Several things wrong at our club and it starts at the top.

We as fans will point our fingers at the manager and players when things go tits up and expect that a change of manager with fresh idea's and a new imputes will magically solve all our problems over night. Now don't get me wrong, I do believe Brendan Rodgers could get more out of the current crop of players we have and likewise I believe a new manager could also, but for me that is papering over the cracks of what appears to be a failing system.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not here to blow smoke up either Rodgers or FSG's arse or be vehemently as critical of them as some people choose to be, I'm trying to look at everything in perspective with no agenda. I don't for a second believe that FSG are as bad as some people believe, they have backed the manager, started the new stand and increased revenues at the club and they deserve praise for that, but FSG are not perfect, they do have flaws and their flaws for me stick out on the football side of business not the financial side.

What I mean by that is, remember they set the transfer strategy (Certain age and potential) and those below them, Ayre, Transfer Committee and Rodgers work with in those confines, its also worth noting here that they set the wage structure, lower wages with performance related bonus's.

Now lets take a moment to think about that, when City first began their project, did we see them offering lower wages for performance related bonus's ?. The reality is they were over paying in terms of fee's and wages for players that were not quite at the level that either reflected, but if they hadn't they would never have got top 4 and attracted the likes of Silva and Aguero never mind won the league.

We all know City had the finances to do it that way and were not as restricted as we are, but it goes to show it can be done in another way differently to how we are doing it. Now I'm not expecting us to go throw money at the problem willy nilly like City did, but I am advocating a change to how we operate, we are restricting ourselves in terms of the talent we can bring into the club and thus the club is suffering.

The Manager should be given his transfer budget at the start of the season and his wage budget and as long as he stays within those confines then he should be allowed to sign who ever he wants, for says sake he wants a £35m, 27 year old midfielder then he should be allowed to go get his man as long as he stays within his wage budget and transfer budget.

Then we get to the transfer committee another one of the cogs in the machine that is failing, last summers transfer business was absolutely shocking in hind sight, we have Balotelli on loan, Markovic on Loan, Lambert sold, Lovren looking a disaster, Moreno can't get a sniff for an 18 year old CB playing as a left back, Lallana flattering to deceive etc.

Now some of the failings of the above I believe could have been avoided without the Age restriction/performance related contracts on offer, but still the transfer committee on the whole has failed, whether that is a failing of the system or the people implementing is another topic all together but the signs that is has failed are glaringly obvious and is a total contradiction of 'John Henry's we'll not waster resources paying over inflated transfer fee's blah blah', F**k me we paid £20m for Lovren, £20m for Markovic who'd on loan and £16m for Balotelli who's on loan £56m wasted.

Then we have Rodgers, tactics aside seemingly happily to rid the squad of players who may stand up to him, but is this truly the case ? Is Rodgers pushing the likes of Reina, Agger out of the door to bring down the wage budget in line with what he's being asked to from above ?

Our problems, in my opinion are not going to be solved by just merely sacking the manager and putting a new one in place unless those up above seriously reconsider their strategy, age should not come in to it, the only questions that should come into it when buying players is, will he seriously improve us and can we afford him, not he may be good enough in 3 years and we might make £10/£15m on him.

Anything were seeing on the football field is the result of the trickle down effect that they in Boston are dictating, yes John Henry is not picking the tactics or selecting the players to play, but he is/they are (FSG) are affecting the quality of player we can target that can improve our squad with the restrictions they place on the committee/Rodgers.

Were not a well oiled machine at present, were more like a clapped out 1.0 Corsa 3 potter with 176000 miles and a rattling timing chain plodding down the road, with a 17 year old Chav with no sense of direction at the wheel.

It's a mess, would it be better to buy one quality player who gets twice the wage, instead of two players who won't be the level we need getting half each?
That's where their handcuff philosophy for our club doesn't make sense.
Do they want us to be like Chelsea with 30+ players out on loan but in our case at the detriment of LFC?
Why did we brake the shackles for Milner? Why not get someone special if we are now going to pay that amount of wages on certain players, we all knew Milner would be a workhorse like Henderson, these aren't game changing players.


God knows what they're thinking. I haven't got the answers.

There are too many people high up at the club who have no idea about football. I don't think Ian Ayre could speak to you about his team of th season or how things are looking in La Liga compared to last year. The average Joe can hold a conversation about that but the fact the people running our club don't have a scooby about the game we play is very concerning.

There are too many people high up at the club who have no idea about football

I don't even think its that Mag's to be honest, they want a Billy Bean money ball approach and have set their stall out for that, but there's too many variables come in to play in football, stats are not the be all and end all, yes they paint a picture but they can be interpreted in many different ways, scouting a player thoroughly is better than running a few numbers through a computer.

Wage restrictions and performance based contracts do not work in football, you go after some one who's highly rated and offer him one, then there's the possibility that another team who rates him the little bit more offers him the contract he really wants.

Its a load of bollocks, the whole thing wants scrapping.

I thought we got all our targets this window?

I thought we got all our targets this window?

The point that is totally missing on you is, if the current transfer policy and wage structure wasn't being dictated by John Henry and FSG then perhaps the targets we aquired this summer wouldn't have been our targets as there would have been a different criteria/parameters to work with.

The point that is totally missing on you is, if the current transfer policy and wage structure wasn't being dictated by John Henry and FSG then perhaps the targets we aquired this summer wouldn't have been our targets as there would have been a different criteria.

Perhaps. But if we followed your strategy maybe we could only afford a couple of players every season that wouldn't cover the gaps needed in the squad.

Paying for big money signings hardly guarantees success - the resident forum genius wanted us to sign Falcao rather than Sturridge.

Perhaps. But if we followed your strategy maybe we could only afford a couple of players every season that wouldn't cover the gaps needed in the squad.

And spunking £20m on Lovren, £20m on Markovic, £16m on Balotelli does ?

I'm not advocating big money buys, I'm advocating the manager Having free reign on deciding the players he wants without age restrictions or sell on value, as long as we can afford him transfer fee wise and wage wise without none of this performance related pay nonsense.

The only questions relevant when signing a player should be will he improve us and can we afford him, its really that simple, it levels tha playing field more in terms of recruiting players and improving the squad when we remove our own self imposed sanctions.

its far too easy to blame the owners.

its like the default setting for football fans.

They are not the reason why rodgers is making basic mistakes, being rigid in tactics, having poor defensive orgaization and freezing his own signings out.

Even if we are using the method of buying youngster and potential. WHICH THEY WERE CLEAR ABOUT FROM THE START. (I dunno why its an issue now. It wasnt in 2014 when we were in a title chase)

We should still be capable of not losing 3-0 at home to west ham or 6-1 to stoke with the players we have.

Im sorry, im just not buying it.

They are not the reason why rodgers is making basic mistakes and freezing his own signings out.

That's where you've got the context of the post wrong mate, I didn't want to get into the tactics aspect and the mistakes he's making.

There seems to be a grey area on freezing people out of the squad, some will say he's favouring his own signings over those of the Committee signings, which if true points to another failing of the transfer committee.

Maybe Rodgers wouldn't be making the mistakes he is making if our self imposed sanctions on transfers and wages were not in play, maybe Rodgers could target the actual players he does want other than the ones who fall in those specific criteria.

Do you actually think we are putting ourselves at an advantage over the rest of the league by imposing a strict set of guidlines regarding age, resale value, low wages above talent ?

Look at it another way, we are at a disadvantage to Chelsea, City, Arsenal, United as we can't compete financially and offer Champions League Football, so were restricted some what by that in terms of transfers as we know 9 out of 10 players would reject us if they were also speaking to the player.

So what we do, we go and further put ourselves at a disadvantage by having wage restrictions in place and performance related contracts and a set of criteria for identifying players that include a specific age range and resale value and thus further narrowing the market we can shop in to improve our squad.

And spunking £20m on Lovren, £20m on Markovic, £16m on Balotelli does ?

I'm not advocating big money buys, I'm advocating the manager Having free reign on deciding the players he wants without age restrictions or sell on value, as long as we can afford him transfer fee wise and wage wise without none of this performance related pay nonsense.

The only questions relevant when signing a player should be will he improve us and can we afford him, its really that simple, it levels tha playing field more in terms of recruiting players and improving the squad when we remove our own self imposed sanctions.

But how does that solve anything?

The manager was given free reign to buy Borini, Allen, Lovren, Lallana, Lambert and so on.

Letting him spend whatever he wants on players that are older doesn't mean his judgement will improve - it just means the player costs more overall as they harder to sell on if they flop.

Maybe Rodgers wouldn't be making the mistakes he is making if our self imposed sanctions on transfers and wages were not in play, maybe Rodgers could target the actual players he does want other than the ones who fall in those specific criteria.

I get what youre saying, but even with self imposed sanctions. U still have to make the correct decisions.

Lets say youre the manager and u have 2 left back options 1 is super attacking, the other is 1 footed but is a seasoned premier league player and a 3rd u just signed is a 18 year old CB and is right footed.

Do you
a) persist with a right footed cb in a flat back 4 (also playing right rooted wingers a head of him)
b) work with your 20million pound left back to become more defensive
c) make up with the seasoned professional you have frozen out
d) play 3-5-2 to suit the players you have in the squad.

now in a situation like this. You could argue that its the owners fault we are in the situation to begin with (which i dont see how) BUT.

If you are the manager u have to deal with situations, thats part of the job.

And you have to make the right choices. In my opinion we arent losing 3-0 to west ham at home because our owners want to buy young potential. Our squad is better than west hams

If you are going to talk about the 'situation we are in' in terms of the owners. Its impossible to ignore the results on the pitch which also have to do with tactics and the managers choices.

If u want to just talk about the pros and cons of their strategy generally, then thats something else. But we've know about this for a long time, its an issue now because we suck on the pitch.

but to your general point,  IMO i dont think its a bad strategy. There are enough good players in the footballing world for us to do well with that strategy if we leverage our history, good coaching and good scouting. Other teams have proven it.

The risk of these sorts of debates is that its gonna ultimately come down to most fans want rich owners like chelsea and city (even though they wont out right say it). Which is fair enough, but its not going to happen right now.

So until that changes we could at least get it 'sort of' right on the pitch.

Also lets not forget the shysters we had for owners before these ones.

Random fact.
Under Fenway's "principles", we'd never have signed Dalglish in 77.
He was "too old". Also, too "expensive" and "no resale value".

Also, we'd never have signed Lawrenson, Souness, never re-signed Rush.
We'd never have signed Torres, Masch, Reina. Prob never signed Alonso, or Hansen etc etc

And all the players who became great? They'd have been sold early on, as early as 20yrs of age - if Sterling is an indicator.

That Tompkins did an article about transfer fee inflation which was interesting, even if he did have his tongue up the Yanks arses alot in the past. In wages and fees, we really don't have more than a dog's chance of getting in the top 4, let alone our "bread and butter" of winning the league.

Basically, if we'd been owned by Yanks in the past, we'd never have been "Liverpool".

work with your 20million pound left back to become more defensive

What £20mill LB?

Random fact.
Under Fenway's "principles", we'd never have signed Dalglish in 77.
He was "too old". Also, too "expensive" and "no resale value".

Also, we'd never have signed Lawrenson, Souness, never re-signed Rush.
We'd never have signed Torres, Masch, Reina. Prob never signed Alonso, or Hansen etc etc

And all the players who became great? They'd have been sold early on, as early as 20yrs of age - if Sterling is an indicator.

That Tompkins did an article about transfer fee inflation which was interesting, even if he did have his tongue up the Yanks arses alot in the past. In wages and fees, we really don't have more than a dog's chance of getting in the top 4, let alone our "bread and butter" of winning the league.

Basically, if we'd been owned by Yanks in the past, we'd never have been "Liverpool".

That's not a fact - you don't understand our transfer strategy let alone moneyball.

The strategy accepts, in fact encourages, paying for and recruiting players even if they don't fit the common profile if they fill vital gaps in the squad.

Hence under FSG we have signed the likes of Milner, Lambert and Toure.

Yes, yes "get back to Boston", "concentrate on rounders" blah blah.

What £20mill LB?

sorry it was 18million euros.

geeze, ppl will read a whole post and ignore the overall point and reply to point out 1 minor discrepancy smh

i think it's fair to say FSG started on an OK path but they will never be able to push us to the next echelon because they aren't football people, they aren't even British or European, they're yankee doodles, they do not understand the world game very much. their focus on the corporates and the international support and all that is fine for a while but we are already a superpower across the world. we should already be able to attract any sponsorship. they have to make THE CLUB appealing again and not rely on history or reputation because as the years go by without the club improving people will see that there isn't much of a club to support anymore!

i think there are early signs that they are rebuilding the club inside with good people. but it's a scary time because it's so unfamiliar, we are going down new territory and our heartbeat is unfamilar, there are no scousers left, unless rossiter properly kicks on this season. maybe he's coming up just at the right time. to keep the Liverpool in Liverpool FC. that's what we must never let go of. the rest will come together with good intelligent people backing us but we need to get back to basics and bring through players that the supporters love and identify with, that's the most important part, how the supporters feel about the team and the gaffer. sorry for the rambling post, hope it made sense to some people!

That's not a fact - you don't understand our transfer strategy let alone moneyball.

The strategy accepts, in fact encourages, paying for and recruiting players even if they don't fit the common profile if they fill vital gaps in the squad.

Hence under FSG we have signed the likes of Milner, Lambert and Toure.

Yes, yes "get back to Boston", "concentrate on rounders" blah blah.

Look I understand "our" transfer strategy all too well.
Players aren't bought for football, they're bought for profit. Cheap, young, usually crap. As opposed to proven, quality and costing more than £7.99 in Aldi.

You can't go "the principles are this, however as it looks crap, I will pretend its the opposite".

And its not "gaps" that need filling, its virtually a whole squad thats been destroyed by greed and idiocy.

Finally, I talk about Dalglish, Torres, Masch, Lawrenson.
Then in defence of the bullshitters, you talk Lambert, Kolo Toure (and the pretty average Milner).

Not much of a defence when you bring up Lamb and Toure to defend its credibility is it?

(Rounders etc etc etc...  )

Look I understand "our" transfer strategy all too well.

Do you?

Players aren't bought for football, they're bought for profit. Cheap, young, usually crap.

Crap footballers are bought cheaply to turn a profit?

So Markovic was cheap? Moreno? Borini? Lovren? Balotelli?

And look at that amazing profit we made on them all!!!

I don't think you understand much

I get what youre saying, but even with self imposed sanctions. U still have to make the correct decisions.

Lets say youre the manager and u have 2 left back options 1 is super attacking, the other is 1 footed but is a seasoned premier league player and a 3rd u just signed is a 18 year old CB and is right footed.

Do you
a) persist with a right footed cb in a flat back 4 (also playing right rooted wingers a head of him)
b) work with your 20million pound left back to become more defensive
c) make up with the seasoned professional you have frozen out
d) play 3-5-2 to suit the players you have in the squad.

now in a situation like this. You could argue that its the owners fault we are in the situation to begin with (which i dont see how) BUT.

If you are the manager u have to deal with situations, thats part of the job.

And you have to make the right choices. In my opinion we arent losing 3-0 to west ham at home because our owners want to buy young potential. Our squad is better than west hams

If you are going to talk about the 'situation we are in' in terms of the owners. Its impossible to ignore the results on the pitch which also have to do with tactics and the managers choices.

In the opening post.

I do believe Brendan Rodgers could get more out of the current crop of players we have and likewise I believe a new manager could also, but for me that is papering over the cracks of what appears to be a failing system.

If u want to just talk about the pros and cons of their strategy generally, then thats something else. But we've know about this for a long time, its an issue now because we suck on the pitch.

but to your general point,  IMO i dont think its a bad strategy. There are enough good players in the footballing world for us to do well with that strategy if we leverage our history, good coaching and good scouting. Other teams have proven it.

The risk of these sorts of debates is that its gonna ultimately come down to most fans want rich owners like chelsea and city (even though they wont out right say it). Which is fair enough, but its not going to happen right now.

So until that changes we could at least get it 'sort of' right on the pitch.

Also lets not forget the shysters we had for owners before these ones.

It may not be a bad strategy, but as we've shown its failing us as a club, our squad is continually worse, genuine quality has left and there is no genuine quality to replace it.

Like I've already stated, were limiting ourselves to specific pool of talent which is narrowing our market to the kind of players that can come in and make an immediate impact on the team.

I support Liverpool FC, not the balance sheet.

Again from the opening post.

I don't for a second believe that FSG are as bad as some people believe, they have backed the manager, started the new stand and increased revenues at the club and they deserve praise for that, but FSG are not perfect, they do have flaws and their flaws for me stick out on the football side of business not the financial side.

Look I understand "our" transfer strategy all too well.
Players aren't bought for football, they're bought for profit. Cheap, young, usually crap. As opposed to proven, quality and costing more than £7.99 in Aldi.

You can't go "the principles are this, however as it looks crap, I will pretend its the opposite".

And its not "gaps" that need filling, its virtually a whole squad thats been destroyed by greed and idiocy.

Finally, I talk about Dalglish, Torres, Masch, Lawrenson.
Then in defence of the bullshitters, you talk Lambert, Kolo Toure (and the pretty average Milner).

Not much of a defence when you bring up Lamb and Toure to defend its credibility is it?

(Rounders etc etc etc...  )

I wasn't talking about how successful the strategy has been.

I was disputing your "fact" that the manager can't sign older player sthat he likes because of the strategy.

If so, the signings of players like the examples I mentioned are either a figment of our imaginations or your "fact" is bollocks.

Just to repeat again, since you missed it the first time, I'm not commenting on how successful the strategy has been.

I was disputing your "fact" that the manager can't sign older player sthat he likes because of the strategy.

But I think we have to agree a couple of Bosmans and a low spend 3rd choice striker are the exception other than the norm, could you see them paying out a transfer fee and massive wages to say Pirlo, Ibrahimovic who are both pretty much into the twilight of their careers ?