Something Has To Change

We've had a lot of discussion over the last few weeks about who is to blame for the season as a whole and what we need to do going forward. The manager has come in for a lot of criticism with many losing faith with him, many never had that faith to begin with, and many who have the opinion that he is working with his hands tied behind his back and that he is doing the best in the current set up.

I think we can all agree though that something has to change this summer and I wanted a thread to have a discussion about what that should be and if we have any faith that what should happen will happen. I'm talking about from a structural viewpoint more than individual transfers etc etc.

What can we expect to change?

There are three key areas where changes could be made:

Owners
Manager/coach
MD/Transfer committee

The least likely, I'd say 100% likely, to change is the owners moving on and I'm sure everyone on here would agree even if they don't want them here. FSG are here to stay in the short to medium term so even if 'we' think they have made the most mistakes they are not something that can change. I would add that I don't think they will change from their transfer policy either, give or take the odd signing, and we will have to accept that they will broadly look to signing younger players with an eye on the future and players who have their best years ahead of them.

If FSG are here to stay and the policy won't change, and there is little evidence to suggest it will, then what changes will they make moving forward? If they think we have failed this season, and it's not even a given that they do, then who will they identify as being responsible? If not the manager then someone or some part of the football structure within the club hasn't functioned as it should have done. If they don't see this season as a failure then we won't see any changes and the same again will happen this summer and into next season.

Conversely if FSG do think we have failed in our objectives for the season I would expect changes to be made to either, or both,of the other areas I mentioned above. The manager and/or the structure above him and what he works with in recruiting players.

I'm of the opinion that the people in the transfer committee are working to the guidlines set by the owners and we 'miss' many players because they aren't given more freedom to be more flexible in how the money available for transfers is used. But maybe there is arguement that there are too many grey areas within the structure and no one person is performing well enough within their role to get deals done.

Should we appoint an experienced Sporting Director to come in and implement all football policy from top to bottom? An experienced operator who will shape transfers, youth policy and basically everything football wise at the club. Someone who will be in charge fo the transfer committee and who has experience dealing with transfers, scounting players, getting transfers over the line etc. Someone like Monchi at Sevilla or example.

This would leave Brendan as simply the head coach and leave him to coach and set up the first team. It could lessen his remit at the club but also give him a more focussed approach and allow him to get on with the job of coaching the side to win football matches.  There would be no grey areas where signings are concerned as they would be taken out of this hands. It could also lessen the role and influence Ian Ayre has over transfers and leave him, if he is still here, to either move roles or we move him on and possibly gives some of Ayre's jobs to others withing the structure such as Billy Hogan.

If, on the other hand, FSG are 100% happy with how we recruit players and who we recruit if they still see this season as a failure then the person to blame is the manager as he has failed to get the best out of players they have brought in. In this instance we would expect to see a change of manager, and an upgrade, to someone they feel will be able to get more from both the players we have here and make best use of the policy that is in place. I would expect that is this is the case that they should be looking at the top managers that seem to be on the market this summer such as Jürgen Klopp, Rafa Benitez and Carlo Ancelotti. Or looking at other coaches in Europe who have possibly exceeded expectations and worked under similar polices such as Unai Emery, Diego Simone etc.

I think we as supporters all agree that something has to change moving forward although we aren't united in what that should be. I'm sure the vast majority of us want transfer policy to change, at the very least, while some more feel we need to change the manager, or others feel we need to overhaul the committee.

We need a clear strategy for the coming season and people appointed within that strategy who are the very best at their jobs if we are to bridge the gap and exceed expectations.

What is FSG's attitude to success and what is success to them?

Will they act swiftly to ensure we exceed the par or are they happy to drift along and be the team that stays in it's place?

In my opinion we need a true dyed in the wool Director of Football that answers to nobody except the owners. If he wants a committee for transfers that is fine but the final decisions, responsibilities, credit and blame belong to him and him alone.

If Brendan cannot work under such leadership then he should be let go and somebody brought in that will.

To many years now things have gone wrong and there is nobody held accountable; I wan't somebody to say "We did not get this transfer done because XYZ" I want somebody to say "this player did not get a new contract because of ABC" or "We are not going to pay XXX to player because he is not worth it"

Somebody needs to take this club, build it based off of the vision of play-style, history & constraints and run with it.

We have people owning, running, managing, playing for this club with zero accountability; all running around in circles doing nothing like they are afraid to confront what actually needs to be done.

In my opinion we need a true dyed in the wool Director of Football that answers to nobody except the owners. If he wants a committee for transfers that is fine but the final decisions, responsibilities, credit and blame belong to him and him alone.

If Brendan cannot work under such leadership then he should be let go and somebody brought in that will.

To many years now things have gone wrong and there is nobody held accountable; I wan't somebody to say "We did not get this transfer done because XYZ" I want somebody to say "this player did not get a new contract because of ABC" or "We are not going to pay XXX to player because he is not worth it"

Somebody needs to take this club, build it based off of the vision of play-style, history & constraints and run with it.

We have people owning, running, managing, playing for with zero accountability; all running around in circles doing nothing like they are afraid to confront what actually needs to be done.

If there are to be no changes to the manager then I 100% agree AZ.

The transfer committee consists of the main compenents of what you need to recruit players and is no different to what most top clubs have in place. The problem is I think Ian Ayre has too much influence on that committee and like you I'd take the manager right out of the equation and remove Ayre and appoint a  proper Sporting Director/DOF.

That guy will have the remit to shape the football club from topto bottom and will be experienced enough and have enough contacts in world football that he will make the best from FSG's recruitment policy.

That guy will have the remit to shape the football club from topto bottom and will be experienced enough and have enough contacts in world football that he will make the best from FSG's recruitment policy.

This is what I believe FSG wanted all along but really sidetracked themselves in doing...the whole David Dien type guy that was to be here at the offset.

The idea was that no matter the manager or players the club had a direction and style from the children to the u-18's all the way to the starting XI that would not change.

None of this happened or what did happen has been in bits and pieces.

Biggest failure of FSG is not about spending what we make; its about having zero consistency and flip flopping ideas every couple of years; they have themselves in a "paralysis by analysis" mode and we are just going sideways.

This is what I believe FSG wanted all along but really sidetracked themselves in doing...the whole David Dien type guy that was to be here at the offset.

The idea was that no matter the manager or players the club had a direction and style from the children to the u-18's all the way to the starting XI that would not change.

None of this happened or what did happen has been in bits and pieces.

Biggest failure of FSG is not about spending what we make; its about having zero consistency and flip flopping ideas every couple of years; they have themselves in a "paralysis by analysis" mode and we are just going sideways.

I agree.

I'm almost at a point now where there is nothing to be gained by debating the policy as I see no real evidence that it will change or that FSG want to change.

I have said that if that is the case I'm not convinced Brendan is the guy to make the most out of that policy but if the manger isn't to change, and I think he won't be replaced, then like you I think the best and only option is to appoint the very best Sporting Director we can get and let him control all football policy at the club.

I agree.

I'm almost at a point now where there is nothing to be gained by debating the policy as I see no real evidence that it will change or that FSG want to change.

I have said that if that is the case I'm not convinced Brendan is the guy to make the most out of that policy but if the manger isn;t to change, and I think he won't be replaced, then like you I think the best and only option is to appoint the very best Sporting Director we can get and let him control all football policy at the club.

Nothing to add to this other than it needs to happen.

In my opinion we need a true dyed in the wool Director of Football that answers to nobody except the owners. If he wants a committee for transfers that is fine but the final decisions, responsibilities, credit and blame belong to him and him alone.

If Brendan cannot work under such leadership then he should be let go and somebody brought in that will.

To many years now things have gone wrong and there is nobody held accountable; I wan't somebody to say "We did not get this transfer done because XYZ" I want somebody to say "this player did not get a new contract because of ABC" or "We are not going to pay XXX to player because he is not worth it"

Somebody needs to take this club, build it based off of the vision of play-style, history & constraints and run with it.

We have people owning, running, managing, playing for this club with zero accountability; all running around in circles doing nothing like they are afraid to confront what actually needs to be done.

I'm not sure there is much if any evidence to suggest that this has worked at any club in English football though has it? We had a go with Commoli and we still wasted a ton of money on poor players. I'm not really sure how it will solve anything? And you seek to be suggesting the DOF has absolute power and final say, how many of the top managers in European want to work in that sort of environment? Particularly if they know we will never be in for the top players. Not many I shouldn't think.

I'm not sure there is much if any evidence to suggest that this has worked at any club in English football though has it? We had a go with Commoli and we still wasted a ton of money on poor players.

An intersting article from John Gibbons on Comolli and also the possible need for 'a Comolli'.

  LIVERPOOL: IS IT TIME TO THINK AGAIN ABOUT DAMIEN COMOLLI? TUESDAY’S COLUMN

by John Gibbons // 12 May 2015 // 27 Comments

Gibbons Ident (1)

STEVE Hothersall recently interviewed Damien Comolli about his time at Liverpool for City Talk 105.9 and it got me thinking about Anfield’s former director of football strategy and later director of football.

I thought about him while watching Luis Suarez for Barcelona. I thought about him when Memphis Depay decided to go to Manchester United after Liverpool’s earlier interest in the player. And I thought about him when Jerome Sinclair made his Premier League debut on Sunday at Stamford Bridge aged 18, with 19-year-old Jordan Ibe joining him on the pitch soon after.

All the time I wondered whether it was time to have a look at Comolli’s time at Liverpool again.

The Frenchman, who has also worked with Monaco, St Etienne, Arsenal and Spurs, was sacked by FSG just 18 months after being appointed in November 2010.

Don’t worry. I’m not going to try to convince you that Andy Carroll was worth £35million, or that Charlie Adam was ever the right fit for the club. But here are the signings most attribute to his hand during his time at the club:

    Andy Carroll: £35m
    Luis Suárez: £22.7m
    Jordan Henderson £20m
    Charlie Adam £8.5m
    Stewart Downing £20m
    Doni: Free
    José Enrique: £7m
    Sebastián Coates: £7m
    Craig Bellamy: Free
    Jordan Ibe: £500k
    Danny Ward: £100k
    Sheyi Ojo: Undisclosed
    Jerome Sinclair: Free

Like at Spurs, his record reads a superstar, a couple of notable successes, some fantastic youth players and plenty who leave you scratching your head. But forget the players for a moment, instead it’s the strategy and implementation during Comolli’s reign that I believe is worth some fresh consideration.

I will touch on the Suarez transfer though. It seems Comolli is part of the growing number of people who don’t get any credit for what Luis Suarez did at Liverpool.

Football - Preseason Friendly - Valerenga v Liverpool FC

Earlier in the year, in an attack on Comolli, Ian Doyle of the Liverpool Echo called the Suarez transfer ‘something of a no-brainer’ which seems ridiculously harsh considering every other club in Europe knew about him and didn’t put a bid in. For example, here is Harry Redknapp:

“We looked at Suarez. He was a player who we  probably should have taken, looking back on it. We just weren’t sure.”

And that was for bloody Tottenham! We’re not talking Real Madrid here. Comolli was part of the team that identified the player as someone who improved us and, crucially, he then got the job done.

This is what I want to focus on: Comolli as a man who got sh*t done. In January 2011, less than three months after joining Liverpool, he managed to negotiate a fee of £50million for a striker who didn’t want to play for Liverpool and bring in two who did. This was during the January transfer window – a time when Liverpool haven’t managed to sign anyone for the last two seasons because apparently it’s impossible.

So back then, against all the odds, we managed to lose one of the most highly thought of strikers in Europe and, for a few extra quid, come out better off. And he still found time to sell Ryan Babel, too.

There has been plenty written and said about the players brought in during the summer of 2011, but from a director of football point of view it must be said that the club seemed to have a clear strategy and managed to secure most of their first-choice targets.

A focus on midfielders who created chances might not have been the best strategy in the world; I would argue that any system that values Charlie Adam above Xabi Alonso is ultimately flawed, while I also doubt how many of Stewart Downing’s floated balls into the box a striker probably wants.

But it was a clearer strategy than the one which sent us from Sanchez to Remy to Balotelli in the summer. And I’d have fancied Comolli over anyone at the club now to at least manage to a chat with Alexis Sanchez.

Away from the headline-grabbing deals, there was also a recruitment strategy of poaching the best teenage talent in the country for nominal fees. Comolli helped secure Sinclair, Ibe and Sheyi Ojo in a short space of time. Since he left we either haven’t been as successful at this, or we simply haven’t bothered with it.

Also under the radar, and less referenced in print and online, are  the players Comolli helped shift on during the summer of 2011. He got a healthy £12m for Raul Meireles, a generous £4m for David N’gog, a ‘tops off’ £1.5m for Paul Konchesky and a champagne popping £1m for Christian Poulsen. SERIOUSLY, SOMEONE GAVE US MONEY FOR CHRISTIAN POULSEN.

He also got notable amounts for a few young players who were never going to make the grade, including Gerardo Bruna (once hailed as the ‘new Lionel Messi’), who was recently seen playing for Whitehawk in the sixth tier of English football before moving to Accrington Stanley. Whitehawk? Yeah, me neither. They sound like a metal band from Wolverhampton.

Jovanic with Hodgson and Cole of England

On top of all that, Comolli managed to get the eye-watering £120,000-a-week salary of Milan Jovanovic off the wage bill.

He did much of this, by all accounts, by not being terribly nice to footballers Liverpool didn’t want anymore. A much underrated Comolli quality — and another which might be lacking from the club at the moment.

The Fabio Borini situation is a good example of this. Last summer the manager clearly wanted him gone, but in the back of his mind he is thinking, ‘If he doesn’t go, I might need him’. He also might be thinking, ‘I might end up at another club in a few years’ time and he might be playing there’. This is a tough one for managers all over the country. How much can you truly ostracise a footballer?

What was needed then was Damien Comolli flushing Borini’s head down the toilet and shoving a National Express bus ticket in his back pocket.

As Liverpool fans, it was our first real experience of a director of football, and it was always going to be an uneasy one, especially with someone with a limited experience of playing and coaching. “Who is this fella to tell Kenny Dalglish who he should and shouldn’t be buying?”

But Kenny spoke highly of Comolli both during and after their work together. In late April 2012, when Comolli had been sacked but Dalglish was just about hanging on, Kenny said:”The director of football role in this country is much maligned. I think people just have something against the job title or the principles.

“For me, the role Damien played was a fantastic help. I think it would be for any manager, as long as everyone knows the lines that they cannot cross, that’s fine.”

Dalglish spoke of the need to replace Comolli, but the club never did, instead moving towards a committee of men, some of whom make Comolli’s footballing career look like Johan Cruyff’s.

Is it time to replace him now? Would we as a fan base be more welcome to it?

The manager famously refused to work under one, telling the media on his appointment as Liverpool boss in June 2012: “One of the items I brought up when I was speaking to the club was that I wouldn’t directly work with a director of football.

“I feel that if you are going to do that as a club you have to do that first. That was my recommendation. If you want to have a sporting director, get him in and then you can pick your manager from there but if you do I won’t be the manager.”

Rodgers’ hand could be weakened after a disappointing season. Or, if it makes him feel any better, maybe we can call it something else.

I’m not advocating the return of Comolli. He’s still the fella who spent £20m on Stewart Downing. I just want someone who is out there getting deals done. Moving players on. Committed and able to ensure the best young talent in the country is moving to our academy. Making sure that, when top talent is looking to move, Liverpool are at least part of the conversation.

I think we’d all welcome that individual at the club. Whoever they may be.

http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2015/05/time-reassess-damien-comolli/

I'm not sure there is much if any evidence to suggest that this has worked at any club in English football though has it? We had a go with Commoli and we still wasted a ton of money on poor players. I'm not really sure how it will solve anything? And you seek to be suggesting the DOF has absolute power and final say, how many of the top managers in European want to work in that sort of environment? Particularly if they know we will never be in for the top players. Not many I shouldn't think.

I was under the impression Scott that most big clubs had a sporting director or President Sammer (Bayren), Paratici (Juventus)...etc etc...Commoli never had any power at all.

I think the main thing it does is put a face and a name on who is responsible and it should give more consistency in all of our polices.

As the article above states:

I just want someone who is out there getting deals done. Moving players on. Committed and able to ensure the best young talent in the country is moving to our academy. Making sure that, when top talent is looking to move, Liverpool are at least part of the conversation.

This is what we need.

The only thing that needs to change is fans insatiable lust to have PSG style billionaire owners who will throw money at the club. Its not realistic at this point in time.

I was under the impression Scott that most big clubs had a sporting director Sammer(Bayren), Paratici (Juventus)...etc etc...Commoli never had any power at all.

I think the main thing it does is put a face and a name on who is responsible and it should give more consistency in all of our polices.

As the article above states:

I just want someone who is out there getting deals done. Moving players on. Committed and able to ensure the best young talent in the country is moving to our academy. Making sure that, when top talent is looking to move, Liverpool are at least part of the conversation.

This is what we need.

I don't know that it really does give you the accountability that you are looking for though? Commoli gets the blame for players such as Downing and Carroll but Kenny has always said he fully endorsed all of our transfer moves. And if you take someone like Sammer at Bayern, I don't for one minute imagine that players come in without the full and total endorsement of Pep Guardiola, what do you think?

The model at Spurs with Baldini and Villa Boas looked pretty iffy to me, it did seem very much a case of Baldini bringing in players that the manager didn't particularly want to work with and it didn't end well. Do we want something similar at LFC, I'm not convinced.

I was under the impression Scott that most big clubs had a sporting director Sammer(Bayren), Paratici (Juventus)

I think they do AZ. It is almost common practise on the continent and I'm one on here who has always seen merit in that system.

Even Kenny always praised the job Comolli did while he was here and felt it was essential in the modern game.

'The Director of Football role in this country is much maligned. I think people just have something against the job title or the principles. For me, the role Damien played was a fantastic help. I think it would be for any manager, as long as everyone knows the lines that they cannot cross, that’s fine.’

I don't know that it really does give you the accountability that you are looking for though? Commoli gets the blame for players such as Downing and Carroll but Kenny has always said he fully endorsed all of our transfer moves. And if you take someone like Sammer at Bayern, I don't for one minute imagine that players come in without the full and total endorsement of Pep Guardiola, what do you think?

The model at Spurs with Baldini and Villa Boas looked pretty iffy to me, it did seem very much a case of Baldini bringing in players that the manager didn't particularly want to work with and it didn't end well. Do we want something similar at LFC, I'm not convinced.

Honestly Scott, I don't know why FSG does not do this; it is what they are most familiar with.

They have a general manager of the baseball team, in the end he is charged with hiring the manager and implementing the recruitment of players while the manager handles the ins/outs on the field and in training.

I would want a strong DoF or Sporting Director and have him be responsible for not only the players brought in but also for the manager.

That is my feeling anyway..right now we have Ian Ayre and a bunch of nameless dudes on a committee and they all seem to be going in different directions.

Honestly Scott, I don't know why FSG does not do this; it is what they are most familiar with.

They have a general manager of the baseball team, in the end he is charged with hiring the manager and implementing the recruitment of players while the manager handles the ins/outs on the field and in training.

I would want a strong DoF or Sporting Director and have him be responsible for not only the players brought in but also for the manager.

That is my feeling anyway..right now we have Ian Ayre and a bunch of nameless dudes on a committee and they all seem to be going in different directions.

Yeah it's what they know, and of course in the states it Is very much the norm to have a GM and an HC, no one questions it, it's just the way it is. I'm a big NFL fan and the HC has an input on draft day but many of them simply work with what they're given. But it s the complete opposite to the culture in football and I don't think the idea will ever truly be embraced in this country, or in football in general. Football is a more organic game than American sports, they are all pieces on a board in the NFL, or in baseball. Football is different and the managers live with the pressure, they want to be able to bring in their own players.

And as for the DOF brining in there own Manager, that also echoes what we see in US Sport and certainly (if your going to go down the DOF route) it is probably the best way to make it work with the DOF in post first and then the manager follows suit. Are you American by any chance!?

Yeah it's what they know, and of course in the states it Is very much the norm to have a GM and an HC, no one questions it, it's just the way it is. I'm a big NFL fan and the HC has an input on draft day but many of them simply work with what they're given. But it s the complete opposite to the culture in football and I don't think the idea will ever truly be embraced in this country, or in football in general. Football is a more organic game than American sports, they are all pieces on a board in the NFL, or in baseball. Football is different and the managers live with the pressure, they want to be able to bring in their own players.

And as for the DOF brining in there own Manager, that also echoes what we see in US Sport and certainly (if your going to go down the DOF route) it is probably the best way to make it work with the DOF in post first and then the manager follows suit. Are you American by any chance!?

I actually don't see why it can't be embraced Scott and as I said I'm one who see's the merit in a Sporting Director.

An intersting article from John Gibbons on Comolli and also the possible need for 'a Comolli'.

  LIVERPOOL: IS IT TIME TO THINK AGAIN ABOUT DAMIEN COMOLLI? TUESDAY’S COLUMN

by John Gibbons // 12 May 2015 // 27 Comments

Gibbons Ident (1)

STEVE Hothersall recently interviewed Damien Comolli about his time at Liverpool for City Talk 105.9 and it got me thinking about Anfield’s former director of football strategy and later director of football.

I thought about him while watching Luis Suarez for Barcelona. I thought about him when Memphis Depay decided to go to Manchester United after Liverpool’s earlier interest in the player. And I thought about him when Jerome Sinclair made his Premier League debut on Sunday at Stamford Bridge aged 18, with 19-year-old Jordan Ibe joining him on the pitch soon after.

All the time I wondered whether it was time to have a look at Comolli’s time at Liverpool again.

The Frenchman, who has also worked with Monaco, St Etienne, Arsenal and Spurs, was sacked by FSG just 18 months after being appointed in November 2010.

Don’t worry. I’m not going to try to convince you that Andy Carroll was worth £35million, or that Charlie Adam was ever the right fit for the club. But here are the signings most attribute to his hand during his time at the club:

    Andy Carroll: £35m
    Luis Suárez: £22.7m
    Jordan Henderson £20m
    Charlie Adam £8.5m
    Stewart Downing £20m
    Doni: Free
    José Enrique: £7m
    Sebastián Coates: £7m
    Craig Bellamy: Free
    Jordan Ibe: £500k
    Danny Ward: £100k
    Sheyi Ojo: Undisclosed
    Jerome Sinclair: Free

Like at Spurs, his record reads a superstar, a couple of notable successes, some fantastic youth players and plenty who leave you scratching your head. But forget the players for a moment, instead it’s the strategy and implementation during Comolli’s reign that I believe is worth some fresh consideration.

I will touch on the Suarez transfer though. It seems Comolli is part of the growing number of people who don’t get any credit for what Luis Suarez did at Liverpool.

Football - Preseason Friendly - Valerenga v Liverpool FC

Earlier in the year, in an attack on Comolli, Ian Doyle of the Liverpool Echo called the Suarez transfer ‘something of a no-brainer’ which seems ridiculously harsh considering every other club in Europe knew about him and didn’t put a bid in. For example, here is Harry Redknapp:

“We looked at Suarez. He was a player who we  probably should have taken, looking back on it. We just weren’t sure.”

And that was for bloody Tottenham! We’re not talking Real Madrid here. Comolli was part of the team that identified the player as someone who improved us and, crucially, he then got the job done.

This is what I want to focus on: Comolli as a man who got sh*t done. In January 2011, less than three months after joining Liverpool, he managed to negotiate a fee of £50million for a striker who didn’t want to play for Liverpool and bring in two who did. This was during the January transfer window – a time when Liverpool haven’t managed to sign anyone for the last two seasons because apparently it’s impossible.

So back then, against all the odds, we managed to lose one of the most highly thought of strikers in Europe and, for a few extra quid, come out better off. And he still found time to sell Ryan Babel, too.

There has been plenty written and said about the players brought in during the summer of 2011, but from a director of football point of view it must be said that the club seemed to have a clear strategy and managed to secure most of their first-choice targets.

A focus on midfielders who created chances might not have been the best strategy in the world; I would argue that any system that values Charlie Adam above Xabi Alonso is ultimately flawed, while I also doubt how many of Stewart Downing’s floated balls into the box a striker probably wants.

But it was a clearer strategy than the one which sent us from Sanchez to Remy to Balotelli in the summer. And I’d have fancied Comolli over anyone at the club now to at least manage to a chat with Alexis Sanchez.

Away from the headline-grabbing deals, there was also a recruitment strategy of poaching the best teenage talent in the country for nominal fees. Comolli helped secure Sinclair, Ibe and Sheyi Ojo in a short space of time. Since he left we either haven’t been as successful at this, or we simply haven’t bothered with it.

Also under the radar, and less referenced in print and online, are  the players Comolli helped shift on during the summer of 2011. He got a healthy £12m for Raul Meireles, a generous £4m for David N’gog, a ‘tops off’ £1.5m for Paul Konchesky and a champagne popping £1m for Christian Poulsen. SERIOUSLY, SOMEONE GAVE US MONEY FOR CHRISTIAN POULSEN.

He also got notable amounts for a few young players who were never going to make the grade, including Gerardo Bruna (once hailed as the ‘new Lionel Messi’), who was recently seen playing for Whitehawk in the sixth tier of English football before moving to Accrington Stanley. Whitehawk? Yeah, me neither. They sound like a metal band from Wolverhampton.

Jovanic with Hodgson and Cole of England

On top of all that, Comolli managed to get the eye-watering £120,000-a-week salary of Milan Jovanovic off the wage bill.

He did much of this, by all accounts, by not being terribly nice to footballers Liverpool didn’t want anymore. A much underrated Comolli quality — and another which might be lacking from the club at the moment.

The Fabio Borini situation is a good example of this. Last summer the manager clearly wanted him gone, but in the back of his mind he is thinking, ‘If he doesn’t go, I might need him’. He also might be thinking, ‘I might end up at another club in a few years’ time and he might be playing there’. This is a tough one for managers all over the country. How much can you truly ostracise a footballer?

What was needed then was Damien Comolli flushing Borini’s head down the toilet and shoving a National Express bus ticket in his back pocket.

As Liverpool fans, it was our first real experience of a director of football, and it was always going to be an uneasy one, especially with someone with a limited experience of playing and coaching. “Who is this fella to tell Kenny Dalglish who he should and shouldn’t be buying?”

But Kenny spoke highly of Comolli both during and after their work together. In late April 2012, when Comolli had been sacked but Dalglish was just about hanging on, Kenny said:”The director of football role in this country is much maligned. I think people just have something against the job title or the principles.

“For me, the role Damien played was a fantastic help. I think it would be for any manager, as long as everyone knows the lines that they cannot cross, that’s fine.”

Dalglish spoke of the need to replace Comolli, but the club never did, instead moving towards a committee of men, some of whom make Comolli’s footballing career look like Johan Cruyff’s.

Is it time to replace him now? Would we as a fan base be more welcome to it?

The manager famously refused to work under one, telling the media on his appointment as Liverpool boss in June 2012: “One of the items I brought up when I was speaking to the club was that I wouldn’t directly work with a director of football.

“I feel that if you are going to do that as a club you have to do that first. That was my recommendation. If you want to have a sporting director, get him in and then you can pick your manager from there but if you do I won’t be the manager.”

Rodgers’ hand could be weakened after a disappointing season. Or, if it makes him feel any better, maybe we can call it something else.

I’m not advocating the return of Comolli. He’s still the fella who spent £20m on Stewart Downing. I just want someone who is out there getting deals done. Moving players on. Committed and able to ensure the best young talent in the country is moving to our academy. Making sure that, when top talent is looking to move, Liverpool are at least part of the conversation.

I think we’d all welcome that individual at the club. Whoever they may be.

http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2015/05/time-reassess-damien-comolli/

that was actually a great read. How do people see if a past player was success or a flop. Resale value? their stats while playing for us? Doesnt matter how you see it, if you take a look at the list of the players comolli/kenny brought in. They have to be success.

Not individuals but all the players they brought while their time with us. We paid too much for majority of the players, but we did get our money back. Sinclair, ibe and hendo are still with us.

 Suarez carried our team to second place, in the champions league. We sold him for alot of money (not saying it was the right choice), we got a bit off the flop, add that money to what we got for landing 2nd and CL money. SO all that money we recouped, if it is invested in new players, then they did a good job. didnt they?

so overall it wasnt too bad. now i am not sure if damien/kenny partnership was as bad as i first thought it was. Maybe going for a DOF isnt a bad idea.

BR & Gerrard have told FSG what is needed this summer in terms of transfers, so let's see if they come up with the goods.

If not then the nail is in the coffin for FSG.

BR & Gerrard have told FSG what is needed this summer in terms of transfers, so let's see if they come up with the goods.

If not then the nail is in the coffin for FSG.

Have you got any proof of this mate, I mean apart from the recent interview Gerrard gave. Is there something new you know, as you just stated Gerrard is to shadow Rodgers after his venture in LA is over.

Source please?

Something only needs to change if your objective is to seriously challenge for titles and honours. If on the other hand your objective is to maximise profits and build up the value of the club before selling on for an absolutely massive wedge of cash, nothing whatsoever needs to change because we are progressing beautifully.

The synergy between what the fans want and what the owners want has never been further apart.

Something only needs to change if your objective is to seriously challenge for titles and honours. If on the other hand your objective is to maximise profits and build up the value of the club before selling on for an absolutely massive wedge of cash, nothing whatsoever needs to change because we are progressing beautifully.

The synergy between what the fans want and what the owners want has never been further apart.

That is just about spot on Mick only difference between the last two is that these fckers are very smart and deceptive.

The key fact is:-
You can't fix something, without duhhhh taking steps to fix something.

I mean some Summers our net spend was ZERO. Which, after natural annual depreciation means  a deterioration, not improvement. Various wage cuts were brutal so its clear what they're setting us up for.

I think most fans can see the deception now, atleast much of it. So many of the debates are becoming irrelevant.

I think we have too many hands in the cookie jar.

First off, it would be great if the owners had an insatiable lust to make this club similar to Barcelona on the pitch. I don't know if that's financially possible at this point but I feel like the owners want the club to progress, but they don't want to have to make any hard decisions or do any heavy lifting to get it there.

Second, I think the transfer committee needs to be disbanded. For me, the manager should be alerting scouts to either a) specific players he is interested in or b) a "type" of player he wants to bring in.

Once those have been identified, the scouts go and do their job (yes they'd actually have to leave England occasionally) and actually scout the players and report back.

Third, the manager decides who he really wants in his side (within some semblance of reason...he can't ask for Messi and Ronaldo every time) and this list of players is then provided to the DoF whose job it is to go and make the transfers happen.

If the transfers can't be completed for one reason or another, the DoF moves on to the manager's next target or backup plan, but there would be no substituting of players that aren't wanted by the manager.

This would require a very close and good working relationship between the DoF and the manager and trust would be paramount to the success of this setup. These two would have to feel like they each had each other's back.

A by product of a setup like this is accountability. If the manager is getting the players he wants but not getting consistent results, then he's accountable. If the manager isn't getting the players he wants because the DoF can't close deals with any of them then you know the DoF needs replacing. If the DoF can't close deals because we can't compete financially, then you know the owners are the issue. It's cut and dry and pretty straightforward.


I don't think there is any way that FSG would implement this approach though.

I think most fans would accept that if you pay 300 million quid for a club/business, it's only fair if you make a profit out of your investment. Whether or not this is in the form of regularly taking money out (which cleverer people than me have assured the forum doesn't happen), or by increasing the value of the club so it can eventually be sold as a profit, I think most people would go along with it.

That is IF however all reasonable steps are taken to allow the club to actually compete for honours on the football pitch. I mean, I don't mind them making money out of the whole thing WITHIN REASON as long as each and every decision is not taken solely with the objective of increasing that eventual windfall.

Our transfer strategy is a case in point. Yes I get that we can't compete financially with some other clubs, but what I definitely do not get is the idea that we will not spend big wages to get proven players who are often available for next to no transfer fee, simply because they don't carry with them a future sell on value. We can afford it, we have the means, but we don't have the will. This is what needs to change .