Liverpool FC Forum

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:40 am

bigmick wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:Furgeson never retired cus he wanted to win the Champions Leuage again, he knows that to be seen as truly succesful you have got to win the European Cup twice.

Mourinho was ousted cus he did not deliver the Champions League at Chelsea.

Bernt Schuster will probably lose his job at the Benrebau cus he has not progressed in the European Cup.

It's an interesting one. I actually agree with you that it irks Ferguson that having had such a good team over so many years, he has only won the Champions League once. It should as well, their record is poor considering how good their team has been.

I also agree that Mourinho's failure to win the Champions league, and Schusters failure to make much of a fist of it contributed to their downfall.

That doesn't really though alter my opinion on how difficult or not it is to achive relative success in the competition. If you accept the premise that we really ought to be able to finish in the first four just about every season, then qualification is automatic. If you look at English clubs records of getting out of the groups in recent years that is almost automatic as well.

Chelsea have made semi final appearances practically an annual event, and we are getting that way ourselves. I think my original point regarding the difficult of achieving relative success holds scrutiny. I do accept however that my theory is at best original and at worst outlandish (or a load of sh!t some might say ).

I'm pretty much convinced I'm right on this one though, and next seasons Champions League semi finals will no doubt contain at least two English teams and possibly more.

I'm not obviously disputing the financial gain of doing well, nor the prestige although I do think as people come to realise that the whole thing is totally predictable, the degree of both will diminish significantly.

Perhaps it would be better if it was genuinely played on a league basis, home and away against every team. At least that way the team that won it could claim to genuinely be the best in Europe. I wonder how often we'd win it though under those circumstances

Is that not more to do with the quality of the English league (and maybe thats why its harder to win it) as opposed to other leagues across Europe ?

by **66-1112520797** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 11:29 am

Leonmc0708 wrote:Furgeson never retired cus he wanted to win the Champions Leuage again, he knows that to be seen as truly succesful you have got to win the European Cup twice.

Mourinho was ousted cus he did not deliver the Champions League at Chelsea.

Bernt Schuster will probably lose his job at the Benrebau cus he has not progressed in the European Cup.

Leon, Fergie never retired because he wants to overtake us in league titles won.

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 11:35 am

Bamaga man wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:Furgeson never retired cus he wanted to win the Champions Leuage again, he knows that to be seen as truly succesful you have got to win the European Cup twice.

Mourinho was ousted cus he did not deliver the Champions League at Chelsea.

Bernt Schuster will probably lose his job at the Benrebau cus he has not progressed in the European Cup.

Leon, Fergie never retired because he wants to overtake us in league titles won.

I am sure I have read that he wants another European Cup though.

Even if they win two more leagues after this one, (its 18:16 right now) then it would need three more European cups to get on par in that sense.

by **bigmick** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 11:59 am

Leonmc0708 wrote:Is that not more to do with the quality of the English league (and maybe thats why its harder to win it) as opposed to other leagues across Europe ?

The English league is of a good quality right now in comparison to the other competitions throughout Europe, of that there is no doubt. It's this relative superiority which is largely brought about by huge financial disparities between the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd and Chelsea and on the other hand, Ajax, St Etienne, Sporting Lisbon and Dynamo Tibliski which in my view are gradually diminishing the sense of achivement all fans of English clubs should feel when their team is successful.

Once again I'm stressing here that my comments on the Champions League are not to seek to diminish Rafa's achievements in the competition which particularly in his first attempt were remarkable, but more to stress that if we allow Champions league "success" to compensate for poor league performances, Rafa or indeed anyone else who was in charge ought really to have a job for life.

Who at the moment can actually win the Champions League, and I ask the question as a fully paid up member of the clueless about other countries football club?

Well to my mind if you're being charitable, you'd say any one of Arsenal, Manchester United, Chelsea or Liverpool for starters. Bayern Munich are generally quite good, Barca or real Madrid are possibilities and at a stretch you'd have the two Milan teams and Juve. Is that around ten teams that can possibly win it, barring a Porto style turn up which is already in my view a thing of the past, or at the very least a thing of the once in a blue moon.

Rafa has done extremely well in the competition of that there is no doubt. His achievements look all the more remarkable when compared to our abject performances in the league, whereas someone like Chelsea reaching the semi's four times in five years or whatever the feck it is would be only what you'd expect from a team who has performed like they have domestically.

I'm basically saying that a competition in which you are almost ceretainties to get to the last 16 in, in which there is effectively a seeding system so you don't play your main rivals till the last eight, is a competition in which you really ought to do fairly well in. We've done better than fairly well, but it's in our own league where we form how good a team we are, and ultimately how good a manger we've got.

by **stmichael** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:04 pm

People can say whatever they like about Rafa's spending; some has been good and some has been poor, but the most important thing for me is that his lates signings were really good. This also shows that he's getting past the re-building phase and is now able to spend on quality instead of quantity. Maybe he should've started that earlier, maybe he's spot on with his timing; either way he's there now and he's doing the quality-approach. If it's due to his learning curve or due to him not being able to do it until now doesn't matter. Let him continue with the process he's in. The alternative is getting in someone who will use the next 3-5 years re-building.

by **bigmick** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:20 pm

stmichael wrote:The alternative is getting in someone who will use the next 3-5 years re-building.

I must say that this in my view is one of the great urban myths, and I say this as somebody who is a recent convert to the idea of Rafa staying for a while yet.

To me, all this about if Rafa goes it'll "set us back ten years" is about as sensible as some of Rafa's staunchest supporters assuming that anybody who dares to criticise him wants Sam Allardyce as manager, or that all the players will immediately hand in transfer requests if he leaves.

Look if Rafa were to go (and none of this post applies if he goes because of Hicks, in that scenario I agree we are fecked choose whoever comes in) then the new manager wouldn't need to rebuild. He would sign a couple of players for sure (so will Rafa) but the idea that he would rip the whole thing apart and start again is nonsense in my view. Whoever came in, be it Sam Allardyce or GBJH is already in the Champions League next season, and my guess is we'll get out of the group at least and get into the last sixteen. I would also venture that unless you get a complete numpty in, provided we keep Gerrard, Masherano and Torres we will almost certainly finish in the top four as well. In so doing we would qualify for the group stages again, probably get out of the group etc etc and so on.

No as I've said before, coming in the top four in the league and then getting out of the group in the Champions League should be achieveable for any manager at Liverpool without too many problems. NO rebuilding required to achieve that.

by **JoeTerp** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:26 pm

finishing top 4 may be easy for LFC Bigmick, but with GBJH at the helm? I think you are stretching your luck mate

by **stmichael** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:30 pm

bigmick wrote:
stmichael wrote:The alternative is getting in someone who will use the next 3-5 years re-building.

I must say that this in my view is one of the great urban myths, and I say this as somebody who is a recent convert to the idea of Rafa staying for a while yet.

To me, all this about if Rafa goes it'll "set us back ten years" is about as sensible as some of Rafa's staunchest supporters assuming that anybody who dares to criticise him wants Sam Allardyce as manager, or that all the players will immediately hand in transfer requests if he leaves.

Look if Rafa were to go (and none of this post applies if he goes because of Hicks, in that scenario I agree we are fecked choose whoever comes in) then the new manager wouldn't need to rebuild. He would sign a couple of players for sure (so will Rafa) but the idea that he would rip the whole thing apart and start again is nonsense in my view. Whoever came in, be it Sam Allardyce or GBJH is already in the Champions League next season, and my guess is we'll get out of the group at least and get into the last sixteen. I would also venture that unless you get a complete numpty in, provided we keep Gerrard, Masherano and Torres we will almost certainly finish in the top four as well. In so doing we would qualify for the group stages again, probably get out of the group etc etc and so on.

No as I've said before, coming in the top four in the league and then getting out of the group in the Champions League should be achieveable for any manager at Liverpool without too many problems. NO rebuilding required to achieve that.

Fair enough mate.

I for one look at the signings of Mascherano and Torres for example as a natural progression, combined with other factors like timing and available players/cash. If others like to look at it as change in policy, because they were of the opinion that his policy was wrong earlier, then that's okay too. At least both parties agree that what's happening now is a good thing. That's progress, and the only issue then is whether or not the path to where we are now was the right one (and that's an issue of formalities).

Personally I don't really belive that a manager necessarily has a 'policy'- it's always player and circumstance specific. You look at Utd for example, Ferguson didn't just decide to change policy and start spending 30 million on players. The ability to do so came from the progression of the team and the success that brought. In the 86/87 season the transfer record for a player was 6 million Milan paid for Ruud Gullit (breaking the 5 million record Napoli paid for Maradonna). Ferguson's biggest signing was 850,000 for Brian McClair.

4-5 years later he was still spending modestly with players like Kanchelskis (650,000) Paul Parker (2 million), Schmeichel (500,000) while the transfer record was shooting up to the 10-13 million pound mark on the likes of Lentini, Papin and Vialli.

7 years after he joined the club his record signing was just 3.7 million for Keane, the rest is history.

by **bigmick** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:32 pm

JoeTerp wrote:finishing top 4 may be easy for LFC Bigmick, but with GBJH at the helm? I think you are stretching your luck mate

OK Joe I'll concede that like the rest of us on the forum John would be out of his depth, but you take my point anyhow.

by **radun5** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 1:35 pm

bigmick wrote:Who at the moment can actually win the Champions League, and I ask the question as a fully paid up member of the clueless about other countries football club?

Well to my mind if you're being charitable, you'd say any one of Arsenal, Manchester United, Chelsea or Liverpool for starters. Bayern Munich are generally quite good, Barca or real Madrid are possibilities and at a stretch you'd have the two Milan teams and Juve. Is that around ten teams that can possibly win it, barring a Porto style turn up which is already in my view a thing of the past, or at the very least a thing of the once in a blue moon.

I agree with you, but it has to be said Liverpool was hardly in that mix before Rafa Benitez came in. It was the Barca tie last year that I thought really transformed us into THE team to beat in Champions League.

Oh, and Mick I love your knowledge of the eastern european teams. Dukla Prague

(they never had a lot of pedigree in CL, never got to the finals, certainly). Then Dynamo Tibliski (Tbilisi is more likely, and they are not the best example to put aside Ajax. I am pretty sure you mispelled Steaua Bucharest aswell, but that is normal, they're so faaaar away from the footballing world, it does not matter they won it 20 years before.

Dinamo Kiev (in the Sevcenko years) was the only east european club to challenge the Champions League seriously in the late nineties.

by **stmichael** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 1:35 pm

crazyhorse wrote:I agree with most of Micks comments to now. However I really do not think that as a club we are leaps and bounds ahead of where we were under GH. There are many reasons for this but to my mind as Mick has already said the ONLY measure we should apply as to our improvement is our performance in the LEAGUE. We know we have an excellent team, capable on its day of beating any team put in front of us - but we also know that since the early 90s the one thing we have never been able to do is be consistent week in week out. Every season since 1990 there has been a month or six week period in the season that has seen us lose several games and put ourselves out of contention.

You can list each manager we have had since then and yes you can always put a reason to our underperformance - Souness, too many poor signings and tactically inept. Evans - had a really talented squad but some would say was too much of a nice guy. Houllier - Headstrong and brought in far too many mediocre players. And now Rafa - Rotation, Rotation, Rotation (Although I believe that he is shifting on this). Each of these managers has brought success in cup competions but failed to deliver the title that we all want and deserve. Why?

I do not think that there is a definitive answer to this qustion. However when you look at the current top three in detail there are different approaches that they have employed which have brought success.

Man Utd - They have a firm and solid foundation, and have possibly the biggest fan base in the world which brings he wealth with it. Ferguson although we hate him has been a fantasitic servant and is tactically first class - he has built the success of the team based upon the old fashioned principles of his predecessors. Build a spine and invest in youth - He has spent a lot of money, but how many big named signings have been failures?. I can only really think of Seba Veron. Fergie has only spent money on talent that will improve the squad and has been careful not to introduce too many new faces to upset the balence of his side.

Arsenal - Wenger is another fantastic manger, no matter how much we think him arrogant this has to be acknowedged. He has not spent a lot of money, but has built a squad based on youth and potential and combined this with experience. You can tell his players enjoy playing for him - how many actually leave? and those that do have normally been at the club for years and are in need of a change for the good of their career. Arsenal are the best footballing side in the league and possibly in Europe.

Chelsea - Completely different. A new breed of club that has built itself into a challenger through corporate investment. They have developed the whole area aound the ground into a complex almost like a town in its own right, and now have a chairman with more money than sense. They have invested heavily in the playing staff and in Mourinio had the charasmatic manager to carry it all off. This is in my opinion not sustainable, and eventually I believe that Abramovic will withdraw his money - the challenge for them is by that time to have built themselves into a business so profitable that they can sustain the spending themselves. Chelsea have bought the title, but their route to success is still uncertain in terms of keeping it up.

Liverpool - We are really not too much like any of the above. I look at the first team squad now and do not see many names that came through the youth system (two notable exceptions aside). I see several players on which a lot of money has been spent and none apart from one has delivered the goods in the way that we hoped. The atmosphere in the board room is chaotic and the new ground seems a long way away. Successive managers have made very poor signings (I dare not go through the list and add up how many millions have been wasted) and truly inspired signings have been few and far between. In recent years I stil think the best signing we have made is Sami but The money spent on Torres looks to have been money well spent if we can keep the lad fit.

A bit of a ramble, and I am not sure that I have put my point across. Buit there you go!

Good post mate.

At the end of the day there were glaring deficiencies in the squad when looking to mount a 38 game campaign. A great tactician, which he is, can overcome a better team in a cup with poor players but it shows over 38 games.

He has had to generate half of that money himself (that's not taking into account the money he himself has generated in the Champions League), so if he just kept the same squad he would have had about £80m to spend over four years. Do you think that is a realistic amount to catch Utd and Chelsea when they will continue spending but won't need to get rid of as many players because they've either been building for 20 years, so have a stable, top class base or are splashing hundreds of millions on players?

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:41 pm

bigmick wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:finishing top 4 may be easy for LFC Bigmick, but with GBJH at the helm? I think you are stretching your luck mate

OK Joe I'll concede that like the rest of us on the forum John would be out of his depth, but you take my point anyhow.

nah mick, anybody, me, you, joe or mickey :censored:

mouse could get Liverpool into the top four of the league and into the last 16 of the champions league with that current crop of players. As I keep saying that's no achievement.

Reaching the semi final or final of the European Cup is an achievement, finishing first in the league is an achievement and not just anybody could do either of them. You have to be some sort of manager to do either, Benitez has proved he has something about in Europe and deserves a lot of credit, but likewise has to come in for huge amounts of stick because he's achieving nothing in the league by coming third or fourth.

The league and Champions League are two completely different competitions. Success in the champions league doesn't paper over the cracks of the league form, but likewise people can't be any less chuffed that we succeed in Europe because of the league form. It works both ways.

by **Bad Bob** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:46 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:
bigmick wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:finishing top 4 may be easy for LFC Bigmick, but with GBJH at the helm? I think you are stretching your luck mate

OK Joe I'll concede that like the rest of us on the forum John would be out of his depth, but you take my point anyhow.

nah mick, anybody, me, you, joe or mickey mouse could get Liverpool into the top four of the league and into the last 16 of the champions league with that current crop of players. As I keep saying that's no achievement.

Reaching the semi final or final of the European Cup is an achievement, finishing first in the league is an achievement and not just anybody could do either of them. You have to be some sort of manager to do either, Benitez has proved he has something about in Europe and deserves a lot of credit, but likewise has to come in for huge amounts of stick because he's achieving nothing in the league by coming third or fourth.

The league and Champions League are two completely different competitions. Success in the champions league doesn't paper over the cracks of the league form, but likewise people can't be any less chuffed that we succeed in Europe because of the league form. It works both ways.

Well, feck me. What he said, Mick.

by **crazyhorse** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:12 pm

stmichael wrote:
crazyhorse wrote:I agree with most of Micks comments to now. However I really do not think that as a club we are leaps and bounds ahead of where we were under GH. There are many reasons for this but to my mind as Mick has already said the ONLY measure we should apply as to our improvement is our performance in the LEAGUE. We know we have an excellent team, capable on its day of beating any team put in front of us - but we also know that since the early 90s the one thing we have never been able to do is be consistent week in week out. Every season since 1990 there has been a month or six week period in the season that has seen us lose several games and put ourselves out of contention.

You can list each manager we have had since then and yes you can always put a reason to our underperformance - Souness, too many poor signings and tactically inept. Evans - had a really talented squad but some would say was too much of a nice guy. Houllier - Headstrong and brought in far too many mediocre players. And now Rafa - Rotation, Rotation, Rotation (Although I believe that he is shifting on this). Each of these managers has brought success in cup competions but failed to deliver the title that we all want and deserve. Why?

I do not think that there is a definitive answer to this qustion. However when you look at the current top three in detail there are different approaches that they have employed which have brought success.

Man Utd - They have a firm and solid foundation, and have possibly the biggest fan base in the world which brings he wealth with it. Ferguson although we hate him has been a fantasitic servant and is tactically first class - he has built the success of the team based upon the old fashioned principles of his predecessors. Build a spine and invest in youth - He has spent a lot of money, but how many big named signings have been failures?. I can only really think of Seba Veron. Fergie has only spent money on talent that will improve the squad and has been careful not to introduce too many new faces to upset the balence of his side.

Arsenal - Wenger is another fantastic manger, no matter how much we think him arrogant this has to be acknowedged. He has not spent a lot of money, but has built a squad based on youth and potential and combined this with experience. You can tell his players enjoy playing for him - how many actually leave? and those that do have normally been at the club for years and are in need of a change for the good of their career. Arsenal are the best footballing side in the league and possibly in Europe.

Chelsea - Completely different. A new breed of club that has built itself into a challenger through corporate investment. They have developed the whole area aound the ground into a complex almost like a town in its own right, and now have a chairman with more money than sense. They have invested heavily in the playing staff and in Mourinio had the charasmatic manager to carry it all off. This is in my opinion not sustainable, and eventually I believe that Abramovic will withdraw his money - the challenge for them is by that time to have built themselves into a business so profitable that they can sustain the spending themselves. Chelsea have bought the title, but their route to success is still uncertain in terms of keeping it up.

Liverpool - We are really not too much like any of the above. I look at the first team squad now and do not see many names that came through the youth system (two notable exceptions aside). I see several players on which a lot of money has been spent and none apart from one has delivered the goods in the way that we hoped. The atmosphere in the board room is chaotic and the new ground seems a long way away. Successive managers have made very poor signings (I dare not go through the list and add up how many millions have been wasted) and truly inspired signings have been few and far between. In recent years I stil think the best signing we have made is Sami but The money spent on Torres looks to have been money well spent if we can keep the lad fit.

A bit of a ramble, and I am not sure that I have put my point across. Buit there you go!

Good post mate.

At the end of the day there were glaring deficiencies in the squad when looking to mount a 38 game campaign. A great tactician, which he is, can overcome a better team in a cup with poor players but it shows over 38 games.

He has had to generate half of that money himself (that's not taking into account the money he himself has generated in the Champions League), so if he just kept the same squad he would have had about £80m to spend over four years. Do you think that is a realistic amount to catch Utd and Chelsea when they will continue spending but won't need to get rid of as many players because they've either been building for 20 years, so have a stable, top class base or are splashing hundreds of millions on players?

I agree mate. However when the club actually had the chance to step on the ball and build for the future, successive managers have been allowed to fritter away funds on quick fix players who eventually turn out to be surplus to requirements.

The team Kenny Dalglish left in the late 80s was in need of a re build, and unfortunately this did not happen and the doldrums began for us.

by **JoeTerp** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:20 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:
bigmick wrote:
JoeTerp wrote:finishing top 4 may be easy for LFC Bigmick, but with GBJH at the helm? I think you are stretching your luck mate

OK Joe I'll concede that like the rest of us on the forum John would be out of his depth, but you take my point anyhow.

nah mick, anybody, me, you, joe or mickey mouse could get Liverpool into the top four of the league and into the last 16 of the champions league with that current crop of players. As I keep saying that's no achievement.

Reaching the semi final or final of the European Cup is an achievement, finishing first in the league is an achievement and not just anybody could do either of them. You have to be some sort of manager to do either, Benitez has proved he has something about in Europe and deserves a lot of credit, but likewise has to come in for huge amounts of stick because he's achieving nothing in the league by coming third or fourth.

The league and Champions League are two completely different competitions. Success in the champions league doesn't paper over the cracks of the league form, but likewise people can't be any less chuffed that we succeed in Europe because of the league form. It works both ways.

no way the players would put up with your hijinx, and I would be giddy to play Pacheco and Nemeth all the time.

Liverpool FC Forum

Progress Under Rafa - Analysis and Opinion

Who is online