The Manager Merry-go-Round
- Thread starter jd2010
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
- Feb 1, 2010
- 38,722
- 19,673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspur, Brentford FC
- Thread starter
- #8,503
We need to give Conte the ultimatum. Sign a 4 year extension this week or you're out. We can't leave this squad as is. But we can't back conte as he would like with him unsigned
- Apr 6, 2004
- 4,903
- 2,388
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
The names linked with Everton dont sound too good for the fans. Dyche or Rooney ?
lol
lol
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
Would take Dyche.
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,744
- 36,791
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
All his money? *ing lol. Our front 3 has been the same since 2017 and also needs replacement Mane was sold for 35m and Firmino is finishing up most likely in summer after giving 8 years of service. That's 2 out of 3 gone that needed replacement.
FSG are tight arses, plain and simple. These figures demonstrate it
Since they came on board 12 years ago Liverpool are well below City/United/Chelsea/Arsenal in transfer spending.
FSG gave Klopp Van Den Berg and Adrian on a free after winning the CL n 2019 plus Minamino for 7m mid season for example. Klopp won things in spite of FSG, not because of them. I'd give anything for an owner to back him as much as Potter is being backed by Boehly right now.
We need new owners willing to fund the club relative to its size and ambitions.
Bradesmaen
TheBrownDog
Woe is me, only 1.1 billion spent on players. How dare they!! I mean maybe if you didn't buy 4 forwards as part of your last 5 transfers you might have a midfield. Money was there, just spent wrong. But you know, blame the owners as always who stay within means (same with the red Sox who up until this off-season had the sixth highest salary but apparently that means they don't care)
- Moderator
- #8,508
Darwin, Jotta and Diaz were meant to be the replacements for Bobby, Salah and Mane weren't they?
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,744
- 36,791
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
Half the net spend of Chelsea, City & United. We should be spending more than Chelsea considering the recent successes and size of the club / revenues.
Nonsense to bring up the forwards who also all needed replacement anyway. Mane/Minamino had to be replaced from last year's squad and that's not counting your favorite player Origi who wasn't replaced at all.
Spending virtually nothing after winning the CL shows what FSG is all about. Name me another club who has won a major title and gone out to spend just 5m on new signings in recent history.
- Dec 22, 2009
- 62,744
- 36,791
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Matildas/Socceroos/LFC/MVFC/RCStrasbourg
Long term yes, with Salah there for the next few seasons. We've had mostly the same side since 2018.
- Feb 1, 2010
- 38,722
- 19,673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspur, Brentford FC
- Thread starter
- #8,511
Net spend shouldn't be used when talking about Liverpool because one half of the formula is Sales and you've fleeced nearly everyone you sell to!
We can't even muster up a penny for Ndombele, Winks, Lo celso and Reguillon and have them all on cheap loans. Bournemouth of old would somehow offer us 30m for any of those 4 if we had the Liverpool bloke in charge.
moomba
TheBrownDog
No. Not at all. You clearly don't understand football spending.
Geez, that's a fair amount of time.
Teams don't put in enough research and compatibility checks for their managers is the problem it seems.
Appointments are often made on the person's name and brand rather than are they suitable for a club and how they want to play.
Appointments are often made on the person's name and brand rather than are they suitable for a club and how they want to play.
SM
Bigfooty Legend
Think the issue is also that unless you've had a manager for 3+ years, the squad will be a mis-match of playing styles based on whoever the manager was when they were brought to the club.
As you say though, if they have a clear identity for style that transcends the manager, you should be able to get continuity even with a few managerial changes, like Brighton have managed, and Swansea tend to be able to.
As you say though, if they have a clear identity for style that transcends the manager, you should be able to get continuity even with a few managerial changes, like Brighton have managed, and Swansea tend to be able to.
Which is why owners who aren't football savvy can often lead to these problems.
Owners should state what type of football they want their team to play then appoint the people who can make that happen then step back.
If that manager can't get the team winning with that style go find another one who can.
When Liverpool were winning they had a style under Klopp, even if they move on from him their next manager should be a hire that coaches a style similar to Klopp.
SM
Bigfooty Legend
Haha our owners (previous) were set on us playing 4-3-3 I suppose trying to follow this logic, but then recruited a range of players that didn't suit it, eventually our manager found an excuse to shift to 3-5-2 last season and we started winning games. It's a bit funny how it can work out.
Which is where the system fell down because perhaps the owners didn't set their recruitment department up well enough to match their vision.
It really does have to have the whole organisation on the same page for it to work.
At lower levels this will be a more difficult task but at PL level with the resources some of these clubs have it should be possible.
- Feb 1, 2010
- 38,722
- 19,673
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tottenham Hotspur, Brentford FC
- Thread starter
- #8,520
100 percent this!
Club should come up with an approach they want. Then hire managers who fit that. And sign players who fit the approach. Then if for whatever reason it doesn't work with manager A, you rehire down that philosophy and manager B inherits a squad that largely suits his needs.
Rather than do what we are likely to do and have a new manager not play a back 3. Meaning a few of our current players become redundant. Our current targets might not fit a need. And some deadwood gets sold under conte might have been able to a job under the next manager
SM
Bigfooty Legend
At what point do you shift philosophy though? At that point you have to change the squad significantly.
For smaller clubs, if they suffer relegation they would also need to overhaul their squad.
For smaller clubs I think they need to start at their youth ranks and bring in youth who they can mould to that system of play.
That way any promising young player can be brought into the senior squad and they will already be playing the same style.
Think that's what's worked best for us.
Helps that transition be more seamless. Even when you loan kids out send them to teams who employ a similar style philosophy.
If you have to keep buying in players to suit a system I think that becomes unsustainable and the system falls apart.
Art Vandelay_
TheBrownDog
- Oct 28, 2012
- 104,629
- 142,667
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers - Tottenham
Our problem is not in management but ownership. Arsenal backed Arteta with €300m in the last two summer windows. Ar one point backing him after a 12 game run with 1 win.
Our philosophy absolutely has to change. Ownership need to behave like the big club they purport to be, and tell the world they are with top management appointments.
Playing “our way” hasn’t worked for a couple of decades at least. Earning and spending more money is the way to win. Happy to adopt that philosophy
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Hey? Arsenal net spend last 4 seasons is 400m (euro), yours has been 380m.
SM
Bigfooty Legend
Also strange because Gero criticised Arsenal's strategy and suggested Arteta would be on thin ice now is praising their approach.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
