Serious Thread: The Liverpool Situation

Dalglish himself has said in an interview that it would take 4 years to have Liverpool back challenging again

makes you realise the extent of the damage Benitez did in the end and the extremely poor state of the squad at the minute
 
buckooo1978 said:
Dalglish himself has said in an interview that it would take 4 years to have Liverpool back challenging again

makes you realise the extent of the damage Benitez did in the end and the extremely poor state of the squad at the minute
Click to expand...

It's all Rafa's fault!

All it takes is a sugar daddy and a couple of transfer windows in reality. Anyone can challenge if they throw enough money at the problem.

Given we don't have one there is a bit of rebuilding to do now though. Too many years of neglect, poor ownership and questionable transfers..
 
buckooo1978 said:
Dalglish himself has said in an interview that it would take 4 years to have Liverpool back challenging again

makes you realise the extent of the damage Benitez did in the end and the extremely poor state of the squad at the minute
Click to expand...

Benitez challenged for title with the same team plus Mascherano and Alonso, one of whom was sold by Hodgson after Benitez had departed and the other one wanted to join his dream club. They are not that far off, they probably need two or three players to get back into top 4 and from there on anything could happen. Oh, and a new manager would be handy.
 
Sarni said:
Benitez challenged for title with the same team plus Mascherano and Alonso, one of whom was sold by Hodgson after Benitez had departed and the other one wanted to join his dream club. They are not that far off, they probably need two or three players to get back into top 4 and from there on anything could happen. Oh, and a new manager would be handy.
Click to expand...
Alonso left because Rafa was a shit manager.
 
Sam.G said:
It was an observation about football more than a plea for a rich owner.

More money = more trophies. Less money = less trophies.
Click to expand...
The problem is Liverpool needs more than a couple of sugar daddy signings. You need to buy an entire back 4 and decent 4 decent midfielders. The only players Liverpool have who could be taken seriously in a title challenging team are Torres, Gerrard an Riena. The rest could make for a good enough squad but not good enough team.
 
Sarni said:
Benitez challenged for title with the same team plus Mascherano and Alonso, one of whom was sold by Hodgson after Benitez had departed and the other one wanted to join his dream club. They are not that far off, they probably need two or three players to get back into top 4 and from there on anything could happen. Oh, and a new manager would be handy.
Click to expand...

To challenge for the title, they need:

- A couple of centrehalves, including a top notch one
- A left back
- Two wingers
- A centre midfielder
- A striker

That's 7 players.
 
Silva said:
The problem is Liverpool needs more than a couple of sugar daddy signings. You need to buy an entire back 4 and decent 4 decent midfielders. The only players Liverpool have who could be taken seriously in a title challenging team are Torres, Gerrard an Riena. The rest could make for a good enough squad but not good enough team.
Click to expand...

I don't want a sugar daddy. Just owners to run the club properly

My observation was about football in general. Not Liverpool in particular.
 
People go on about the 2009 Liverpool squad but the fact of the matter is the squad is a shadow of that team.

I know a lot of the players are the same minus Alonso and Mascherano but I reckon even if those two were in the team they'd still struggle. I think Fergie made the point that they might have peaked in 2009 and its very difficult to get the players to that same level of performance. He likened it to his first full season when we finished 2nd but were nowhere near the title for the next 2-3 years and you can see the parallels. The likes of Gerrard, Torres and Carragher who were essential to that team are nowhere near the quality of 2009. Only Reina I'd say has gotten better or kept the same level of performance.

I think this Liverpool team needs to be torn apart and built again. It'll take awhile to acheive this. Unless ofcourse the new owners decide to spend shit loads which I highly doubt. They seem to be interested in the longer game.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
To challenge for the title, they need:

- A couple of centrehalves, including a top notch one
- A left back
- Two wingers
- A centre midfielder
- A striker

That's 7 players.
Click to expand...

more or less. I think 60m is conservative for that.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
People go on about the 2009 Liverpool squad but the fact of the matter is the squad is a shadow of that team.

I know a lot of the players are the same minus Alonso and Mascherano but I reckon even if those two were in the team they'd still struggle. I think Fergie made the point that they might have peaked in 2009 and its very difficult to get the players to that same level of performance. He likened it to his first full season when we finished 2nd but were nowhere near the title for the next 2-3 years and you can see the parallels. The likes of Gerrard, Torres and Carragher who were essential to that team are nowhere near the quality of 2009. Only Reina I'd say has gotten better or kept the same level of performance.

I think this Liverpool team needs to be torn apart and built again. It'll take awhile to acheive this. Unless ofcourse the new owners decide to spend shit loads which I highly doubt. They seem to be interested in the longer game.
Click to expand...

Good post.
 
Sarni said:
Benitez challenged for title with the same team plus Mascherano and Alonso, one of whom was sold by Hodgson after Benitez had departed and the other one wanted to join his dream club. They are not that far off, they probably need two or three players to get back into top 4 and from there on anything could happen. Oh, and a new manager would be handy.
Click to expand...
its not that simple - Liverpool have a whole host of problems

gerrard is 2 years older and you could argue he's been in decline (definately not as effective as he was then)

carragher is definately on the way out

hyypia was a very good backup CB but the club failed to give him the contract he wanted - kyriakos or whatever is a really poor defender IMO

skrtl and agger have been very poor lately

letting a half decent defender like arbeloa go and blowing your wad on glen johnson was a mistake

they have no solid reliable left back

the kid kelly looks a prospect

Lucas/Meirles are squad players at best


Babel has underachieved for 4 years now (i think)

Kuyt wouldnt be 1st choice for another side in the top 4/5

Cole could make a comeback and start putting some decent performances

Are Poulson/Jovanavic good enough?

They have 1 backup striker for Torres in Ngog - is he good enough to lead the line when Torres is out?

I think Liverpool have some serious issues and there is no guarantee the owners are gonna spend big - the fact they have been scouting Charlie Adam (a poor mans Danny Murphy?) maybe suggest the kind of price bracket they are working within

I think it could take a few seasons for Liverpool to get the 4th place back - they need at least 5/6 players to come through the system or be bougth in tho - the current squad is full of squad players - the need players who will walk straight into the 1st team
 
Moreover, their current squad lack pace, players that can ake on players and goalscorers.

How many players with genuine pace? Johnson, Torres, Babel, Ngog?

Who can take players on? Torres, Babel, Cole and Gerrard?

And who can you expect goals from? Gerrard and Torres?
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Moreover, their current squad lack pace, players that can ake on players and goalscorers.

How many players with genuine pace? Johnson, Torres, Babel, Ngog?

Who can take players on? Torres, Babel, Cole and Gerrard?

And who can you expect goals from? Gerrard and Torres?
Click to expand...

Right again.

Have you guys been drinking sensible juice?
 
Totally agree Ole's_toe_poke. It may have been a good team for that season, but it's just not now. For some players it was a peak years, others (Carragher) have just aged and will never be what they used to. They should stop thinking about that team and rebuild. Question is, can you rebuild around Gerrard who's not so young anymore and Torres, who you never know if he's willing to last the distace until they can challenge.
 
Sarni said:
Benitez challenged for title with the same team plus Mascherano and Alonso, one of whom was sold by Hodgson after Benitez had departed and the other one wanted to join his dream club. They are not that far off, they probably need two or three players to get back into top 4 and from there on anything could happen. Oh, and a new manager would be handy.
Click to expand...

Alonson left because Benitez was desperate to replace him with Gareth fecking Barry (:lol:). Hodgson was barely in the seat when Masch was sold (frankly I thought the transfer was done before Woy arrived, but cant really remember tbf).

The main thing though, was the top players not performing. Being realistic, Gerrard, Torres and Reina have carried Liverpool through the last 2-3 seasons, and this time round, 2/3 of those arent performing, and it shows. Gerrard is also getting on in the years, and I dont think his heart is in it anymore now that he realises he is probably never going to win another serious trophy with Liverpool. If I were them I would probably sell him before his value plummets too much, they could easily get a good £20m or so for him - more if City were involved.
 
Sam.G said:
It was an observation about football more than a plea for a rich owner.

More money = more trophies. Less money = less trophies.
Click to expand...

More trophies = more money, less trophies = less money.

Many clubs have to fund themselves with success - the good old fashioned way.

Liverpool's failings here are clear. No major trophies for half a decade, despite a mountain of cash spent - a clear example that money doesn't guarantee success if the club is managed poorly.

Then without the success to back up the spending, the arse fell out, the pot was empty, and you are where you are.

As for sugar daddies, they offer a shortcut but they're soon to be a dying breed.
 
Kraftwerker said:
More trophies = more money, less trophies = less money.

Many clubs have to fund themselves with success - the good old fashioned way.
Click to expand...

As I have said twice, it was a general (and correct) observation.

To win trophies at the top level, you have to have (a shed load of) money.

It wasn't an comment on Liverpool.
 
Sam.G said:
It was an observation about football more than a plea for a rich owner.

More money = more trophies. Less money = less trophies.
Click to expand...

Maybe over the long term, but we've been holding our own against Chelsea for half a decade now. We've won slightly more than them in that period despite them having far more money than us.

Obviously it will be all the harder now City have become ridiculous in a whole new way, but its possible to at least stay competitive with good management. You just have to get some of that good management.
 
Plechazunga said:
Maybe over the long term, but we've been holding our own against Chelsea for half a decade now. We've won slightly more than them in that period despite them having far more money than us.

Obviously it will be all the harder now City have become ridiculous in a whole new way, but its possible to at least stay competitive with good management. You just have to get some of that good management.
Click to expand...

Not only good football management, but the management of the whole club and its operations.

What is interesting to see, is that despite all the money Liverpool have spent over the last 5-10 years, their current squad's purchase value (i.e. what Liveprool paid for their players) is only about £100m (£97m if the figures I've got are correct). In comparison, the United squad's purchase value is about £220m. That is excluded players away on loan for both clubs. United obviously have a bigger squad (7 more players in the two squads compared).
 
Plechazunga said:
Maybe over the long term, but we've been holding our own against Chelsea for half a decade now. We've won slightly more than them in that period despite them having far more money than us.

Obviously it will be all the harder now City have become ridiculous in a whole new way, but its possible to at least stay competitive with good management. You just have to get some of that good management.
Click to expand...

I am not inclined to dispute that as I have no idea about the relative spend of Utd and Chelsea. My point was rather a general one about the way football has gone. The trophies being shared out among the elite and the only way to break the hold is by having a huge injection of wealth a la Man City.

Liverpool have obviously spent enough to better off in the table than they are. But my point wasn't about Liverpool. Or Utd. Or Oldham.
 
Sam.G said:
I am not inclined to dispute that as I have no idea about the relative spend of Utd and Chelsea. My point was rather a general one about the way football has gone. The trophies being shared out among the elite and the only way to break the hold is by having a huge injection of wealth a la Man City.

Liverpool have obviously spent enough to better off in the table than they are. But my point wasn't about Liverpool. Or Utd. Or Oldham.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

Obviously, you need good, solid financial resources to compete at the top, but you don't need City kind of money. Good, long term planning and management can take you up there as well - look at Spurs.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
I disagree.

Obviously, you need good, solid financial resources to compete at the top, but you don't need City kind of money. Good, long term planning and management can take you up there as well - look at Spurs.
Click to expand...

I agree you don't need City type of money but you still need a bucketload.

And Spurs have won jack.
 
Sam.G said:
I agree you don't need City type of money but you still need a bucketload.

And Spurs have won jack.
Click to expand...
Earlier you said: "The trophies being shared out among the elite and the only way to break the hold is by having a huge injection of wealth a la Man City."

City have won jack.

Spurs are at least playing in the CL, did win a trophy in 2008, are in with decent shout of qualifying for the CL again this season and have plans to boost their income hugely with a new stadium.

If Liverpool's strategy for recovery rests on hoping for a sugar-daddy, then it's a piss-poor strategy.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Earlier you said: "The trophies being shared out among the elite and the only way to break the hold is by having a huge injection of wealth a la Man City."

City have won jack.

Spurs are at least playing in the CL, did win a trophy in 2008, are in with decent shout of qualifying for the CL again this season and have plans to boost their income hugely with a new stadium.

If Liverpool's strategy for recovery rests on hoping for a sugar-daddy, then it's a piss-poor strategy.
Click to expand...

It was an observation about football in general. Is that really so difficult a concept to grasp? Really?

More money = more trophies. Simple.

edit: I will just add that Spurs have done brilliantly and it's good to see. But have the got the financial muscle to compete at the very top? i doubt it personally.
 
Sam.G said:
It was an observation about football in general. Is that really so difficult a concept to grasp? Really?

More money = more trophies. Simple.
Click to expand...
Having more money obviously helps (it could hardly hurt), but:

* There are many ways of generating more money without needing to have it come from a sugar-daddy.

* There are many ways of maximising the money available for transfer fees (as distinct from spending money on other things, like wages).

* How well transfer fee money is spent is crucial.

So it's far too simplistic to say "The trophies being shared out among the elite and the only way to break the hold is by having a huge injection of wealth a la Man City."
 
Sam.G said:
It was an observation about football in general. Is that really so difficult a concept to grasp? Really?

More money = more trophies. Simple.
Click to expand...

It works both ways.

Of course if you get bought over by a billionaire and have ridiculous amounts to sum you'll soon be in contention to win things irrespective of how rubbish you were before hand. But it isn't the only way to be successful. The more trophies=more money also holds true. It's why we have been able to spend a lot of money in recent years, at least before the Glazers took over. Because we earned the right too by winning things.

Spurs are a great example for Liverpool to follow IMO. They have gradually improved in almost every area and are now not that far off from being a title challenging team. And they're doing it without a billionaire suger daddy which doesn't devalue any success they have. One league title for Spurs would mean more than 5 for Liverpool.

I know your post wasn't about Liverpool but for any club the latter the route to take IMO.
 
Sam.G said:
I agree you don't need City type of money but you still need a bucketload.

And Spurs have won jack.
Click to expand...

City have won jack.

You need financial resources to compete.

But you are confusing yourself. You are saying you need money ala City, but that you don't need money ala City...
 
amolbhatia100 said:
It works both ways.

Of course if you get bought over by a billionaire and have ridiculous amounts to sum you'll soon be in contention to win things irrespective of how rubbish you were before hand. But it isn't the only way to be successful. The more trophies=more money also holds true. It's why we have been able to spend a lot of money in recent years, at least before the Glazers took over. Because we earned the right too by winning things.

Spurs are a great example for Liverpool to follow IMO. They have gradually improved in almost every area and are now not that far off from being a title challenging team. And they're doing it without a billionaire suger daddy which doesn't devalue any success they have. One league title for Spurs would mean more than 5 for Liverpool.

I know your post wasn't about Liverpool but for any club the latter the route to take IMO.
Click to expand...

Good post and I agree with all of it.

Spurs are a great example of a well run club.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
City have won jack.

You need financial resources to compete.

But you are confusing yourself. You are saying you need money ala City, but that you don't need money ala City...
Click to expand...

All I am saying is the more money you have, the more chance you will have at winning trophies.

It's nothing more complicated or agenda-driven than that.
 
Sam.G said:
All I am saying is the more money you have, the more chance you will have at winning trophies.

It's nothing more complicated or agenda-driven than that.
Click to expand...

yes, more money = more chance of winning

More money does not = more trophies though, which is what you claimed above.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
yes, more money = more chance of winning

More money does not = more trophies though, which is what you claimed above.
Click to expand...

Yes it does. More trophies, more chance of winning, however you want to term it.

Both of these in my view.
 
Liverpool need to forget past glories and realise that returning to challenging at the top is going to be a long-term project. There will be no quick fixes.

The squad contains a large amount of ageing players and many mediocre (or worse) players, Torres will be gone this summer (IMO), you have little width or real pace in the team, squad depth is thin, the new stadium project seems to be in limbo-land and you now have a 3rd manager in little more than 6 months. The only bright spot is that your massive debt has been more or less wiped away.

In short, the team needs more or less a complete re-build, one that cannot be built around players that probably won't be there for much longer (e.g. Torres) or players whose age precludes this (e.g. Gerrard, Carragher).

This re-build can only take place bit by bit, such is the scale of changes needed. It needs to include a major focus on signing/developing "youth with real potential", rather than looking to sign big-name, expensive players.

Above all it needs the right manager (not Dalglish) - one who is free to decide on their own transfer dealings within a set budget, without the interference of a Director of Football (DoF).

The Spurs experiment with a DoF (Commolli) had mixed results, but overall Spurs did better under Jol before the DoF's influence became strong and have done much better since the experiment was ditched. I believe Liverpool will discover the same truth ... but better sooner rather than later.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Moreover, their current squad lack pace, players that can ake on players and goalscorers.

How many players with genuine pace? Johnson, Torres, Babel, Ngog?

Who can take players on? Torres, Babel, Cole and Gerrard?

And who can you expect goals from? Gerrard and Torres?
Click to expand...

N'gog is our top goalscorer alongside Gerrard. Still got a long way to go before he is a proper player, but he's done really well in taking his chances as a sub for Torres this season.

Babel used to be good for goals as a sub. I honestly don't know where to place him as a player these days.

Kuyt used to be good for a fair amount of goals from the wings, but he looks finished tbh.

I think actually our most pressing concerns are defensive. We are leaking goals and we are getting overrun in midfield. Get that sorted and you can still fall back on Gerrard and Torres to win games more often than not as long as we control games and start keeping clean sheets.

Actually I'd really like one top notch creative player in there to complement them. I think one would do for the purposes of adressing the most glaring deficiencies. And then sort out the defensive parts of the team.
 
B9 said:
N'gog is our top goalscorer alongside Gerrard. Still got a long way to go before he is a proper player, but he's done really well in taking his chances as a sub for Torres this season.

Babel used to be good for goals as a sub. I honestly don't know where to place him as a player these days.

Kuyt used to be good for a fair amount of goals from the wings, but he looks finished tbh.

I think actually our most pressing concerns are defensive. We are leaking goals and we are getting overrun in midfield. Get that sorted and you can still fall back on Gerrard and Torres to win games more often than not as long as we control games and start keeping clean sheets.

Actually I'd really like one top notch creative player in there to complement them. I think one would do for the purposes of adressing the most glaring deficiencies. And then sort out the defensive parts of the team.
Click to expand...

Do you think the tactics are exacerbating the problem at Liverpool? Torres isn't playing well up front at the moment, so surely they should put a partner alongside him to link up with?

Not to mention that Liverpool have no width at the moment. To my knowledge Babel has never had a run of 10-15 games in the Liverpool team, no wonder he looks average at best. Look at what a run of games has done for Nani, Rafael and hopefully Anderson (not saying he's anywhere near as talented as those).
 
finneh said:
Do you think the tactics are exacerbating the problem at Liverpool? Torres isn't playing well up front at the moment, so surely they should put a partner alongside him to link up with?
Click to expand...

Of course tactics have been a problem. That's why we just sacked the manager.

Really hope Kenny comes up with something better than a midfield pack of Meireless, Poulsen and Lucas with donkeys like Jovanovic and Kuyt supporting Torres on the wing for Everton. Don't know what the feck he was thinking with that lineup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.