• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Rodgers On The Committee

Status
Not open for further replies.

Windom Earle

Very Active
Member
Brendan Rodgers has told Liverpool they must decide between running a business or winning trophies.
Former Liverpool boss Rodgers has finally opened up fully on the club’s controversial transfer committee system and warned the club must “decide whether they want a business model or a winning model.”
Rodgers insists he did not have any problem working under the committee but suggested Liverpool are gambling on signing players based on their age and potential rather than paying bigger money for established stars.
Liverpool’s policy has been not to sign players over 24 for big transfer fees and Rodgers’ successor Jurgen Klopp has struggled to improve the club’s fortunes since taking charge.
In pictures - Liverpool 2-2 Sunderland:

VIEW GALLERY
Liverpool-v-Sunderland.jpg


In an interview with beIN Sports, Rodgers said: “Well I think it is probably a little difficult at the moment. I didn't have any problem working under one [a transfer committee].
“The club needs to look at it and decide whether they want a business model or a winning model. A winning model would mean trying to get the best possible players that you can, at whatever age they are, it doesn't matter.
“Some clubs will go into work and have that in mind. Others will think it is about buying a player, developing and improving them and then selling them on for a much greater fee, as opposed to getting the best possible player, irrelevant of his age, in order to win.


Plumb Images
Leicester-City-v-Liverpool-Premier-League

Mixed bag: Jurgen Klopp has been unable to change Liverpool's fortunes

“This is the way it is going, some clubs operate with the model of football being a business and they will want to do the best they possibly can, but it will always be about getting a young player in, improving them and having a sale and value that is greater when they got them.
“Other clubs will be in the market to just buy the top talents, irrespective of what age they are, in order to look to win. I think the best clubs must get the balance between both [models].”
Rodgers has already distanced himself from some of the club’s signings during his spell in charge while Klopp insisted when he arrived that he would have the final say.



Interesting, but perhaps nothing new. I have been reading the board for a while, and I would say that the general consensus is that Liverpool are sticking to a clearly defined transfer strategy - under a certain age, with an upside, potential etc. and it would appear that that is exactly the case.
 
Anything that highlights the cynicism and increasingly detached attitude of the owners is welcome. After the relief of getting rid of Hicks and Gillett, the realisation that we've merely replaced utter crooks with a much more respectable bunch of opportunists must have taken root across the fan base. I can't see the rottenness in this club being removed for years. It feels as bleak as it's been for years and years. I wouldn't blame Klopp for leaving at the end of the season. He's never going to be given the means to succeed at this shambolic place.
 
Anything that highlights the cynicism and increasingly detached attitude of the owners is welcome. After the relief of getting rid of Hicks and Gillett, the realisation that we've merely replaced utter crooks with a much more respectable bunch of opportunists must have taken root across the fan base. I can't see the rottenness in this club being removed for years. It feels as bleak as it's been for years and years. I wouldn't blame Klopp for leaving at the end of the season. He's never going to be given the means to succeed at this shambolic place.
I get that there may be rottenness, but investment wise, the funds are there, they are putting in the money for recruitment, it's just that the players are crap. That's not their fault.

What is Klopp not given? What was Rodgers not given?
 
Unless we get in richer owners who will happily splurge from their bottomless treasure chest.

Meanwhile the likes of Leicester are making a mockery of everyone.

When money becomes central to everything, it's all a vicious cycle really.
 
I get that there may be rottenness, but investment wise, the funds are there, they are putting in the money for recruitment, it's just that the players are crap. That's not their fault.

Yeah, they're really showing how great they are with their ticketing policy. Is there money for players? There's enough for a couple more players whom the top clubs don't want. Is THAT the way to improve this squad? And FSG play a role in the committee, it's THEIR committee. So it is at least partly their fault, no matter who they sack. You think much of the TV money will go on improving the team? Hardly any.
 
Anything that highlights the cynicism and increasingly detached attitude of the owners is welcome. After the relief of getting rid of Hicks and Gillett, the realisation that we've merely replaced utter crooks with a much more respectable bunch of opportunists must have taken root across the fan base. I can't see the rottenness in this club being removed for years. It feels as bleak as it's been for years and years. I wouldn't blame Klopp for leaving at the end of the season. He's never going to be given the means to succeed at this shambolic place.
Yes indeed...I started a thread along similar lines a few weeks ago. I really don't expect Klopp to be in charge on the first day of the 2017/18 season.
 
Anything that highlights the cynicism and increasingly detached attitude of the owners is welcome. After the relief of getting rid of Hicks and Gillett, the realisation that we've merely replaced utter crooks with a much more respectable bunch of opportunists must have taken root across the fan base. I can't see the rottenness in this club being removed for years. It feels as bleak as it's been for years and years. I wouldn't blame Klopp for leaving at the end of the season. He's never going to be given the means to succeed at this shambolic place.

You'd hope that eventually someone will notice that this way of doing things is not really working though. As far as I am aware of all the players that have been bought under these owners and later sold, only Suarez has generated a big profit. There have been a few other decent profits on players, but they were already at the club. Eventually there will be a point when we don't have that many players who will generate a big profit for the owners. I don't think we have many at the moment.

On top of that, we can't possibly be making much money from our on-the-field activities either.

So even if we simply look at it as a business investment, the approach does not seem to be working, and looking at it that way is probably our best hope of change at the top.
 
Yeah, they're really showing how great they are with their ticketing policy. Is there money for players? There's enough for a couple more players whom the top clubs don't want. Is THAT the way to improve this squad? And FSG play a role in the committee, it's THEIR committee. So it is at least partly their fault, no matter who they sack. You think much of the TV money will go on improving the team? Hardly any.
Nah I'm not talking about the fan aspect, that's a poor move from their side no doubt.
Regards to Klopp, I reckon so far they have shown intent. Agreed the committee is poor but you can't accuse them of not trying, they believed the committee would represent better transfer activity.
They've moved for Willian, Sanchez, and so forth, those top players didn't want us though. And there were plenty of big money transfers: Benteke, Firmino, Lovren.

I don't think Klopp won't get means to succeed . Or hope so at least.
 
You'd hope that eventually someone will notice that this way of doing things is not really working though. As far as I am aware of all the players that have been bought under these owners and later sold, only Suarez has generated a big profit. There have been a few other decent profits on players, but they were already at the club. Eventually there will be a point when we don't have that many players who will generate a big profit for the owners. I don't think we have many at the moment.

On top of that, we can't possibly be making much money from our on-the-field activities either.

So even if we simply look at it as a business investment, the approach does not seem to be working, and looking at it that way is probably our best hope of change at the top.
Torres was sold for a profit, as was Sterling.
 
You'd hope that eventually someone will notice that this way of doing things is not really working though. As far as I am aware of all the players that have been bought under these owners and later sold, only Suarez has generated a big profit. There have been a few other decent profits on players, but they were already at the club. Eventually there will be a point when we don't have that many players who will generate a big profit for the owners. I don't think we have many at the moment.

On top of that, we can't possibly be making much money from our on-the-field activities either.

So even if we simply look at it as a business investment, the approach does not seem to be working, and looking at it that way is probably our best hope of change at the top.

The problem is that this way of doing things does work, if you get it right (which can be difficult). Our owners could well be shooting admiring glances at Tottenham at the moment, who are performing well and using a similar strategy, that may be enough for them to feel that they can persist with it.

It's not necessarily the model, it's the rigidity that's exercised in sticking to it and the poor purchases that have been made in the name of it.
 
When deciding to buy players with a sell on value, they mustn't have done their homework on quite a few players.

Balotelli/Benteke are two that spring to mind.
 
When deciding to buy players with a sell on value, they mustn't have done their homework on quite a few players.

Balotelli/Benteke are two that spring to mind.

It's even worse when they do decide to step outside of the model, Zlate. What's Lallana's sell on value?

The main problem with the strategy is that, from the outside looking in, it seems to be that the criteria is just under a certain age and value/sell on potential. It looks like (at least under Rodgers) that the player's position, the first team's playing style/system rarely formed part of the criteria.
 
Will be interesting to see our net spend this summer then.
The money was there for buying Teixeira for 38 mill £ in January, so I cant see Klopp not being given funds this summer.

Since they took over we've spent about 150 mill net spend with the total over 350 million.
The lack of funds isnt the problem, its the way it has been spent.

Hopefully we'll add someone like Zorc after this season and look towards working on a different model.
We have a manager now that can attract other players then the previous one, and hopefully have a better eye for a good deal. His actions in January were promising.
 
Will be interesting to see our net spend this summer then.
The money was there for buying Teixeira for 38 mill £ in January, so I cant see Klopp not being given funds this summer.

Since they took over we've spent about 150 mill net spend with the total over 350 million.
The lack of funds isnt the problem, its the way it has been spent.

Hopefully we'll add someone like Zorc after this season and look towards working on a different model.
We have a manager now that can attract other players then the previous one, and hopefully have a better eye for a good deal. His actions in January were promising.
How was 38m quid there for us to spend in January when we offered 25 odd million quid? Is this a fact?
 
How was 38m quid there for us to spend in January when we offered 25 odd million quid? Is this a fact?

Well, say 25 mill was okay by the media but several others have said that the club would back Klopp with 38 mill but he wouldnt go higher than 25 mill.

We also spent 5,1 mill on Gruijc. So thats 30 mill confirmed. Could have been 43 if what others have heard is correct.

But, the point still stand. The money was there which has been confirmed by most of the press.

From December: Liverpool have 'plenty' of money available to spend. (Ben Smith BBC)
 
Lallana. Lovren also.

Indeed, and they backed the manager with his wishes on 3 of those players.
When Rodgers talks about this in the interview is should be worth noting that he wanted 3 players for 78 mill £, that could have been spent on a whole other type of quality and put the squad/team in a whole other situation.
 
Torres was sold for a profit, as was Sterling.

I know, but as I said those were players who were already at the club. It wasn't exactly the result of any strategy by the owners to buy players who would increase in value. The only major example of that I think was Suarez.
 
Yeah, they're really showing how great they are with their ticketing policy. Is there money for players? There's enough for a couple more players whom the top clubs don't want. Is THAT the way to improve this squad? And FSG play a role in the committee, it's THEIR committee. So it is at least partly their fault, no matter who they sack. You think much of the TV money will go on improving the team? Hardly any.

Exactly. So we change policy. We don't spend £20m a-go on either established Premiership players or the 2nd/3rd/4th tier bright prospects. It's not a case of what our managers are given, it's a case of the whole setup being flawed, from how we identify players to how we negotiate contracts (and often fail). Like I said in the match thread, they can't justify the increase by saying "look at what we've spent", because the wastefulness is on their part and that shambolic committee of amateurs.

Most fans would rather see us buying players for modest prices like we did with Can, Coutinho and Sturridge, than us blowing wads on misfits like Benteke, Sakho and Markovic, just so we can say we're competing by spending those sort of fees. It's all a bit sinister and hollow, the way we're spending the money to present this image of being a top club, when on the pitch it's perfectly obvious we're anything but, and on the terraces we're getting more and more agitated, and skint. Do they understand anything about our city and the wages of the average Joe? No, they want day-trippers who will spend money in the club shop.
 
I find it a little bit rich for Rodgers to complain in truth, this is the man after all who signed fucking Mignolet.
 
I find it a little bit rich for Rodgers to complain in truth, this is the man after all who signed fucking Mignolet.

and Klopp gave him a new five year deal and Achterberg has still not been sacked.
 
In the end it must be up to the manager if he want a DoF or a committee.

If Klopp demand that we appoint a DoF then the club must accept it. If Klopp accept the committee then he can't complain if they sign players he don't want. Rodgers stayed even that the committee signed players he didn't want but because he stayed he can't complain about it.

Our manager must have balls to pressure FSG.

Rodgers wasn't a big enough name so he couldn't demans things in the way Klopp can do. Imagine if Klopp demand a DoF or he walks and they say no. The protests against FSG would force them to accept what Klopp want.

They are in a situation now that they must back Klopp or sell the club. The fans would force them to do it.
 
Rodgers said he didn't want to work under a DoF but then got stuck with a more complicated committee. Which is essentially the same thing but with less clarity and cohesion.
 
you can't accuse them of not trying, they believed the committee would represent better transfer activity.
They've moved for Willian, Sanchez, and so forth, those top players didn't want us though. And there were plenty of big money transfers: Benteke, Firmino, Lovren.
.

You see, I don't get that at all. West Ham go for big players, or so they claim. They just don't get them, and no one is surprised. It's easy to 'go for' big players. Getting them is another matter. Ask Rick Parry. And as for 'big money' players: no, Lovren isn't a big money player. He's a low money player for whom we paid far too much. The mancs buy big money players - that's top players who cost a lot. One or the other manc clubs will go for Neymar this summer, and the other will go for Suarez - they're big money players, that's a sign of clubs trying - not paying double the proper price for someone we've never heard of because the clock's ticking and people are panicking. FSG aren't trying in a serious sense. They're trying to keep things on an even keel until they can sell the wretched thing for a profit. End of.
 
Well, say 25 mill was okay by the media but several others have said that the club would back Klopp with 38 mill but he wouldnt go higher than 25 mill.

We also spent 5,1 mill on Gruijc. So thats 30 mill confirmed. Could have been 43 if what others have heard is correct.

But, the point still stand. The money was there which has been confirmed by most of the press.

From December: Liverpool have 'plenty' of money available to spend. (Ben Smith BBC)

Didn't Klopp also say something along of lines of the money being there but the selling club's valuation being too high in a press conference? Or have I imagined that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom