According to this journalist, we're still unclear on many fronts. This is worrying, but it's hardly surprising isn't it? Wonder how long it'll really take to get us back on our feet.
Walking on... but where to and how fast?
13:36, 20 Dec 2012
Miguel Delaney
Recent results reflect this too. Just nine days ago, they admirably scored three away from home without Luis Suarez to giddily leave themselves four points off fourth. On Saturday, though, they conceded three at Anfield with the Uruguayan, and are now as close to the relegation zone as they are the Champions League places.
Of course, we all know where Liverpool have been. The club have one of the most glorious histories in the game and that can never be taken away. By contrast, despite certain perceptions about finances, that past has played a part in contributing to the fact that still have the fifth highest wage bill in the Premier League and the 18th among global sports teams overall. Ironically, that leaves them in between the Boston Red Sox franchise of their owners and Miami Heat.
As such, as distant as the main London and Manchester clubs seem right now in terms of finances and form, the platform is still there for Liverpool to be a power.
The key, though, is how that platform is used and who is on it. Because, for all the talk about the inherent traits of teams as well as 'club ways', it is ultimately individuals and infrastructures that enforce and condition them. Indeed, when you consider some of the so-called 'facts' about other teams from football's past, they may as well be part of a parallel universe.
For quite a long period up to 1958, for example, Brazil were a country seemingly incapable of either winning a World Cup or escaping a pretty traumatic early history in the tournament. Similarly, Barcelona spent 30 years enduring constant political infighting and only winning two league titles — a situation that seems simply unthinkable now.
Ultimately, though, the right people came in and the right principles were put in place.
And, given that they're a club that have enjoyed the brilliance of the old Boot Room, the question must again be asked whether that's currently the case with Liverpool - especially when you look at some of the more infamous transfer market moves they have made.
Those close to Anfield, in fact, have concerns about the current structure above the first team and the consequent effect on it. At the top, there are effective absentee owners. In between, there is a former commercial director in Ian Ayre who may not be completely suited to the demands of managing director without a degree of help. As a result of all that, then, there is an overall lack of leadership which was reflected in the clumsy manner the Suarez issue was handled.
It says a lot that, as far as this column understands, Roberto Martinez turned down the Liverpool job because he was unimpressed with the club's general shape. To put that into some kind of context, an exceptionally sharp young manager who continues to defy economics felt the set-up at Wigan was more efficient and, ultimately, better for his long-term future. He didn't want to deal with the chaos.
Of course, Liverpool ended up hiring someone whose best achievements have come on the back of Martinez's work. In fact, Michael Laudrup's instant adjustment at Swansea indicates that an excellent set-up may ultimately be more important than the actual identity of the manager, provided the right type is brought in. The same applies at West Brom who, relative to their size, have provided far better examples of the kind of 'Moneyball' market princuples the Liverpool owners are in thrall too.
Let's be straight too: none of this is to say that Rodgers is not a good manager. Clearly, he has many excellent qualities. Whether thet are absolutely the right qualities for Liverpool right now, though, remains to be seen.
He hasn't yet illustrated the kind of adjustment and immediate improvisation that marks apart the true greats.
Rodgers, after all, is a manager who has a very defined template but a somewhat mixed record. If the conditions perfectly fit his approach, as at Swansea, he excels. If they don't, as at Reading, he can encounter difficulty.
At the moment, as the balance of their midfield encapsulates, Liverpool are somewhere between these two points. Occasionally, they have elements that indicate that excellent passing approach and a much brighter future. Other times, though, they only suggest quality while appearing to lack true character.
The imminent signings of Ince from Blackpool and Daniel Sturridge from Chelsea are part of Rodgers's attempts to rectify this. But, at an expected net spend of above £14m for a young player they used to own and another who has never been consistent, some old questions have to be asked about the transfer policies. While that may be unfair on two players still in formative stages of their careers, the real point is that Liverpool can't really afford any more mistakes in the transfer markets if they are serious about progressing as quickly as possible and not losing further ground. Given previous expenditure and failures, they need to get the next few absolutely right.
Sturridge, for example, is clearly a player with talent and a capacity for improvisation. He has not yet, however, suggested that he can regularly apply at an elevated levels. In that, there is a danger he could fall into a particular pool of English attacking players that include Adam Johnson and Scott Sinclair. They suggest an ability beyond their present status but don't really rise above it.
At the moment, the same could be said for Liverpool.
