English Football Philosophy vs Liverpool Football philosophy

There's a problem that has existed throughout English football for a long time, and may go some way to explaining the success we had in the 70's and 80's.

The major problem was that for many years, English coaches spent a lot of time trying to turn athletes into footballers.

Liverpool, at the same time were turning footballers into athletes.

It's a small difference, but in my mind, a crucial one and we still see it reflected in the Premier League to this day.
Some like to talk about the Prem being the best league in the world.
It's not, although it is probably the most exciting.

I think this is a very underrated part of our domination of the 70's and 80's and ironically is also part of the reason for our decline, as other coaches started to emulate our philosophy.
I'm not saying other teams didn't have good players, they obviously did, but the emphasis was always on big, strong, fast.
Our emphasis was on skill, ability, passing and reading the game and only when we knew a player had very specific qualities would we sign them, and it has to be said we had players who were pretty much complete in terms of physique and ability because of the way we trained them after we signed them.

As other clubs caught on and rejected the 80's mindset, and as money started to flood into the game, we got left behind, for a variety of reasons, but I think other clubs changing their own philosophy contributed to this, and I also think that after the demise of the bootroom we lost our way regarding what made a Liverpool player.

Great point.

For me the problem is that the game itself has changed to a quicker, more technical sport and less of a contact sport.

If you look at footballers from the 70s or 80s they loked more like carthorses then the svelte athletes of today. That's why it was so hard to compare footallers from different eras - put Neymar in that environment and he woud have got ripped apart.

At our most dominant we combined the technical passing and skills of continental sides with the British underpinning of speed, power and aggression.

It is much easier to train someone physically than to make them better footballers - our best hope now is training players in a way that everyone else isn't doing. Probably the best way to do that is to make them the most tactically adaptable which appears to be the route we going down.

Like Joe Calzaghe, you don't have to hit the hardest or be the quickest to be champion if you can constantly adapt to your opponent.

Great point.

For me the problem is that the game itself has changed to a quicker, more technical sport and less of a contact sport.

If you look at footballers from the 70s or 80s they loked more like carthorses

not satisfied with insulting members of this forum now you are calling the great teams of the 70;s and 80;s carthorses.

Great point.

For me the problem is that the game itself has changed to a quicker, more technical sport and less of a contact sport.

If you look at footballers from the 70s or 80s they loked more like carthorses then the svelte athletes of today. That's why it was so hard to compare footallers from different eras - put Neymar in that environment and he woud have got ripped apart.

At our most dominant we combined the technical passing and skills of continental sides with the British underpinning of speed, power and aggression.

It is much easier to train someone physically than to make them better footballers - our best hope now is training players in a way that everyone else isn't doing. Probably the best way to do that is to make them the most tactically adaptable which appears to be the route we going down.

Like Joe Calzaghe, you don't have to hit the hardest or be the quickest to be champion if you can constantly adapt to your opponent.

While I agree with much of this, I do think there are massive limits to coaching a player - especially youth - to be tactically adept. If you read Dennis Bergkamp's autobiography he bemoans the fact that kids are taught where to run, where to pass - basically everything is like a script and everyone is regimented to do a particular job to stick to a disciplined method, and there's no room for creative expression. He actually cites Luis Suarez as the ideal player who takes the initiative and doesn't need a coach to teach him what to do.

At Ajax at the moment, ex-legends took over the whole management structure in 2010 (Frank De Boer - manager, Bergkamp - assistant, Stam - defensive coach, Ronald De Boer - youth coach, etc) and are currently encouraging their youth players to be more creatively expressive and take their own initiative, thinking for themself.

For players to creatively flourish, players obviously need to be street wise and highly technically superior, but also have an intelligent mind to be able to make up their own mind rather than having coaches do it for them. If players are not technically adept, then fine, put them in a strict disciplined tactical system, but for a very fluid, highly attractive side like the classic Ajax sides, we need highly technical players who are independent in thought to allow themselves to creatively flourish.

The Ajax model is one that is particularly appealing to me, and one that Liverpool need to take heed of if they have any ambitions to develop great teams from the youth academy.

not satisfied with insulting members of this forum now you are calling the great teams of the 70;s and 80;s carthorses.

Honestly do you have to go on every thread and pick out bits of his posts you can use to further what ever agenda you have against him. Your just as bad as he is.
It's a footie forum FFS

The culture of bullying amongst a few members rears its ugly head again.
Rather than come in and address a concern about a post, it gets spread around and used out of context as a stick to beat someone with.

I think it's a fair point about the differences in physique between now and back then.
It's no big secret that a diet of chips and beer is not conducive to being a finely tuned athlete, although as per my original post this applied a lot less to Liverpool teams and players.

and I also think that after the demise of the bootroom we lost our way regarding what made a Liverpool player.

I agree to an extent Swab but I think Brendan has a good idea of what makes a'Liverpool' player and I also think in general he has a good idea of what a good footballer should be.

I actually think Brendan has lost his way a bit and is still trying to work out what to do after Luis has gone. I feel he is trying to be all things to all men, so to speak, and I'd like to see a it of courage from the boos to go back to his orignial philosophy in a way as I feel it's a better fit for theplayers we have now after Luis has left.

The culture of bullying amongst a few members rears its ugly head again.
Rather than come in and address a concern about a post, it gets spread around and used out of context as a stick to beat someone with

Couldn't agree more and it is getting a little tiresome to be honest and is getting in the way of somedecent debate.

While I agree with much of this, I do think there are massive limits to coaching a player - especially youth - to be tactically adept. If you read Dennis Bergkamp's autobiography he bemoans the fact that kids are taught where to run, where to pass - basically everything is like a script and everyone is regimented to do a particular job to stick to a disciplined method, and there's no room for creative expression. He actually cites Luis Suarez as the ideal player who takes the initiative and doesn't need a coach to teach him what to do.

At Ajax at the moment, ex-legends took over the whole management structure in 2010 (Frank De Boer - manager, Bergkamp - assistant, Stam - defensive coach, Ronald De Boer - youth coach, etc) and are currently encouraging their youth players to be more creatively expressive and take their own initiative, thinking for themself.

For players to creatively flourish, players obviously need to be street wise and highly technically superior, but also have an intelligent mind to be able to make up their own mind rather than having coaches do it for them. If players are not technically adept, then fine, put them in a strict disciplined tactical system, but for a very fluid, highly attractive side like the classic Ajax sides, we need highly technical players who are independent in thought to allow themselves to creatively flourish.

The Ajax model is one that is particularly appealing to me, and one that Liverpool need to take heed of if they have any ambitions to develop great teams from the youth academy.

Good point; I didn't watch the England match but I was reading that the players were shocked by Hodgson putting Barkley on then giving him an expletive laden bollocking for losing the ball.

There is definitely a balance of creativity and discipline which our current coaching setup is getting wrong.

I agree to an extent Swab but I think Brendan has a good idea of what makes a'Liverpool' player and I also think in general he has a good idea of what a good footballer should be.

I actually think Brendan has lost his way a bit and is still trying to work out what to do after Luis has gone. I feel he is trying to be all things to all men, so to speak, and I'd like to see a it of courage from the boos to go back to his orignial philosophy in a way as I feel it's a better fit for the players we have now after Luis has left.

One of the things I think I can justifiably criticise in BR's philosophy is a lack of athleticism in the players he brings in, at least to an extent.
He's bought a lot of small, nippy players with good touch and skill, but last year one of the outstanding players in the team was an almost pure athlete, which is Henderson.
When I think of the great Liverpool sides of the past, we always had small, nippy, skillful players, but there was a balance between them and the very athletic, powerful players.
Personally, I think a mix of the 2 types is essential for the Prem especially in midfield, but that again brings the question of Gerrard to the fore, and there are enough posts and threads about his contribution without me adding more to them.

edit to add: I just read hollywoods post above, and I see he is thinking along the same lines 

Yep, exactly right Swab - I think Brendan has definitely identified the need for bigger, more athletic players and I think that was reflected in the latest transfer window.

N

I agree to an extent Swab but I think Brendan has a good idea of what makes a'Liverpool' player and I also think in general he has a good idea of what a good footballer should be.

I actually think Brendan has lost his way a bit and is still trying to work out what to do after Luis has gone. I feel he is trying to be all things to all men, so to speak, and I'd like to see a it of courage from the boos to go back to his orignial philosophy in a way as I feel it's a better fit for theplayers we have now after Luis has left.

Couldn't agree more and it is getting a little tiresome to be honest and is getting in the way of somedecent debate.

No doubt they will be gathering round their auld mates on their secret thread to get everyone they dislike banned. Bunch of fascists.