 
Agree with the "without question" bit, but ultimately someone has to have the final say. I'd sooner that was the manager than anyone here (or anyone else at the club for that matter).
 
I'm not saying we shouldn't ever go for anyone other than our top target. I'm saying that, if Klopp decided in this particular case that doing so wouldn't be worthwhile, I'm prepared to trust his judgment.

By no means everyone at the club dealing with transfers is new since Klopp's arrival, so I disagree with that last bit.

Trust his judgement? Based on what?

When it comes to defensive decisions and his judgement with regards to the 'not conceding goals' bit, it's probably judicious to take a look at his record and decision-making so far:

- Extended the contract of the hapless Lovren and awarded a new deal to fucking Mignolet

- Signed the hopeless Karius and has spent the ensuing period trying to alternate the keepers in the hope one will obviously be less shit

- Signed Ragnar Klavan

- Regularly plays Ragnar Klavan

- Managed the team with the worst defence of any side in the Top 6 last season. Even worse than City

- Liverpool have once again one of the worst defensive records in the league, and have conceded an average of two goals PER GAME so far this season in all competitions

- Refuses to sign a proper top quality DM

Now, given all of that very available and obvious evidence, I would suggest that anyone trusting Klopp's judgement with regards to any issues pertaining to defence, is a bit deranged
 
Agree with the "without question" bit, but ultimately someone has to have the final say. I'd sooner that was the manager than anyone here (or anyone else at the club for that matter).

Brendan has listed the reasons why you should not necessarily trust Klopp's opinion more than any opinions on here.
 
We expected to bring van Dijk in as well though. Klavan was supposed to be only a 4th choice, and he will be when van Dijk arrives, quite possibly in January.

I don't see the Ox as an automatic starter but I don't agree he's an unnecessary signing, not with the number of games we're going to have to play.
So what happens then if van dijk decides to go to Chelsea instead of us? According to klopp there is no one else.
 
So what happens then if van dijk decides to go to Chelsea instead of us? According to klopp there is no one else.
One thing... Klopp will look more depressed than what he does today. Seriously have you guys seen him in the post match press conference .. he looks like a defeated man.
 
One thing... Klopp will look more depressed than what he does today. Seriously have you guys seen him in the post match press conference .. he looks like a defeated man.

That's because, with minimal experience of computer games, fantasy football, football forums and pub discussions, he is ill-equipped to manage at the highest level.
 
That's because, with minimal experience of computer games, fantasy football, football forums and pub discussions, he is ill-equipped to manage at the highest level.
gk...someone has upset you on this forum..is it that Rosco fella. You are being too political these days.

No seriously Klopp looks like he really does not know what more he can do and todays defensive fuck up made him more submissive.
 
Well 5 games in and its looking like the decision to not invest heavily in a new GK, Two CB's, a top class LB and a DM are backfiring massively.

5 games 9 goals shipped not to mention how worse it gets if you add Europe

Shambles
 
That's because, with minimal experience of computer games, fantasy football, football forums and pub discussions, he is ill-equipped to manage at the highest level.
Well he's proving ill-equipped to manage a defence that's for sure.
 
Well 5 games in and its looking like the decision to not invest heavily in a new GK, Two CB's, a top class LB and a DM are backfiring massively.

5 games 9 goals shipped not to mention how worse it gets if you add Europe

Shambles
How many clubs in the history of top flight football have replaced 4 of the 5 at the back in one transfer window?
 
How many clubs in the history of top flight football have replaced 4 of the 5 at the back in one transfer window?

How many clubs have needed to would be more the question.

We sold our best CB cover who was a converted DM. We sold Sahko and we had another CM playing at LB.

Our Keepers have flattered to deceive all season.
 
There we go again....against Burnley...Flopp's defenders, Klavan, Matip, Trent Arnold, Robinson, Lovren, Gomez are ALL FUCKING USELESS!

We are now stucked until next summer and no top class defenders will come in January, 5th place here we come.

No trophy season once again for Flopp.

Overrated Flopp once again fooled us with his one dimension tactic, clueless whenever opposition team have a compressed defence and counter-attacking team.

He only knows attack, attack, attack. Nothing else.

And who the fuck rotates their goal keeper and central defenders???

Please fuck off Flopp!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom