Penguins » Sun Sep 02, 2012 8:01 pm wrote:Yeah, he seems like a straightforward honest fellow.
A fellow having to climb mount Everest keeping up with the owners, the supporters expectations.
Which right now are way too high...
Franky000 » Sun Sep 02, 2012 6:01 pm wrote:We are Sh*t and need to accept that in order to lower expectations. Brendan is a man with a plan, and we are on but a mere first step towards glory. It's a bit like childbirth...at first the woman is in agony, and she shits herself rather embarrasingly, but later on she is presented with a beautiful child, the result of painful labour, and possibly the result of a painful f*ck. Our future glory will not come about without a struggle
Redman in wales » Sun Sep 02, 2012 7:35 pm wrote:The Hustler » Sun Sep 02, 2012 7:20 pm wrote:Thats another point someone made. Rodgers wanted full control of 1st team affairs when he took the post, so he has to take responsibility.
I dont blame fully the yanks. We must of got over 8m for kuyt,bellamy+ maxi. + 5m for adam. So theres some cash to spend.
Well mentioned.
Just cause he wanted full control - doesnt mean he was the one saying "no fulham, we'll give you £4m for dempsey and no more" . No - he would have said I want dempsey - and Ayre negotiated and the owners capped the spending. - I'm not blaming the owners fully, and probably rodgers needs to share some of the blame, but imo less of it (hence his answer in todays presser - no he wouldnt have let andy go on loan if there wasnt anyone coming in)
Completey wrong about the income though. We got £1m total for kuyt, bellamy + maxi and £4m for Adam.
Redman in wales » Sun Sep 02, 2012 9:21 pm wrote:true. so why didnt rodgers get his man that he wanted? - cause the owners capped the spend or ayre did the negotiation. Rodgers prob was involved - but he wanted the player, and said he wouldnt have let carroll go if noone was coming in, so it stands to reason that he felt asured that we had the funds for dempsey.
As ive said, i dont think rodgers is blameless, but i think the owners share the majority of the blame as they held the purse strings tight
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Sun Sep 02, 2012 9:32 pm wrote:bringing owen back would just add to the f**king farce, he shafted the club out of a decent transfer fee when he left (at a time when the club needed the money) and then, despite coming through the ranks at anfield, he goes and signs for man united.
could you imagine ryan giggs, paul scholes or gary neville signing for liverpool? no, me neither, but thats because they actually give a ***** about the tradition and supporters of the club they play for.
thats the same reason why you`d never see the likes of robbie fowler, john aldridge or even vladi smicer in a united shirt.
michael owen cares about one thing in football and thats his career, to bring him back would just show how far out of touch brendan rodgers and FSG are with the soul of this club.
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:32 pm wrote:bringing owen back would just add to the f**king farce, he shafted the club out of a decent transfer fee when he left (at a time when the club needed the money) and then, despite coming through the ranks at anfield, he goes and signs for man united.
could you imagine ryan giggs, paul scholes or gary neville signing for liverpool? no, me neither, but thats because they actually give a ***** about the tradition and supporters of the club they play for.
thats the same reason why you`d never see the likes of robbie fowler, john aldridge or even vladi smicer in a united shirt.
michael owen cares about one thing in football and thats his career, to bring him back would just show how far out of touch brendan rodgers and FSG are with the soul of this club.
Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 45 guests