They need to go big this window or they will face the music..
|
|
I have not contradicted myself at all - you seem to lack the intellect to comprehend some simple concepts.
The "right owners" cannot make a team a dominant one without having one of the best managers in place. The owners job is primarily to get the manager the players he needs.
You do think the owners drive success - and I have exposed this fallacy many times. Was it Arsenal's owners or Wenger that drove their dominance? Was it United's owners or Ferguson - Busby....Our owners or Paisley - Shankly - Kenny etc? Roman has been far more hands on than ANY owners I know of but he has always sourced top class management and always provided top class players.
My worry is that we have won just 2 titles with - IMO - by far the best manager around and that a failure to give him what he needs is why we have not managed more.
It is so fooking simple but you just can't bring yourself to see it.
Bottom line is everything I stated I stand by because it is true.
They have been negligent and inept.
Summer 2019 making a profit - Summer 2020 selling Lovren no replacement - January 2021 inaction until Feb 1st....with an invisible man and a kid from the bottom of the Bundesliga.
And they have been clowns from Boston with their attempted
1.£77 ticket hike
2. attempt to trademark the very name of the city FFS - I mean seriously just how clownish do you need them to be?
3. Project Big Picture ... WTF?
4. ESL... Say no more.
We could go on and on forever and never agree and many of you want to highlight ONLY that which can be said to be good - I am highlighting where they have been remiss and it has become a theme.
Last edited by Steveo; 3rd June 2021 at 02:22 PM.
They need to go big this window or they will face the music..
Lovren out - Thiago & Jota in...
Lovren injury prone too, Klopp looking to blood youngsters and relied on VVD not being mullered.
Whilst it looks like he had identified this Konate lad to step in the following summer
"...and my inch is like a freight train, so I only use it in self defence"
If only you were exposing fallacies, Steveo, we might have something interesting to read. Instead all we have is your firmly held opinions.
I agree with this and have made the point often. Although it's interesting that you say 'one of the best' and not 'the best'. In doing so, you admit that there are other ingredients involved in success. Even though, when you don't want to admit defeat in an argument, you avoid stating what these other ingredients are beyond 'money'.
No, I don't think this is right. The owners have to manage a budget that they are instrumental in accruing by their clever running of the club. The budget goes on other important things like medical staff, community development, the stadium, television rights, shirt sales in the Far East, computer modelling of potential signings, a throw-in coach, youth development policy and training facilities etc.
In the case of Man City, their clever running of the club includes fraudulent sponsorship deals. In the case of real Madrid, it includes bailouts from the King of Spain. In the case of Barcelona it includes going one billion pounds into debt. If you are happy with getting the players in by all means, I think you are being short-sighted (see Barcelona's outlook) and also unethical.
Liverpool's era of success was shared by four managers. What stood behind them was stable ownership. Now, most historians that I have come across believe that the Moores family failed to keep up with the times. When the new ear arrived, we fell behind at the level of ownership, not choice of managers. Benitez is an example of 'one of the best' managers unable to do his job because the ownership is more important than the manager in terms of success. That is my case. You have not exposed it as a fallacy.
Ferguson arrived when Man U were modernising their operations and they were both lucky to have each other. They eclipsed us because they had a better club model. My belief is that club has lost its way since Ferguson left. Perhaps the rot started earlier and perhaps they will get their act together soon, who knows. They have tried appointing the best managers they could but it didn't work. There are a number of reasons for that and 'underinvestment' probably isn't one of them.
So, again, must do better.
And if you think trying to trademark the name Liverpool (the name the club is widely known by) shows the owners to be clowns, your lack of basic sympathy for what they were trying to do again reveals your irrationality when it comes to thinking about our owners.
Why would it be a crime to actually have some owners that spend on one of the biggest most sucessful clubs in the world?
Yanks are pathetic. "franchise" "investment"
You think they care about the club and fans? Haha.
I would most of all want someone from Liverpool who has a passion for the place. After that I would go for an Abramovich all day long. Seems to love Chelsea Football Club and is absolutely football mad - madly passionate about the game of football.
Don't like the idea of being state run at all but to be honest once you are owned by a foreign billionaire or group of billionaires - what is the actual difference? For me being owned by a group that has no interest in the sport at all, that is essentially tapping into the wealth generation to expand their global influence/portfolio - is arguably the worst combination of all.
Bookmarks