Brendan Rodgers

[johnnytodd]

Liverpool have a squad that can compete for the top three imo however Rodgers has never found a way since Suarez left of getting everything he can out of the players. It needs tinkering a bit and I'm unsure he is the man now to get the balance correct.

Do people still drink on a monday?

 

[thespus]

Liverpool have a squad that can compete for the top three imo .

 

[JimJams]

I did ask this before when people were claiming 'We have the players' but have them to do what? You say compete for the top 3, you're struggling to compete for the top 4, and of those you are competing with you definitely have worse players.
If you had Sturridge fully fit for a full season guaranteed, then I could see a top 4 challenge. As is I just can't see it. Benteke would get you 20 goals comfortably if you played to his strengths, he might even do it while you aren't, but the whole side is being readjusted because of sales and injuries to key players which were crucial to the style of play that Rodgers has utilised. The players brought in are not like for like replacements of a lesser quality, they're players that don't appear to fit into the system that you've been trying to play.

 

[Jockney]

I think a challenge would be taking over at Arsenal and wrestling the league away from the current status quo. A challenge would be making Man City a real European contender. A challenge would be taking over at Milan and knocking Juve off top spot in a similar fashion to how he won the title with Dortmund. These are challenges. Doing something with Liverpool would require a fucking miracle.

True but think Klopp would see Milan as too much hassle, Berlusconi too involved.
Man City a possibility but again I think he wants his own project. Man City are an Abdu Dhabi United brand not a football club.
Also, could you imagine Klopp at Real Madrid. There'd be riots within weeks.

 

[G-Dragon]

Liverpool are about a Spurs-sized club. Similar league positions over the past five years. Similar trophy count over the past five years. Slightly larger stadium. Slightly larger wage bill. In the Europa League. Hamstrung by their resources, playing catch-up to the SuperClubs who make up last season's top four. Huge history, yes, but not a huge club anymore.

Only SuperClub in PL at the moment is Manchester City.

 

[JimJams]

No, not really. Chelsea and Man Utd both have the resources to spend crazy money to keep them in that bracket. Arsenal possibly too, though it may get out of their reach if prices continue to escalate.

 

[G-Dragon]

No, not really. Chelsea and Man Utd both have the resources to spend crazy money to keep them in that bracket. Arsenal possibly too, though it may get out of their reach if prices continue to escalate.

Not just in terms of spending money. For example, winning two FA Cups and making up numbers in CL in the last 10 years does not make a club "SuperClub."

 

[ColB]

Liverpool are about a Spurs-sized club. Similar league positions over the past five years. Similar trophy count over the past five years. Slightly larger stadium. Slightly larger wage bill. In the Europa League. Hamstrung by their resources, playing catch-up to the SuperClubs who make up last season's top four. Huge history, yes, but not a huge club anymore.

It's the history and tradition of the club that makes it a huge one. I'm not trying to say that Liverpool are the equals to Madrid, Barcelona or United, but there aren't many players around that would turn their nose up at Liverpool and I'm pretty sure that goes for any out of work managers too, including Jurgen Klopp. Dortmund are no bigger than Liverpool and yet he was there for a number of years.

 

[Red]

Apparently a Liverpool fan has started an online campaign to get rid of Rodgers. He's trying to get enough donations so he can give the club money to pay off Rodgers' compensation.

 

[Stevencc]

Apparently a Liverpool fan has started an online campaign to get rid of Rodgers. He's trying to get enough donations so he can give the club money to pay off Rodgers' compensation.

I just read about that too.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-page-to-pay-for-Brendan-Rodgers-sacking.html

 

[G-Dragon]

Only sack Rodgers if we are going to get Klopp or Ancelotti.

 

[Whitechapel]

Only sack Rodgers if we are going to get Klopp or Ancelotti.

Don't think Liverpool are a club which can attract top managers like that. Hence Rodgers took over, and as of right now since he took over you've been treading water at best.

 

[Stocky]

He's a good coach. But his transfer dealings are horrendous. It looks like it's going to cost him. Worst Liverpool team in years at Old Trafford on Saturday.

 

[smat]

It's the history and tradition of the club that makes it a huge one. I'm not trying to say that Liverpool are the equals to Madrid, Barcelona or United, but there aren't many players around that would turn their nose up at Liverpool and I'm pretty sure that goes for any out of work managers too, including Jurgen Klopp. Dortmund are no bigger than Liverpool and yet he was there for a number of years.

Most of the players who would improve Liverpool would turn their nose up at them. That's their problem.

Pro Vercelli have won more than twice as many titles as Roma, but their last one was in 1922. Which club is bigger? History is past, it counts for very little.

 

[shane]

The club could have got rid of Rodgers in June after the Stoke game, got a new manager in, given him the large fees we spent* so he had time to bed in a new team before the season started. Instead, they publicly backed Rodgers and let him spend away. We won our first two games, performed relatively well against Arsenal and then absolutely dicked the following two games. They aren't getting rid based on that.

If we don't take 6 points against Norwich and Villa, then is the time to talk sackings.

*(small net spend though - LFC disclaimer)

 

[Pagnell]

Comparing titles a club won pre 1922 with titles another won pre-25 years back in terms judging club size is idiotic. However, only the stupidest Liverpool fans (although I certainly accept there are a lot of them) wouldn't accept we're not the force we were, with the last 5-6 years in particular being bad. One second place finish and a title challenge a few seasons back doesn't make up for that. Klopp won't come to Liverpool, so we need to ask ourselves who would replace Rodgers if we get rid. And then if keeping hold of the wrong manager is the right thing to do simply because there is no one obvious to replace him who'll be a definite improvement.

As I've said previously, he will get the entire season short of it looking like a bottom half finish.

 

[ColB]

History is past, it counts for very little.

It counts for a lot. Liverpool, whether you like it or not, are a massive name in football despite obviously not being the force they once were when it comes to winning trophies.

But my original point is that Klopp would absolutely consider Liverpool, I have no doubt about it.

 

[TheArtfulDodger]

It's more about potential to challenge, Liverpool aren't a top club at the moment but are feasibly one of the few which could challenge again. However, I think they've been very conservative with their stadium and can't see much changing for them under this ownership.

 

[smat]

Comparing titles a club won pre 1922 with titles another won pre-25 years back in terms judging club size is idiotic.

Hi Pagnell, thanks for keeping it civil.

Personally I think liking Coronation Street and Bill Hicks is massively idiotic, and at least that criticism isn't based on fantasy. I wasn't actually comparing Liverpool and Pro Vercelli's titles

b
u
t

t
h
e
n

y
o
u

k
n
e
w

t
h
a
t

a
l
r
e
a
d
y

 

[Pagnell]

 

[Red]

I'm sure I read somewhere that klopp would consider becoming the manager of a team that isn't a top top club. Benitez might be a possibility for Liverpool. He loves the club and if he royally fucks up at Madrid.

 

[G-Dragon]

Don't think Liverpool are a club which can attract top managers like that. Hence Rodgers took over, and as of right now since he took over you've been treading water at best.

Van Gaal said: “I decided to go and talk to Liverpool, after they had approached me.

"I had serious talks with them and for me it was a good option because I considered Liverpool as a fantastic club.”

 

[Whitechapel]

Van Gaal said: “I decided to go and talk to Liverpool, after they had approached me.

"I had serious talks with them and for me it was a good option because I considered Liverpool as a fantastic club.”

When I said "Managers like that", I meant decent ones.

 

[Stevencc]

Van Gaal said: “I decided to go and talk to Liverpool, after they had approached me.

"I had serious talks with them and for me it was a good option because I considered Liverpool as a fantastic club.”

You don't think Van Gaal is a top manager, though...

 

[merseyboyred]

Don't think Liverpool are a club which can attract top managers like that. Hence Rodgers took over, and as of right now since he took over you've been treading water at best.

We could definitely get Klopp. Ancelotti maybe not, and I have my doubts he'd be the right fit.

 

[SALTIRE]

Don't think Liverpool are a club which can attract top managers like that.

Alas I agree, maybe they could get the faunt of all football knowledge that is Harry Redknapp if they are lucky.

 

[Christian Slater]

Redknapp is being proved correct about Liverpool though, isn't he?

 

[Pagnell]

No.

 

[Whitechapel]

I honestly think he's be better than Rodgers, Liverpool would no doubt improve.

 

[G-Dragon]

You don't think Van Gaal is a top manager, though...

Looking at today's result maybe not