So, I think most Liverpool fans would agree Shankly and Paisley are Liverpool's top two managers. Most would probably put Shankly top, but a few would probably give it to Paisley. Is third settled with Dalglish? Where does Klopp rank now? A handful of managers before Shankly won the domestic title once, or twice. Klopp just has one title and one European title, but he's fighting against far bigger budgets... And... What if Klopp pulls off the (still unlikely) quadruple this season? Would the quadruple place him above Dalglish? What would Klopp have to achieve in your eyes to be on par with Shankly and Paisley?
In short I wouldn't know who before shanks would be in the earlier history but Dalglish would be my distant distant third but marginally. ***an would have stayed if not for heysel. He should be 3rd. Kenny is third for a double and 2 more hair baths from it. Imo klopp is already miles a head of anyone since Kenny round 1 and if he wins anything more he is firmly no 3. If he wins a quad it'll be a three wise men scenario I couldn't then separate the 3 but would leave it to the seniors on here that should have the say
Obviously it wasn't great... But two years before Klopp took over Rodgers had come close to the title himself. I think it's fair to say though that Klopp took over a team that were probably around 5th best in the league at the time. That's not as extreme as Shankly taking over a team in division 2. Or Paisley and Dalglish taking over a team that was already the best. It was a good spot to build from, and he did.
It's not just about trophies won it's about the unbreakable bond between manager, team and fans. Shankly will always be number 1, Paisley 2, Dalglish 3 and Klopp 4. There's a big similarity with Shankly and Klopp in terms of charisma and similarly between Paisley and Kenny with both being quietly understated but the passion running just as deep.
Special mention for Rafa too who will always be in the company of the aforementioned. Not quite sure how to characterise him.
I would wonder about Kenny in this discussion. There is emotive reasons why he is up there and there's strong 1986, 1988, 1989 and 1990 seasons to put him up there too. However there's also the team he had from ***an and paisley. Grobs Nicol Hanson Lawrenson Berlin Molby Whelan Johnston Rush Kenny himself Tbh the signings of mcmahon Beardsley Houghton and Barnes were great but you.can.see that there's a huge amount.of the 1989 and 1990 team there. Klopp with 2 league titles and 2 cls for me would.be very tempting to put in 3rd. It is quite fortunate to have the possibility of such a discussion
Scientific. Rafa for me is a man who needed a stronger partner and controller in the chairman's slot. He loved a deal did rafa. A little less total control but a bit more backing to get more alonsos and torres types and he would I think have delivered the league. Houllier deserves a mention for 2001.
Unfair to compare Klopp to Shankly/Paisley/Kenny D IMO as it's a totally different era and they were managers first and foremost with a lot of the coaching delegated to coaches. I definitely feel Klopp is the best LFC manager in my lifetime and pound-for-pound he's been the best coach since 2010.
Rafa certainly didn't give the team hugs! . Rafa was cold and calculating and hard to impress, he expected perfection from everyone... Which made us unbeatable on a good day, but didn't help morale when we hit a slump. When he was good he was good. When he was bad he was bad... We seemed to hit streaks of success and streaks of poor results. Him winning the Champions League in 2005 and taking us almost to the same feat in 2007 was him taking a Liverpool team above what it should have been capable of.
Tuchel is the 2005-2007 version of Benitez. He was a fantastic coach when it came to tweaks and adjustments against superior talent - there's no way he should have beaten that 2005 team Chelsea team or Milan team on paper. His biggest strength was also his biggest undoing in league format - too much micromanagement of games and too many dropped points (especially at home) to mount a serious title challenge.
Unfortunately the main ones were before my time so couldn’t give any first hand opinion on that. But don’t think you’ll find one person that says Shanks or Paisley wouldn’t be 1 and 2. I only know Kenny from second stage so don’t know about round 1. Was here a top manager? Obviously won league with Blackburn as well with a lot of money spent but still a good achievement. In terms of pure management ability I’d have though klopp would be above Kenny but obviously what Kenny did in 89 as manager was huge. I’d imagine the team Kenny inherited first time round was a lot better than what Klopp got? Bigger question would be worse manager? Souness? Roy?
You say "emotive reasons" for Dalglish being placed high but isn't that a large part of what it's all about. Being a club legend as a player was a good start and his managerial success raised that status even higher. Not many great players who went on to be great managers exist.
True. The team in 1988 was frankly a thing of beauty. It's very difficult to separate the player and the manager.
Klopp is an absolute genius - he has literally built one of the all time great football teams on a relatively small budget, whilst competing with oil clubs. The reason why he is not regarded even higher is because of the lack of trophies - again, mostly down to having to compete against a bunch of cheats. If he can win at least one of the CL or PL this season, then his legacy is pretty much secured. But the sad thing is that we as LFC know just how good he has been for this club but I don't think he will get the recognition from others without more trophies.
Said Pretty much the exact same thing to a few lads after footy last night. It's a travesty that this current squad isn't going going to achieve what it truly deserves because Man City are about in the same era.
Meant to say that I really like the word pantheon. I think we should have a thread dedicated to the word of the day.
Possibly controversial opinion: Kenny is a club legend, and always will be, because of his playing days coupled with his success as a manager, but based purely on managerial performance I think Klopp wins it. He's had a lower starting point, imo, and has had to contend with the oil cheats. Even what he's achieved so far is phenomenal, regardless of how many more pots he brings in. He seems to have the perfect blend of tactical nous and instinctive man-management skills. I hope he does manage a few more trophies before we lose him, if only so his abilities get the recognition they deserve. The media fawn over Pep's success because they don't seem to recognise the advantages he has always had as a manager.
Klopp is by far the best manager I've personally witnessed at Liverpool. He definitely has players punching above their weight... And the fact that almost none of his transfers are flops is impressive. I liked Rafa at the time and thought he did a lot for us, even off the field modernizing our youth development and reserve teams... but you'd be guaranteed at least one transfer flop per star signing ratio. Houllier was perhaps even worse for signing duds. I think the trophy angle is a big one though and why Kenny might be third... (At least until we know how much silver we're getting this campaign). I do think Pep is a very good manager despite his unlimited funds and barely finishing above us most seasons now. Klopp is just better. Money isn't everything (As City pre Pep know, as United now know, as Everton has just found out, and as Chelsea has witnessed). Even rich teams can do badly. Pep has done well to keep his team on top year after year, even with a bunch of money... Klopp is just better.
