23 Apr 2015 22:19:39
To all the Rodgers supporters, a fellow poster informed me that rodgers has spent 215mil on players, transfer committee or not Rodgers would have asked for most of the players. Sakho, coutinho, sturridge and can are so far the only ones who have been successful at a combined cost of roughly 40 mil.
He's constantly making himself look stupid in the press
He's tactically naive against big teams and never has a good plan b. He also brings Lambert on in the 90th minute.
Now please tell me why you want this man as our manager??
Suarez got us to second, not Rodgers
24 Apr 2015 07:36:46
Who will replace him klopp I would have but who else is better?
24 Apr 2015 08:08:36
I am by no means convinced by what BR has achieved this season, but I will give him credit for what he did last season. He set up a system from which Suarez benefitted the most.
This summer he wasn´t able to get Sanchez or Costa, which would be qualified as in the bracket below Messi, Ronaldo and Suarez. I´m not saying that we would have won the league if we have had any of these players, but I do think we would be closer to top 4/be within top 4. Also if Sturridge wasn´t as fragile as Elijah Price we would probably have been better.
Rumours say that Gerrard spoke to Suarez when he was having a crisis and wanted out, and said if he stayed and played for another season then he would be allowed to go. Meaning that we already knew a year in advance that suarez was going to leave, yet we weren´t able to find a replacement (this was said on anfield index podcast, so I would not rate the credibility highly)
But all in all, you can´t come with excuses when you´ve spend £100M.
24 Apr 2015 08:28:12
I agree Lerchy! Suarez did get us 2nd.
24 Apr 2015 08:48:50
Also a lot of people blame the transfer committee, but the only reason that's in place is because Rodgers was deemed unfit to have full control.
24 Apr 2015 10:29:50
I support LFC and as our manager Rodgers success is inevitably linked with LFC's success. So if you want to call me a BR supporter then crack on.
I don't blame the committee. It's too easy. You have to consider who LFC compete with in the transfer market. We compete with richer clubs and presently more successful clubs. We are not in a position to attract world superstars at the top of their game. We don't have the money or the piling power. Every manager has transfer failings, even Klopp, De Boer, Rafa and Mourinho.
Calling transfers failures after less than a season is naive. Anyone who knows LFC can point to Henderson or Lucas as examples of poor first seasons followed by regular first team games. Sakho, I believe, is coming good. Lovren, Lallana, Markovic, Moreno, Can all deserve another season before they are judged. Mario and Lambert I'm not convinced about as I don't think they fit our style of play.
Saying Suarez got us to 2nd is wrong. Suarez missed the first 6 games of that season, 5 of them premier league games against tough opposition. If you don't think 5 games makes a difference between 2nd and 5th then look at the league table. Last season was a team effort, but Suarez is a world class player who's departure has damaged the team in terms of quality, confidence and belief. It has also boosted opponents confidence.
I disagree with Mikey's statement. The board wanted a manager to work with a DoF. Rodgers refused and because they wanted him as manager the compromise was a committee, of which he is part. That's my reading of events anyway.
You can be tactically out-manoeuvred without being "tactically naive". Ask any grand chess master who has lost a game of chess. You can only play a system which suits the players at your disposal who are fit and not suspended. I don't believe Rodgers is tactically naive but he, like any human, makes mistakes.
Ask Pep Guardiola about "plan B".
{Ed002's Note - Yet again the dribbling of the "everyone has more money than us" excuse - it is pitiful and embarrassing to read.}
24 Apr 2015 10:53:56
You misinterpret Ed002. I didn't say "everyone" but there are a significant number of teams who do have more money. I'm sure you will agree Mansoor and Abramovich have both elevated the financial status of their clubs above Liverpool. A lot of independent sources can back that up including analysis of wage budgets.
But money was just one of the excuses, you will note I wrote of presently being less successful than many clubs and therefore having less pulling power.
I think I was being realistic.
I'm sorry you were embarrassed Ed.
{Ed002's Note - Chelsea are financially self sufficient and Liverpool are spending far more on buying players and have accumulated a significant debt in doing so. Additionally, Liverpool has on going FFP issues because of the financial mismanagement of transfers. You clearly have no grasp of the financial aspects at all and these "Liverpool is so hard done by" and "everyone has more money than us" excuses are truly embarrassing to read.}
24 Apr 2015 11:14:06
Again I'm sorry you are embarrassed Ed.
I am aware of Chelsea becoming self-sufficient and that is to be applauded. I have no problem with them, but if you believe that having more money and being self sufficient are mutually exclusive then I would respectfully disagree.
If you also believe that having more money does not give you a competitive advantage in the transfer market when signing "world class players at the top of their game", then I would disagree with you again.
Why does this have to be about Chelsea and Liverpool? Barcelona, Real Madrid, PSG, Man City, Arsenal and Man Utd all have more money and all have a competitive advantage in the transfer market. Liverpool have a competitive advantage over Portsmouth in the transfer market. It's not a whine about money, it's being realistic with the players we can reasonably attract. Money is just one of the factors as I have repeatedly acknowledged.
{Ed002's Note - It was you who mentioned Chelsea. Rodgers has spent a quarter of a Billion pounds in the past three seasons and could have spent the £25M that Balotelli and Lambert cost (ignoring the significant signing on fee and outrageous agent fees for Balotelli) on a very good striker. Perhaps he could have spent the £22M that Aspas, Ilori and Alberto cost on someone who actually players for the club - the list is endless. This constant bleating about how badly off Liverpool are is really, really embarrassing. I don't see fans of any other club acting in this way.}
24 Apr 2015 12:57:53
Ron I agree with you and the points you were trying to make and you clearly weren't bleating on regarding £ restricting LFC (sure it was one of your points), the ED seems keener to focus on this aspect than you. From the outside looking in it's interesting to see the conversation deteriorate and become manipulated in this manner. I think Liverpool have can have absolutely no complaints regarding any lack of £ and whilst being in the Champs League is an issue when it comes to attracting some elite players, the £ provided was more than enough to achieve 4th spot. The manager has not been though.
In terms of your other points I agree that the new players may come good and it may help us out. Hopefully in terms of finishing higher in the league, their valuation and the attraction of playing alongside them. Call me old fashioned but I also like to think the history of LFC can help attract the odd player too.
24 Apr 2015 13:21:34
ED - You mentioned Aspas Alberto and LLori but how do you expect us to compete with the other clubs when we were sitting around 8th at this point so they were transfers matched to where we were at that time and didn't have the pulling power we may have more of now!!!
You mentioned above Ron Keague posts were embarrassing but really contradicts what you say here about money - Are you saying we could of bought a top class striker at this point who was in a top 4 club with Champions League - Of course money has a significant pulling power
{Ed002's Note - Liverpool had the money but it was squandered by Rodgers. You don't seem to be able to grasp that he has spent in the order of a quarter of a Billion pounds for nothing in return - zip, zero, nada. It is a failure whatever way you look at it and if you think buying the likes of Aspas, Ilori and Alberto, not playing them for a year and then sending them on loan because nobody will by them is anything but really dreadful business, then I feel sorry for you. Take a simple example, for what Liverpool spent on Markovic last summer they could have had Pedro - who was available. That doesn't seem like good business to me. Liverpool could have purchased Lovren a year before they did for a third of the money. It goes on and on. The problem is not the ability to attract players, all clubs suffer from that, but the money has been spent very poorly and has given the club FFP problems and debt - but what it hasn't done is given the club success on the field. For me it needs to change.}
24 Apr 2015 20:56:27
Another BR apologist whose blind faith and pro-BR mythe just got debunked and overall, just got schooled by the inimmitable Ed02.
24 Apr 2015 21:18:17
Ed what about before FFP?
Would Chelsea have breached FFP rules if they were in place before Roman arrived?
You use this ffp as if it was in place when Roman started at Chelsea and Chelsea have always stuck by it.
Nonsense.
You built a super squad for about 200 million pounds when Mourinho was in charge the first time.
Drogba,Johnson,Essien,Cech,Carvalho, Shevchenko et al.
Huge money.
You had to because you wanted success and the current squad was not going to provide it.
So you spent loads of money improving the squad.
Nothing wrong with that but you can't use FFP as a stick to beat other clubs with when it was not a barrier to your squad building in the early 2000's.
If a club wanted to do that now they would not be allowed to or would find it difficult as Man City are finding out.
That is why I can't stand FFP.
It's a con to keep those clubs at the top at the top.
I include Liverpool in "those clubs at the top" by the way.
And don't give me grief for talking about Chelsea. You talk about Liverpool all the time and get away with it.
{Ed002's Note - There is really something wrong with you obsessing about Chelsea and I cannot see the relevance of what they did 12 years ago. The reason I will talk about Liverpool is that this is the Liverpool page. You clearly don't understand FFP nor the problems that some of the English sides have had with it.}
24 Apr 2015 21:22:42
You can't talk about spending without acknowledging players leaving as well.
Rodgers was not given £250 million and told "there you go fella" win us the league with that.
We have to sell to buy in some instances.
Torres=Carroll and Suarez being a case in point.
{Ed002's Note - One feeble excuse after another - he has failed completely and utterly - whatever way you look at it. Liverpool has massive debts due to him pissing vast amounts of money away. Zero targets achieved is only seemingly acceptable to you - a few more years of transition.
25 Apr 2015 07:37:16
We will just have to disagree Ed.
The reason I talk about other clubs is because this is a football website.
I am not obsessed with Chelsea at all mate. why would I be?
But I won't stop talking about Chelsea just because you support them mate.
I have no axe to grind against your team.
I do have a problem with you using your club as a model for compliance with FFP while totally disregarding the years of massive spending prior to it's introduction.
The relevance is obvious.
It's not a feeble excuse either. It is completely relevant to point out that Liverpool can't just spend £250 million pounds without releasing players.
Take £65 million for Suarez off and that is 20% of the total recouped in 1 player.
How is that not relevant?
{Ed002's Note - How can you disagree with Chelsea being compliant with FFP - because they are. Liverpool aren't so you want to bring up what they did 12 years ago. Liverpool have been spending money they don't have - they have been in breach of the regulations and only got away with last season after an appeal to UEFA about writing off additional monies spent on the stadium. They are again in breach this year. For some reason you can't grasp any of this - obsessing about Chelsea is simply embarrassing.}
25 Apr 2015 14:43:27
I think it's embarrassing to suggest Chelsea spending millions and millions of pounds on players prior to FFP has not made it easier for them to comply with FFP now that it has been introduced but there we go.
I don't disagree that you are compliant now. You weren't in the 2000's though. That is my point about FFP.
It is like pulling up the draw bridge.
The only difference between Chelsea and Man City is timing.
{Ed002's Note - Liverpool have been pissing money away for years Jonny - ity is not about Chelsea or any other club you are jealous of. It is about Liverpool, financial mismanagement and abject failure. Suck it up and move on.}