QUOTE(reehdus @ Sep 5 2012, 10:08 AM)
The weight of the price tags made Kenny think he had to justify the purchases. And the amount spent, was it really Kenny's doing?
Whether it was Comolli's decision or his, the bottom line is we paid a lot for players who weren't up to mark. I don't think anyone has denied that mistakes were made in this department. My opinion on the matter however is that I saw enough positives to give Kenny a chance to right the wrong. Yes, I stand strongly by my belief and understanding of the game that we were playing good football, the pass and move of old. We just weren't clinical and there was a fine line between success and failure. If we had converted half the chances that came back off the post, we could potentially have finished in or thereabouts the top four. We certainly weren't playing the crappy, negative football we had been under Hodgson.
QUOTE(reehdus @ Sep 5 2012, 10:08 AM)
I think finishing 8th and reaching two cup finals is turning around the club, yes. Especially comparing the way we played under Kenny to Hodgson. The bigger name player moves stopped once we became a midtable club, i.e. when Hodgson took over. Whoever thought he had the pedigree to manage Liverpool was sadly mistaken. People keep bringing up the money side of things but come on, if FSG was really a shrewd business group, they wouldn't have sanctioned the buys. I don't think Kenny is to blame. And it's also nice to see how people conveniently forget Kenny also brought in Suarez and Enrique.
I agree, following the matches I thought there was a world of difference. But then they sacked KD and here we are back at square one, or should I say square -1 considering we only have a 19 man squad now.
I never quite understood Hodgson's appointment despite him taking Fulham to the Europa Cup final. His away record was appalling and he never showed the steely mentality required by a big club manager. Although Rodgers is way younger, you can feel charisma oozing from him and after reading his interviews, you get a sense that he is determined to do it his way and he displays no fear. He almost sent Raheem Sterling home from our tour in the US after the young lad continuously interrupted his debriefing (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2194616/Liverpools-Raheem-Sterling-barracked-Brendan-Rodgers.html). Whether he'll still be here come end of the season or not, I can at least respect Rodgers for the man that he is.
Hodgson's biggest contribution was Raul Mereiles who was quite easily our player of the season before we sold him.
In terms of FSG sanctioning Kenny's buys, I'm sure you're right, however FSG had very little understanding of the game and the transfer market at the time, hence why they appointed Comolli as Director of Football to advise them on such matters. His appointment in itself was a surprise given his spell at Spurs but axing him clearly showed that whilst Kenny may have suggested which players to buy, Comolli had the final word. Both of them made a mistake but the person who had the last say bit the bullet in the end.
What I find dodgy about Kenny's sacking is this. In his letter, John Henry reiterated that they are looking long term and that it will take some years to re-establish us as a force. This came in light of our inability to sign a striker after the close of the transfer window, and our recent run of poor results. He even suggested that we may have to move backwards to move forward. The question then is, if Rodgers is unable to improve on our league position, will he be retained? Henry said the same things about time and planning for the future when Kenny was at the helm and after just one season, he got the sack. This suggests that regardless of what he says, Rodgers will go if he cannot at least match Kenny's last league finish. I for one would like to see him retained even if he doesn't because I think we need some continuity. We aren't cultivating success the same way the likes of Chelsea and City are. John Henry has already said we aren't going to splurge and pay over the market rate. Therefore, we need continuity and consistency and I say whether this season is regarded as a failure or not, we should persist with Rodgers at least until the end of his contract.
QUOTE(Cloud0890 @ Sep 5 2012, 10:26 AM)
If memory serves me right this problem goes way back to Rafa's last season after the sale of Xabi Alonso. Deprived of his creativity and passing range we were struggling to score goals but still able to do decent because we still have the Torres-Gerrard partnership although declining in form but still effective. Then injury problems to Torres severely affected his form especially after returning from WC '10. The situation worsen when Hodgson encourages long ball defensive tactics that drained every last bit of creativity we had in our team. Torres never recovered from his dip in form, was sold. Gerrard too was having injury problems of his own. So there we have it, Xabi our best playmaker sold, we are a one-two man team in Gerrard and Torres, injured and sold. Who do we have left to lead the team???
Your sequence of events seem about right.
QUOTE(Cloud0890 @ Sep 5 2012, 10:26 AM)
This is where Kenny and Comolli failed badly. They weren't sacked because we weren't playing good football, they were sacked because of their shambolic transfer dealings which directly affected our on-field performance. They were given a huge amount of transfer funds that was meant to strengthen our weakening squad, a squad deprived of star players which every club needs to lead the team. They brought in Henderson, Downing and Carroll as if these big money buys are as good as Xabi, Stevie and Fernando. Had they made better purchases I'm sure the team would've gotten much better results as evident of our improving passing play under KK.
If I understand you correctly, you agree that the team was looking more positive and we played some decent footy, only to be let down by poor players? Thing is if the problem was only the latter, why not just appoint a new Director of Football to oversee signings? I think Kenny was sacked because FSG didn't care if we played good footy or not. In the end it was down to the results. If we lost a game, we lost, regardless of how we lost. It's not my money invested in the club and it's easy for me to say this, but if you ask me, how we lost does matter. The fact that we played well despite losing is a positive.
QUOTE(Cloud0890 @ Sep 5 2012, 10:26 AM)
Saying that we can't make big name buys for the likes of Hazard, Mata etc. is nonsense, if you have 100+ million to spend on superstar players they will come even if we are lingering in midtable because we are spending on quality players and they know its gonna propel us upwards and on a personal level they wanna play with big name players too. Ask any of our signings now they will say they are looking forward to playing alongside Gerrard and Suarez, does Carroll, Downing and Henderson give us that same appeal? Man City did just that! Signing superstar players sends a signal and one will lead to another like a snowball effect.
The reason we aren't signing superstars isn't just down to us not being an attractive destination for them, what with no Champions League football and all.
1) Trimming the wage bill - Signing superstars isn't just about shelling out a huge transfer fee. You have to pay them exuberant wages each week. Ask Yaya Toure how much he's on. He's a superstar an an amazing player but earns the combined amount of 4-5 average first teamers.
2) FFP - The club needs to be profitable and a high wage bill is the main reason clubs like Chelsea and Man City were in the red last season, despite winning trophies.
Sep 4 2012, 12:46 AM, updated 14y ago
Quote
I do think however that certain incentives should be allowed for smaller teams to invest and to catch up with teams with big revenues such as Utd and Arsenal. If not, I think it will be hard for them to catch up with the larger teams.
0.1504sec
1.25
6 queries
GZIP Disabled