I didn't see the news conference but caught bits on the BBC. This article is telling IMO:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34357553
If he's not scared of the sack then he won't mind if he is sacked, but it's still rotten it's all come to this
Rodgers Sacked
- Thread starter Hash.
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
I didn't see the news conference but caught bits on the BBC. This article is telling IMO:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34357553
If he's not scared of the sack then he won't mind if he is sacked, but it's still rotten it's all come to this
I'm sitting here hoping that the only reason Rodgers still is with Liverpool is because a replacement hasn't been finalised and not that FSG are foolish enough to think he can turn it around still.
No, city proved that players will come for enough money. You've just admitted that. Can we afford to fill an entire team just like that? No.
I'm not going to quote players as example because as I've said to Jimmy I can't make an argument based on convos I didn't have.
My opinion and its only that is that as you say we are stuck in between . The finding gold among the **** will only get us to fifth.
Our "history" isn't relevant to European players not born during it.
If our owners really mean they want us challenging again, at some point be it when the debts cleared, or with increased tv money and a more sensible overall wage budget they are going to have to risk offering over the odds wages to players they put in the w/C bracket to stand a chance to get them. Its risky , they could fail, they could start the crying with our existing players not getting it but then those players are getting what they are worth if not more looking at their current performances..by all means if they raise their games to w/c they can renegotiate.
Alternatively the Owners can own up and say it's not possible and start looking for a buyer because the fan base isn't going to accept that.
All the more need for a big name manager like Klopp or Ancelotti to attract players.
I agree. The "young talent that will grow" has failed as much with the manager as it has with the players to achieve our targets..
Hm not sure about that. If you look back over past 2-3 years, it's the youngsters who have played well and the seniors who let us down IMO.
It's not so much an issue with age. It's about quality.
Yes mate, officially. Though we all know the pie eating champions of the world are actually in Lancashire, as was Manchester (the greater part too), Liverpool and Lancaster. All Lancashire.
Breathe in your true Lancashire heritage!
- May 22, 2011
- 73,301
- 25,363
- 113
You can't complain that you can't pay 2 or 3 times the going rate (which is what City did at the onset of their 'project') that's an absolute nonsense.
The kind of players that you needed to cement your place in the top 4 (and thus increase your revenue streams to ensure you could compete with the very best on an equal footing) were well within your current funding ability. You're where you are because numerous ****e decisions were made around recruitment, and the man primarily responsible is the wee man with the sparkly teeth mate. Excusing the faillure partially due to some mythical wages issue is delusional imo. The fact that no-one can name a player who could prove the point makes it moot.
Sorry I was too general. I meant more that just going for young players with the hope enough of them become a challenging team has failed. And since you only gamble on one young manager each time the risk is even worse that he might fail.
Yeah you should, it's boss
Stone the heretic!
This is mine and trebles thing. I hope they have paid for the copyright.
@Treble you having this?
Do they change GOT for broadcast in the southern hemisphere?
King of the south etc...
They should, the upsidedowners will be baffled other wise.
We seem to be at cross purposes. I'm not saying it's the only or immediate problem. As has been discussed to death with general agreement; a lack of quality leadership and clarity of direction is more responsible for where we have ended up after these 3,years. Be it the manager, the committee, the scouts etc.
But even if we get a quality manager in, I don't think the strategy FSG imposed will get them what they say they want simply because there are 4 teams that are able to pay w/c wages and/or attract the likes of Sanchez because of consistent CL..
I'd be very happy to be wrong of course. If a new manager comes in and gets us 4th or above with the same policy in place I'll do a wee dance..
Soon you have to look at it like this. The top 4 is looking increasingly likely to become a top 3. In coming seasons there's going to be a race to make that top 3 and those that do, are likely to stay there.
You had your noses in the CL trough for circa 15 years.
When it was pushed out by the new kid on the block (City) then you desperately tried to nudge your way back in, spending at levels that the business simply couldn't sustain without the lost revenue it was chasing so hard to regain.
Rodgers got you back on the gravy train, but then promptly steered you straight back off the tracks, after spending a Kings ransom on ****e. You should be more than capable of competing on a level playing field with the likes of Arsenal, but you keep making poor decisions. I think the finger pointing at the owners is just plain wrong. They've provided more than enough resource to get you to where you want to be.
- Status