Liverpool FC Forum

by **tubby** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:50 am

Fauxy wrote:
Penguins wrote:
Fauxy wrote:
Penguins wrote:Sigh, this Mourinho wankfest is driving me nuts.

What has he proved?

That he can win if takes on the most finacially strong clubs in a country?
Wow, what an acievement.

I thought we needed manager that could win without being on top at the start?

He he won't have 50 million to spend on deadwood and all is well anyway.
He won't be able to spend 25 on a drogba here or 25 on an Essien there...
What an achievement to win the league with Inter when Mancini did exactly the same and got knocked out in the CL exactly the same way.
What a achievement to fail to win the CL when given hundereds of millions to buy the players he wants.

Well if he's that sh!te then lets hope he does take over the mancs when whiskey nose retires!

I can see were you are coming from in saying that he had a lot of money to play with at Chelsea but he still had to have his team playing good football to beat us, the mancs and arsenal. Even with a lot of money you do need to be a good manager to do that.

For example.. Mark Hughes at Man city has just bought himself a better team than what Mourinho had in his first year. He has more funds, a stronger team to build on, he has already spent more than what Mourinho spent in his first year and yet was lucky not to loose to Birmingham city today.

But you can't compare him to Hughes and city. You have you to compare to Rafa and Liverpool. Here he must overachive with little funds and not have a huge finacial backing which has been the case whereever he has been.

Sure, you need to be a good manager to win the league if you have shedloads of cash, but what kind of manager do you then need to be if you have to win the league with no money?

I'm not so sure that kind of manager exist today that can win titles with less money than 5-6 other teams.

Yes he would come here and not have great funds or financial backing, but he would have a team already set up for him that is capable of winning big competitions.

Wenger has spent less than us, man u, chelsea, city and tottenham yet Arsenal are challenging for the title, which shows that it can be done if you dont have the funds but you do have the players.

Wenger has in place one of the best scouting networks in Europe. I don't think you will find many other managers as capable as him in that dept.

by **Dazzer** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:02 am

bavlondon wrote:
Fauxy wrote:
Penguins wrote:
Fauxy wrote:
Penguins wrote:Sigh, this Mourinho wankfest is driving me nuts.

What has he proved?

That he can win if takes on the most finacially strong clubs in a country?
Wow, what an acievement.

I thought we needed manager that could win without being on top at the start?

He he won't have 50 million to spend on deadwood and all is well anyway.
He won't be able to spend 25 on a drogba here or 25 on an Essien there...
What an achievement to win the league with Inter when Mancini did exactly the same and got knocked out in the CL exactly the same way.
What a achievement to fail to win the CL when given hundereds of millions to buy the players he wants.

Well if he's that sh!te then lets hope he does take over the mancs when whiskey nose retires!

I can see were you are coming from in saying that he had a lot of money to play with at Chelsea but he still had to have his team playing good football to beat us, the mancs and arsenal. Even with a lot of money you do need to be a good manager to do that.

For example.. Mark Hughes at Man city has just bought himself a better team than what Mourinho had in his first year. He has more funds, a stronger team to build on, he has already spent more than what Mourinho spent in his first year and yet was lucky not to loose to Birmingham city today.

But you can't compare him to Hughes and city. You have you to compare to Rafa and Liverpool. Here he must overachive with little funds and not have a huge finacial backing which has been the case whereever he has been.

Sure, you need to be a good manager to win the league if you have shedloads of cash, but what kind of manager do you then need to be if you have to win the league with no money?

I'm not so sure that kind of manager exist today that can win titles with less money than 5-6 other teams.

Yes he would come here and not have great funds or financial backing, but he would have a team already set up for him that is capable of winning big competitions.

Wenger has spent less than us, man u, chelsea, city and tottenham yet Arsenal are challenging for the title, which shows that it can be done if you dont have the funds but you do have the players.

Wenger has in place one of the best scouting networks in Europe. I don't think you will find many other managers as capable as him in that dept.

Yep Wenger is the man. :buttrock

bloody love him I do.I think its due to some of the french in me. :love:

by **Penguins** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:34 am

Well, considering the squad Rafa inherited, that hasn't been improved for years, he has had little to spend and the future looks very bleak spendingwise.

What it comes down to I guess is how good you think the squad was 2004 both then and for the future.

I am in the

"We were way of the pace both 2004 and 2005 finishing 30 pts behind the winners and a long way to go to even be close"
Not mentioning the fact that there were 0 under 25 years old promising quality players either...

Others can think that we had a great squad because we won the CL 2005 how much they want, but I say we had very little to build on in that squad.

All the players that should have made the aquad stronger both then and for the future were all failures for years by Houlliers.
Getting Diao, Cheyrou, Diouf, Cisse for big money was an utter failure and helped our squad even less than Voronin and Babel.

by **boodiddy1** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:32 am

First choice gotta be mourinho. Look, he never spent great at porto, far less than sporting and benfica. Yet, assembled a great team. He has always admired liverpool. You could see that from our encounters with him.

He could never get how are fans are like we are and yet chelsea etc are so quiet. Mourinho would thrive off our support and fanaticalsm.

He knows all about us, and should be given a war chest plus whatever he raises from selling the duds in our squad like lucas, babel, voronin etc.

Mourinho totally first choice. Followed by kenny, MON, hodgson, or dare i says this for getting banned. Get Moyes from them?

Just possibilities, thats all.

by **Ciggy** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:36 am

Dazzer wrote:Yep Wenger is the man. bloody love him I do.I think its due to some of the french in me.

Oh dear, why dont you do us all a favour and p!ss off to Arsenal then, your comments on this forum are cringeworthy.

Steve fecking Bruce as our next manager and now you love Wenger your embarresing lad.

by **Owzat** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 7:59 am

THEBARON wrote:If you replace a manager mid season it stands to reason that a lot of the best options will not be available.

Or cost a lot. So we should only change manager when there are plenty unemployed? Hardly rich pickings, looking only at managers other clubs didn't want.

But hey, if you want "available" then Phil Brown may be unemployed soon....................... :no

THEBARON wrote:Plus you run the risk of things going worse..

That was a risk we took when employing Rafa, Houllier and Evans before him. Last time it actually happened was Souness, everyone else progressed the club in some way, arguably Houllier not so much in the league but did bring us more silverware through a fair amount of spending.

Houllier went mad in his spending just like Rafa seems to have, Houllier brought in young players he thought would become stars just like Rafa has, Houllier had our best Premiership season in terms of points (80) and followed it up with a sh1 te one (64), just like Rafa seems to be.

THEBARON wrote:Surely a run of 6 defeats out of 7 games will not be repeated?

Is that (attempt at positive spin) good or bad? On the one hand it probably won't get that bad again, but the fact that it is so bad it is difficult to repeat is worse.

Of course the one thing it blatantly ignores is, in the words of Grace - "It's not over, not over, not over, not over yet". Could well be seven in eight, eight in nine or ten etc. I mean bigger picture it is eight in 16 which is unacceptable for a big club in the modern era

by **Owzat** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:15 am

Fauxy wrote:Wenger has spent less than us, man u, chelsea, city and tottenham yet Arsenal are challenging for the title, which shows that it can be done if you dont have the funds but you do have the players.

Wenger is the one manager I'd say has the credentials, my only concern is his policies over signing and selling players. Sure he can sign Anelka for £500k, but then sells him for £23m which is a big profit but not a good habit.

Considering the budget he has, Wenger has won three league titles (didn't take seven years to win the first), reached the Champions League Final and has pushed the big spending two as much as is possible under his circumstance. Sure Rafa had pushed him down to 4th by spending a fair bit, but poor managers don't win the league unbeaten, don't put out kid sides in the cup that wipe the floor with some (strong/er) teams, that play great football etc.

Would Wenger come here? I don't see why not. The odds of him being "available" are slim so we'd have to buy him out of his Arsenal contract, but I reckon it would be worth it. Look at his current squad and tell me we couldn't benefit from the types of signings he has in there - Van Persie, Eduardo, Vermaelen, Fabregas, Ramsey, Denilson, Clichy, Arshavin, Sagna, Walcott etc. The guy is a genius, more of a genius than mrs spend-a-lot Mourinho and fergie, a lot more of a genius than the leprechaun at villa who thinks any half decent signing is worth £30m and then goes out and signs players like Heskey, Reo-Coker, Knight and Luke Young. Sure he signs some good players, but he also pays over the odds for some very ordinary ones. He did well with Leicester, but that aside he's nothing special. He finished in the top 10 with them, won a couple of league cups when the top sides were very much disinterested to such a degree TRANMERE were a side they beat. In the seven year period between 1996 and 2002 only twice did one of the 'big four' grace even the final of the League Cup, in the seven year period since they have made up NINE of the 14 finalists with spudz making up two of the others in both seven year periods. Compare that with the FA Cup where only twice in the last EIGHTEEN finals has the winner not been one of the 'big four' - bitters in 95 and pompey in 2008. Had leprechaun won that competition, or reached the final, then that might have been something.

by **Sir Roger** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:26 am

Effes wrote:
Sir Roger wrote:
Effes wrote:
Sir Roger wrote:Yes we can
You two can do the interviews

He wouldn't get the interview with you though would he?

See post above about what your boss would think.

My boss is a knob as well

Well, he gave you a job didn't he ?

Exactly...!!!
:wwww

by **Sir Roger** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:30 am

Sir Roger wrote:
Effes wrote:
Sir Roger wrote:
Effes wrote:
Sir Roger wrote:Yes we can
You two can do the interviews

He wouldn't get the interview with you though would he?

See post above about what your boss would think.

My boss is a knob as well

Well, he gave you a job didn't he ?

Exactly...!!!

By the way Im self employed
:lookaround

by **tubby** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:37 am

Sir Roger wrote:
Sir Roger wrote:
Effes wrote:
Sir Roger wrote:
Effes wrote:
Sir Roger wrote:Yes we can
You two can do the interviews

He wouldn't get the interview with you though would he?

See post above about what your boss would think.

My boss is a knob as well

Well, he gave you a job didn't he ?

Exactly...!!!

By the way Im self employed

So you are saying....you are a knob?

by **SouthCoastShankly** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:49 am

Hiddink after the World Cup

by **tubby** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:23 pm

SouthCoastShankly wrote:Hiddink after the World Cup

Bingo.

by **eonerf** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:35 pm

My 1st choices would be O'Neil or Hiddink after the World Cup. I don't want Mourhino anywhere near our club after his 'small club' statement and the fact he's a knob!

by **7_Kewell** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:46 pm

you know, after the world cup there might be a certain Italian who we could turn to....

by **tubby** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:50 pm

Any of these big continental managers would want a decent sized kitty to spend. Without that I can't see us getting anyone with any pedegree.

Liverpool FC Forum

New Manager - Who would you have? (merged thread)

Who is online