Quantcast
FSG are not shit - Page 179 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content

Welcome to the new and improved TLW!

 

Some of you may experience issues logging in and will get an 'incorrect password' error. Don't worry, you haven't typed it in wrong and your password hasn't been changed. You will need to reset it though in order to log in. Click the reset password link and you will receive an email with your new temporary password. Once logged in, you need to choose a new password (or restore to your old one) otherwise you will be locked out again.

 

If you have an out of date email address linked to your account, then you won't receive the new password. If that's the case then you'll need to email me (dave @liverpoolway.co.uk) or send me a tweet @theliverpoolway and I'll update your password manually. 

 

Any other problems or questions just let me know.

 

Thanks

Dave

Dave D

FSG are not shit

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Bad Red Bull said:

Well, VVD was sounded out in the summer before Coutinho went but I don't want to start that argument now in this thread again.

Of course he was,but he was only signed once the Coutinho deal was done. It was all part of the same transfer merry go round,nothing wrong with it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Of course he was,but he was only signed once the Coutinho deal was done.

Vlad -- we were not allowed to sign him. Remember?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Vlad -- we were not allowed to sign him. Remember?

So we kept Coutinho despite him desperately wanting to go. A merry go round,like I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were prevented from signing Van Dijk, and yes Coutinho forced a move.

 

Your point is players will come and go? Or is it something more than that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

We were prevented from signing Van Dijk, and yes Coutinho forced a move.

 

Your point is players will come and go? Or is it something more than that?

The point is that VVD's move was inextricably linked to Coutinho's move to Barca. Some people just seem to not get that and get mad because they think it wasnt. Simple business,but one piece that just seemed to make people defensive because it seemed to support an argument some have about whether or not it was FSGs money or not. What difference does it make?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No diff - certainly everyone could see Coutinho ripe for a move. And at that number - no brainer.

 

The fact that the contact with Van Dijk came very early makes the assumption that they were connected presumptive for me.

 

I certainly do agree that the club has a pretty good idea of its assets, and their worth in the market and are probably willing to find value there at anytime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Arl arse said:

 Just so it’s clear, are FSG shit or not?

 

They have just edged into the "not shit" camp having beaten Bournemouth.

 

Anything less than 2 wins vs Munich and United and its straight back into "very shit"

 

*awaiting verification that they appointed Klopp to serve sandwiches in hospitality only to find out that he knew a bit about football  

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dave D said:

 

They have just edged into the "not shit" camp having beaten Bournemouth.

 

Anything less than 2 wins vs Munich and United and its straight back into "very shit"

 

*awaiting verification that they appointed Klopp to serve sandwiches in hospitality only to find out that he knew a bit about football  

The highly coveted German Sandwich tray.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

The highly coveted German Sandwich tray.

 

I believe Herr Klopp introduced the prized Currywurst to the 200-quid-a-seat Carsberg Dugout

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2019 at 9:19 PM, VladimirIlyich said:

To be honest,most football stadiums are soulless without the fans,including our own. Its the fans that make these arenas what they are.

I don’t agree with that entirely. Yes it’s the fans that make the atmosphere on match day what it is, but a stadium can get in the way of that. Those huge screens at Wembley break up the atmosphere on the three occasions I’ve been.

 

but away from matchday have you ever just wondered down to anfield? Whether it’s for a tour, or in the day to queue up for tickets, or just for the hell of it, there’s a soul to the place that comes from its history.

 

i know it’s nonsense and it’s in my head - it’s just steel and concrete - but that history makes the place special and always will.

 

personally, I’m thrilled we didn’t leave.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 3:20 PM, lifetime fan said:

We’ve spent less than £30m a year under Klopp and it’s even less than that over FSG’s entire tenure. 

 

Thats a fact. A fact that has come back to bite us on the arse on numerous occasions. 

 

This. Is. Not. A. Fact.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:

 

Feel free to give us your figures. 

 

You are the one saying it is a fact. Prove it!

 

*Hint - You can't because the accounts have not been published yet for the last 4 transfer windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

 

You are the one saying it is a fact. Prove it!

 

*Hint - You can't because the accounts have not been published yet for the last 4 transfer windows.

 

Give us the net spend under Klopp that is available then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

In his first full season it was £39m

I wonder how many other clubs who weren't in the Champions League the year before spent more than that in the same season. Anyway, to me it's much more important that we have spent a lot of money now we are back in it and we have improved our deals. It looks like FSG aren't taking money out of the club, and making it available to spend when the manager wants it. Then there's the loan deal, which is pretty good. Money, unfortunately, doesn't grow on trees. 

 

Out of interest, Woolster, can you think of any owners in Europe who are not either backed by an oligarch type individual (like Abramovich), or state sponsored fuckery (like PSG, Manchester Oilers) who are better than these lot? I don't think they've been perfect, obviously, but I think we could be doing much, much worse. I'm not entirely sure that we could be doing much better without the types of owners I just mentioned. Can you think of anyone? I mean, the two big Spanish clubs are there but they have an entirely different income source capability. German clubs are a bit weird, and even then maybe on Bayern would be on a list and they're owned by several different large businesses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Bob Spunkmouse said:

I don’t agree with that entirely. Yes it’s the fans that make the atmosphere on match day what it is, but a stadium can get in the way of that. Those huge screens at Wembley break up the atmosphere on the three occasions I’ve been.

 

but away from matchday have you ever just wondered down to anfield? Whether it’s for a tour, or in the day to queue up for tickets, or just for the hell of it, there’s a soul to the place that comes from its history.

 

i know it’s nonsense and it’s in my head - it’s just steel and concrete - but that history makes the place special and always will.

 

personally, I’m thrilled we didn’t leave.

I have been on the pitch at Anfield and in the ground on a non match day and it is just a soulless and functional building to me. The people/fans are what make it what it is.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:

 

And the rest? 

 

What rest? That is what is publicly available. Although financial results have been reported for 2017/18, the accounts aren't available yet.

 

If you mean his first transfer window, when we bought in Grujic (and Grabara) and sold no one. Firstly He was only a couple of months in charge and wanted to take stock of what he had. Secondly the way transfers work is that we would have been contracted to pay fees in that window, and there is no way to know how much we 'spent' in that window because we only get the full year's accounts.

 

For the full year 2015/16 we spent £38m, the year before £59m, the year before £53m, the year before £44m, and the year before that, FSG's first full season, it was £14m. That averages as as £41m per year.



Quote

We’ve spent less than £30m a year under Klopp and it’s even less than that over FSG’s entire tenure. 

 

So, we have 2 'facts' in your post. One of them is demonstrably wrong, so why should we believe the other one?

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

I've gone over this type of stuff repeatedly over the years in this very thread, but the same shit still gets posted

 

*shrugs*

And the thing is, it doesn't actually matter. We've sold lots of shit players in that time for lots of money. If we kept them, but didn't have one or two of our players but the net spend was higher, would we be better off? No. We wouldn't, of course. I'm much more worried about the direction the team and the club is going. I think it's fair to say things in that regard are going well. It's not that I don't WANT more money for signing, but I just have to be realistic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×