Rodgers On The Committee

[Tinto]

We haven't always bought players for their potential.

The likes of Lallana, Lovren and Benteke were bought for the now. We overpaid for them massively because they were suppose to contribute immediately.

Probably the main reason our team is so mediocre is because our for-the-now-signings have struggled or are struggling.

 

[Frogfish]

Anything that highlights the cynicism and increasingly detached attitude of the owners is welcome. After the relief of getting rid of Hicks and Gillett, the realisation that we've merely replaced utter crooks with a much more respectable bunch of opportunists must have taken root across the fan base. I can't see the rottenness in this club being removed for years. It feels as bleak as it's been for years and years. I wouldn't blame Klopp for leaving at the end of the season. He's never going to be given the means to succeed at this shambolic place.

Yeah because 32M for Benteke, 20M+ for Lallana and a 30M offer for an unproven (in a top league) 26 y.o. (even though we didn't end up securing him) isn't major investment. I can understand the sentiment if the owners weren't putting up the money but they clearly are. Unfortunately it's generally been for the wrong players.

I'll be very surprised if Klopp is not very heavily backed in the Summer. Let's wait and see shall we.

 

[Frogfish]

............ Most fans would rather see us buying players for modest prices like we did with Can, Coutinho and Sturridge, than us blowing wads on misfits like Benteke, Sakho and Markovic, just so we can say we're competing by spending those sort of fees. It's all a bit sinister and hollow, the way we're spending the money to present this image of being a top club, when on the pitch it's perfectly obvious we're anything but .........

Sorry Mark but that is simply ridiculous. No club is going to flash large amounts of cash on players they don't think are going to improve the team, just for the sake of 'image'. It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Yeah because 32M for Benteke, 20M+ for Lallana and a 30M offer for an unproven (in a top league) 26 y.o. (even though we didn't end up securing him) isn't major investment. I can understand the sentiment if the owners weren't putting up the money but they clearly are. Unfortunately it's generally been for the wrong players.

I'll be very surprised if Klopp is not very heavily backed in the Summer. Let's wait and see shall we.

Are they putting up the money though? Or just giving the money from the sales of Suarez, a sterling etc?

 

[mark1975]

Sorry Mark but that is simply ridiculous. No club is going to flash large amounts of cash on players they don't think are going to improve the team, just for the sake of 'image'. It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Well they seem to be under this illusion that it's productive to overspend to secure players, that most people are left scratching their heads over when looking at the fees. We spend big on players who are second rate, while the top clubs spend relatively the same amounts on "top" players. We seem to spend at the same level and think it automatically guarantees the same level of success.

 

[Tinto]

Well they seem to be under this illusion that it's productive to overspend to secure players, that most people are left scratching their heads over when looking at the fees. We spend big on players who are second rate, while the top clubs spend relatively the same amounts on "top" players. We seem to spend at the same level and think it automatically guarantees the same level of success.

Maybe we overspent on players the manager wanted?

 

[mark1975]

Maybe we overspent on players the manager wanted?

Depends on your bias I guess, it's been made pretty clear now that we have a committee and they decide on players as much as the manager does. When the setup is that the manager has a first choice player and the committee provide alternatives, you only have to look at the amount of big transfers that have slipped through our fingers and then do the maths. Perhaps that's as much a reason for us ending up with so much shite.

 

[Tinto]

The only thing I know is the likes of Lallana, Benteke, Sakho and Lovren, players we bought to contribute immediately have struggled.

We are not in the state we are because of the likes of Gomez, Origi, Markovic and others like them, players we bought for their potential and possible resale value.

 

[Frogfish]

Well they seem to be under this illusion that it's productive to overspend to secure players, that most people are left scratching their heads over when looking at the fees. We spend big on players who are second rate, while the top clubs spend relatively the same amounts on "top" players. We seem to spend at the same level and think it automatically guarantees the same level of success.

That's a scouting (and manager whilst Rodgers was here) issue as far as I'm concerned. I doubt the owners are involved in any way or form bar deciding what the transfer kitty will be.

 

[mom]

I don't think Klopp will be surprised by the way we sign players. I'm sure he did his homework So I can't see him leaving any time soon on that basis.

 

[Frogfish]

Are they putting up the money though? Or just giving the money from the sales of Suarez, a sterling etc?

Whether the money came from their pockets (I'm sure I read they actually put in a considerable amount - or at the very least they are taking zero out of the club) or from sales it amounts to the same thing. A high amount spent on players during their tenure.

 

[gkmacca]

Yeah because 32M for Benteke, 20M+ for Lallana and a 30M offer for an unproven (in a top league) 26 y.o. (even though we didn't end up securing him) isn't major investment. I can understand the sentiment if the owners weren't putting up the money but they clearly are. Unfortunately it's generally been for the wrong players.

I'll be very surprised if Klopp is not very heavily backed in the Summer. Let's wait and see shall we.

Not that big money these days, no matter what PR crap you spout out. It's not much for top players, but too much for so-so players. If paying double over the odds for so-so players strikes you as major investment, sleep well.

 

[Frogfish]

Not that big money these days, no matter what PR crap you spout out. It's not much for top players, but too much for so-so players. If paying double over the odds for so-so players strikes you as major investment, sleep well.

Beautiful tangent you went on there Macca. I wasn't saying anything about them being value for money - as my other posts in this thread indicate quite clearly. I said that you can't denigrate the owners for not investing. The fact it's been mostly wasted is a scouting/managerial issue and you can't lay that at the feet of the owners.

 

[mark1975]

Beautifully tangent you went on there Macca. I wasn't saying anything about them being value for money - as my other posts in this thread indicate quite clearly. I said that you can't denigrate the owners for not investing. The fact it's been mostly wasted is a scouting/managerial issue and you can't lay that at the feet of the owners.

We can denigrate them for investing badly though. It's their setup, they allow us to have fall back options that lack any sort of value for money or similarity to the manager's first choice. They also allowed us to invest in poor first choice targets too, granted, but for all of the so called obvious Rodgers signings, we can count probably triple that in failed moves and players who were brought in as compiled by the committee. There's zero sensibility about wanting a versatile hardworking attacker like Sanchez and ending up with a lazy centre forward like Mario. That's just fucking idiotic.

 

[Arn]

Some players will be a no risk signing. If a club sign Neymar for £150m then they will get the money back after a short time, two or three years. If a club sign Zlatan and give him a £50m sign on fee and £300k a week for a couple of years then that is also a no risk signing.

That is the type of players we should try and sign. Suarez is linked to City for £40m. If he is available on the cheap then we must do everything we can to get him even if he want £300k a week in wages. Almost no sell on value but he would make us title contenders whatever players the other team signs and it would be a huge statement from FSG that titles is the number one priority.

Suarez would turn down City and join us almost guaranteed. You can't say that about other superstar out there. He is the only realistic one we could get.

 

[Tinto]

We can denigrate them for investing badly though. It's their setup, they allow us to have fall back options that lack any sort of value for money or similarity to the manager's first choice. They also allowed us to invest in poor first choice targets too, granted, but for all of the so called obvious Rodgers signings, we can count probably triple that in failed moves and players who were brought in as compiled by the committee. There's zero sensibility about wanting a versatile hardworking attacker like Sanchez and ending up with a lazy centre forward like Mario. That's just fucking idiotic.

I can't see how you can defend Rodgers and denigrate them.

Our players aren't good enough because of both our previous manager and the TC. Anyone who isn't bias will say so.

 

[mark1975]

I can't see how you can defend Rodgers and denigrate them.

Our players aren't good enough because of both our previous manager and the TC. Anyone who isn't bias will say so.

I never said Rodgers was absolved of any blame, my initial response was to people pretty much doing the opposite and solely blaming him. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other, but like I said, we lost out on alot of good players too and ended up with committee dross. In my post you just quoted I said we overspent on first choice targets too, so where is the bias?

Maybe we overspent on players the manager wanted? No bias there of course.

 

[Frogfish]

We can denigrate them for investing badly though. It's their setup, they allow us to have fall back options that lack any sort of value for money or similarity to the manager's first choice. They also allowed us to invest in poor first choice targets too, granted, but for all of the so called obvious Rodgers signings, we can count probably triple that in failed moves and players who were brought in as compiled by the committee. There's zero sensibility about wanting a versatile hardworking attacker like Sanchez and ending up with a lazy centre forward like Mario. That's just fucking idiotic.

Yet again I don't blame the owners though. They have put a system in place and a committee to oversee transfers, personally they have no further involvement (assumed).
You can say that the wrong people are on the committee (most would) leading to the wrong decisions, you could also say that our scouting system is poor. But every club has a system and trust has to be placed somewhere. We should start by looking at replacing/revamping the managers/decision makers in our scouting system and replacing some members of the committee, if it still exists. Fact remains though that the owners stumped up the cash even though it was misspent.

 

[SummerOnions]

I read the title as Rodgers is now part of the transfer committee and got worried for a second. Phew

 

[Hansern]

Are they putting up the money though? Or just giving the money from the sales of Suarez, a sterling etc?

150 mill net spend mate.

 

[Tinto]

I never said Rodgers was absolved of any blame, my initial response was to people pretty much doing the opposite and solely blaming him. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other, but like I said, we lost out on alot of good players too and ended up with committee dross. In my post you just quoted I said we overspent on first choice targets too, so where is the bias?

Maybe we overspent on players the manager wanted? No bias there of course.

No bias on my part. I was questioning what you said

My take is that Rodgers was on the TC and is at fault for where we are as the other members of the committee. Any questioning of the TC is also questioning him. He's just as responsible for the lack of quality of our squad and for its lack of balance.

Rodgers rightly got replaced by a manager with a better track record. Hopefully the other members of the TC are worried about their job prospects if they keep on failing too.

 

[Hansern]

Not that big money these days, no matter what PR crap you spout out. It's not much for top players, but too much for so-so players. If paying double over the odds for so-so players strikes you as major investment, sleep well.

350 mill in total and 150 mill net spend is major investment.
Its the 4th highest in the league if you look at the last 5 years.

 

[manwithnoname]

Nah I'm not talking about the fan aspect, that's a poor move from their side no doubt.
Regards to Klopp, I reckon so far they have shown intent. Agreed the committee is poor but you can't accuse them of not trying, they believed the committee would represent better transfer activity.
They've moved for Willian, Sanchez, and so forth, those top players didn't want us though. And there were plenty of big money transfers: Benteke, Firmino, Lovren.

I don't think Klopp won't get means to succeed . Or hope so at least.

Well, we could always go down that rabbit hole of 'net spend' but the simple, obvious facts are that we have a wage bill that is larger than every single club in the league apart from United, City, Chelsea and Arsenal.

We spend more money on wages than EVERY other team in the country, apart from the teams who are usually above us. Now that doesn't include Spurs who have a lower wage bill and a cheaper squad, but they've finished above us every year apart from one in the last 6 or 7 seasons, so maybe they're just a better run club.

We have also reinvested money into the squad. We sell, or have been forced to sell, our best players - who rightly decide they need to leave to win trophies - but generally FSG have allowed us to spend that money on replacements, which sadly we usually waste on utter shite like Lallana, Markovic, Balotelli, Sakho, Lovren and overpaying hilariously for Benteke, Henderson, Downing, et al.

So we have one of the most expensive and best paid squads in the country, but we are about three or four places below where that investment should leave us.

That's it. FSG have allowed us to spend money, and it will never be enough to regularly challenge for the title, but it's more than enough for us to be doing better than we are.

End of story.

 

[Windom Earle]

The only thing I know is the likes of Lallana, Benteke, Sakho and Lovren, players we bought to contribute immediately have struggled.

We are not in the state we are because of the likes of Gomez, Origi, Markovic and others like them, players we bought for their potential and possible resale value.

I agree on the first point but I don't agree on the second.

Markovic is the best example out of your list of an unnecessary signing. The fee was around £20m - do you honestly think that he will see a bigger upside than players like Ojo, Kent, Ibe whose route to the first team he could block?

I'd say that the club has been guilty of wasteful spending for the here-and-now as well as the future.

 

[Hansern]

Leicester and Spurs are great examples that you dont need to spend the most money but buying with a clear strategy and having a system and set up that works.

Klopp has talked about this already and thats what at least leaves me with some hope for the future,

 

[manwithnoname]

Leicester and Spurs are great examples that you dont need to spend the most money but buying with a clear strategy and having a system and set up that works.

Klopp has talked about this already and thats what at least leaves me with some hope for the future,

Please repost your eulogy about Leicester's brilliant strategy and clear example from last season, assuming that it was evident then and not just now they're top of the league

 

[Hansern]

Please repost your eulogy about Leicester's brilliant strategy and clear example from last season, assuming that it was evident then and not just now they're top of the league

Heh, so its not a valid example then? They've been very good in the transfer market and have a system/tactic that works.
This has resulted in a brilliant season.
Yeah, they were close to going down last season but they added the right parts to the team last summer. It just highlights what an impact getting the right balance can have, and that you dont have to spend a lot of money to do it if you have a good set up.
They lost the top scout/video analyst (Kante/Mahrez deals) to Arsenal though, so it will will be interesting to see if that has an impact.

Spurs is the best example though compared to us, without a doubt.

 

[Leo]

Yeah Spurs are amazing and fantastic.
1 carling cup in 25 years.
Wish we were them.
Fucking fickle bells.

 

[Red Mullet]

Heh, so its not a valid example then? They've been very good in the transfer market and have a system/tactic that works.
This has resulted in a brilliant season.
Yeah, they were close to going down last season but they added the right parts to the team last summer. It just highlights what an impact getting the right balance can have, and that you dont have to spend a lot of money to do it if you have a good set up.
They lost the top scout/video analyst (Kante/Mahrez deals) to Arsenal though, so it will will be interesting to see if that has an impact.

Spurs is the best example though compared to us, without a doubt.

Nah, it's all luck and down to one player called Vardy. Ranieri - what's he actually won, the chancer.

Wait, I've heard that before after the 13/14 season.

 

[Hansern]

Yeah Spurs are amazing and fantastic.
1 carling cup in 25 years.
Wish we were them.
Fucking fickle bells.

I wouldnt want to be Spurs if my life depended on it. I fucking hate the cunts.
But they've made a lot of decents signings for not to much money and has NOW the right manager in charge aswell. The combination is getting them results this season.

I wish them nothing but fucking shite though.