Quantcast
FSG are not shit - Page 3 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Dave D

FSG are not shit

Recommended Posts

Every year they've massively backed the manager in the transfer market. Players that were sold wanted to go, they weren't ruthlessly sold for profit- Suarez, Mascherano, Torres and now Sterling all wanted to jump ship and we got good money for all of them, setting transfer records in the process. I don't believe they would have forced the sale of any of them.

 

The biggest flaw I could level at them would be how they handle/approach staff appointments, manager included but on occasions they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

 

FSG have continually sold our best players year in year out for profit and they were ruthlessly sold for profit in pretty much every instance. Besides Mascherano wasn't sold at a profit, he was sold at a loss and he was one of the best defensive midfielders in the world when we sold him.

 

Last season it was Suarez, this season it's Sterling, next season it's going to be Coutinho, the season after Ibe possibly? I can't credit owners that put in money when the money they put in is from the sales of our best players, it's still a sell to buy policy regardless of how you look at it.

 

Whether the player wanted to go is irrelevant 'professional footballer in wanting to win things shocker', that's why they leave because there is no ambition at this football club barre hoping we scrape top 4. There's a lot of hot air to pander to the RAWK portion of the fan base and droning on about our history, but theres hardly any footballing decisions that warrant respect for trying to get us back to that top table. Firmino is a statement of intent i suppose, but we always seem to add one exciting player when one goes out the door so the net result is usually standing still.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSG have continually sold our best players year in year out for profit and they were ruthlessly sold for profit in pretty much every instance. Besides Mascherano wasn't sold at a profit, he was sold at a loss and he was one of the best defensive midfielders in the world when we sold him.

 

Last season it was Suarez, this season it's Sterling, next season it's going to be Coutinho, the season after Ibe possibly? I can't credit owners that put in money when the money they put in is from the sales of our best players, it's still a sell to buy policy regardless of how you look at it.

 

Whether the player wanted to go is irrelevant 'professional footballer in wanting to win things shocker', that's why they leave because there is no ambition at this football club barre hoping we scrape top 4. There's a lot of hot air to pander to the RAWK portion of the fan base and droning on about our history, but theres hardly any footballing decisions that warrant respect for trying to get us back to that top table. Firmino is a statement of intent i suppose, but we always seem to add one exciting player when one goes out the door so the net result is usually standing still.

 

I can't think of one player they've forced us to sell. They've also let us re-invest it each time.

 

We've simply signed inferior players, often at world class prices.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they are shit. They're big shitty shitfaced shithouses and I can smell poo poo every time I even read their name. Anyone who disagrees is a money minion fake yesman lizard puppet robot zombie drone clone.

 

I'll change my mind if we sign Reus, Illarramendi, Kovacic, Canales, Lacazette, and that beardy thing that used to manage Dortmund.

Repped by accident. Is this shit supposed to be funny?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't think of one player they've forced us to sell. They've also let us re-invest it each time.

 

We've simply signed inferior players, often at world class prices.

 

I agree with the last part, no disputing that. But look no further than Sterling as an example of a player we didn't need to sell. He had 2 years left on his contract and there was no buy out clause. Even Suarez if the reports are true from Barca's side that they paid 63m, it would mean they didn't activate our release clause and we must of came to the negotiating table and brokered a deal with their representatives. It wasn't like his contract was running out, he'd just signed a new deal a few months previous.

 

It's not a case of them forcing us to sell, it's a case of them wanting to sell and the successful PR spin they put on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting money in sadly isn't everything. Spurs have put nothing except player sales towards their transfer spending for years and during that time they've bested us in the league nearly every season. We need owners that generate commercial revenues effectively and spend it efficiently. Clubs like Spurs, Southampton and West Ham are poised to overtake us because they're not hindered by the kinds of mistakes that FSG make year after year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't think of one player they've forced us to sell. They've also let us re-invest it each time.

 

We've simply signed inferior players, often at world class prices.

 

Big of them. Fucking hell, is this the limit of our expectations?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big of them. Fucking hell, is this the limit of our expectations?

 

 

We will spend more than we make in sales this summer.

 

The amount may not be huge but due to out continued failure to use the money we spend to establish ourselves as champions league regulars we have to cut our cloth accordingly.

 

To lay the blame for that at FSGs door is deluded.

 

They could have given another 200m on top of what we have spent and there's every likelihood we'd still be treading water in 5th or 6th given our hit and miss ratio in signings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Super Sub

We will spend more than we make in sales this summer.

 

The amount may not be huge but due to out continued failure to use the money we spend to establish ourselves as champions league regulars we have to cut our cloth accordingly.

 

To lay the blame for that at FSGs door is deluded.

 

They could have given another 200m on top of what we have spent and there's every likelihood we'd still be treading water in 5th or 6th given our hit and miss ratio in signings

How much money did city have to spend to remove us from our top 4 spot? I cannot recall the exact amounts they spent in the seasons prior but the spent eye watering amounts, they basically launched a financial war of attrition against us. There is no way we can compete with that and as every player people are saying would have been a gamble there is nothing to suggest we would get top 4. When city bought they bought sure things.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will spend more than we make in sales this summer.

 

The amount may not be huge but due to out continued failure to use the money we spend to establish ourselves as champions league regulars we have to cut our cloth accordingly.

 

To lay the blame for that at FSGs door is deluded.

 

They could have given another 200m on top of what we have spent and there's every likelihood we'd still be treading water in 5th or 6th given our hit and miss ratio in signings

 

Perhaps they should employ some people more qualified for their respective roles.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much money did city have to spend to remove us from our top 4 spot? I cannot recall the exact amounts they spent in the seasons prior but the spent eye watering amounts, they basically launched a financial war of attrition against us. There is no way we can compete with that and as every player people are saying would have been a gamble there is nothing to suggest we would get top 4. When city bought they bought sure things.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

They spent about 200m to usurp us and challenge for titles, we've spent near 200m in the last 12 months to go backwards.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Super Sub

They spent about 200m to usurp us and challenge for titles, we've spent near 200m in the last 12 months to go backwards.

5 years ago so how much would that equate to today? About 350 million say?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue isn't the fees they spend its the wages they pay.

 

We could have a front 3 of Costa, Sanchez and Firmino if they paid the wages

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting money in sadly isn't everything. Spurs have put nothing except player sales towards their transfer spending for years and during that time they've bested us in the league nearly every season. We need owners that generate commercial revenues effectively and spend it efficiently. Clubs like Spurs, Southampton and West Ham are poised to overtake us because they're not hindered by the kinds of mistakes that FSG make year after year.

 

Spurs have bested us in the league nearly every season? I dont understand what you mean, they havent finished above us that often.

 

I think there's generally a bit of rose tinted look at what should have been if only etc. Is it really the owners fault that the manager, ayre and or the transfer committee broadly wasted the suarez money? Are people advocating the owners should have said 'you're not signing him, him and him with our money. We want you to spend all the money on him' then be accused of interferring?

 

Its ok to interfer when it works but people kick off when it doesnt. If clubs like spurs and west ham overtake us, it'll be because large sections of the fan base didnt want a new shiny stadium in stanley Park or worse Speke. Southampton are finding a lot of good players but they're selling them all so they arent be in a good position to overtake us unless we royally fuck up.

 

Everyone seems to think there's a richer, better owner out there with Liverpool's name tatooed on his forehead and somehow, FSG are stopping him waltzing in and returning us to the top.

 

Id love to believe it too but the reality is, its not there.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps they should employ some people more qualified for their respective roles.

 

I'd agree there. They will get that right eventually- it may take another crap season and a manager change for it to happen.

 

They could be a bit more hands on in that respect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree there. They will get that right eventually- it may take another crap season and a manager change for it to happen.

 

They could be a bit more hands on in that respect

either they will get it right and appoint experienced people or by the time they get round to actually doing anything the people in place will become experienced

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree there. They will get that right eventually- it may take another crap season and a manager change for it to happen.

 

They could be a bit more hands on in that respect

 

Firstly, I don't think FSG have the ambition to win things. But any manager with stuff on his CV isn't going to want to accept both aspiring to win stuff, and the imposed transfer philosophy. We might get someone who would do a year or two without much thought for the future (which is kind of how you have to manage if you don't have control of much beyond that of a head coach, and therefore that's what you're going to be judged on), but who wants that? Any manager that would want to build something over 3/4/5 years would want control over how the academy is run, transfers, etc.

 

Unless FSG change their idea of how the club should be run we're likely to only ever attract young managers who's biggest achievement will be getting the job, or mercenaries. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Super Sub

Firstly, I don't think FSG have the ambition to win things. But any manager with stuff on his CV isn't going to want to accept both aspiring to win stuff, and the imposed transfer philosophy. We might get someone who would do a year or two without much thought for the future (which is kind of how you have to manage if you don't have control of much beyond that of a head coach, and therefore that's what you're going to be judged on), but who wants that? Any manager that would want to build something over 3/4/5 years would want control over how the academy is run, transfers, etc.

 

Unless FSG change their idea of how the club should be run we're likely to only ever attract young managers who's biggest achievement will be getting the job, or mercenaries.

In fairness mercenaries haven't been to bad for city and Chelsea at least on the playing staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After getting plenty of stick recently I think this summer shows them to be decent owners.They let us spend, plus let the manager spend on who he wants as opposed to players being forced on him.Not sure they do much wrong really but they seem to get plenty of hate.

I guess it depends what you want.

 

They saved us from Administration, and are running the finances sensibly.

 

Decent I agree.

 

At the same time they have appointed mediocre inexperienced football and administrative executives in Rodgers and Ayre under whom we are doomed to mediocrity. On the stadium front their plans are currently to match Newcastle, whilst West Ham, Chelsea and Spurs will move even further forwards, as Man U, Man City and Arsenal already have. Team wise, each year we have sold our best player.

 

That's bad.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it depends what you want.They saved us from Administration, and are running the finances sensibly.Decent I agree.At the same time they have appointed mediocre inexperienced football and administrative executives in Rodgers and Ayre under whom we are doomed to mediocrity. On ths stadium front their plans are Currently t match Newcastle, whilst West Ham, Chelsea and Spurs will move even further forwards, as Man U, Man City and Arsenal already have.That's bad.

 

 

I've never looked at the spends/net spends/players sold etc but surely Arenal are what we should be aspiring too?

 

It would seem Wenger has the backing of the board but more often than not he chooses to develop what he has. This may mean the odd season of under performing (often finishing above us)

 

Above that your looking at Sugar Daddy's or United's current system which is increasingly taking them down the Galactico route. This can work in the short term as no matter how you try and polish that turd- Madrid will always be sunnier than Manchester. I'm glad we aren't playing that game as it will all come crashing down.

 

In a way I see parallels with us and United under Ron Atkinson (don't laugh those that remember)

Every year they threatened to be their year- each year they squandered big money on players, clinging on to our coat tails.

 

I remember the summer they signed Danny Wallace, Neil Webb and Mike Phelan- they beat Arsenal 4-1 on the opening day- the press went crazy- they then capitulated and nearly went down.

 

At some point Slur/Utd suddenly either got very lucky or got very good at identifying good players- in quick succession they signed Pallister, Bruce, Schmeichal, Irwin, Keane, Cantona, Kanchelskis etc.

 

We patiently await our moment of getting lucky or just getting bloody good at signing good players.

 

We don't need new owners to achieve it- just good judgement allied with a bit of luck

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never looked at the spends/net spends/players sold etc but surely Arenal are what we should be aspiring too?.... etc

The Arsenal model?

 

They moved to a new 60k stadium on adjacent land almost a decade ago, we are building a new stand.

 

They appointed a manager who had twelve years experience and had won a league title and three cups on appointment, we appointed Brendan.

 

It is difficult to see how Man U’s policy of buying the cream of world talent, combined with a vastly experienced manager with an enviable record of winning things, will send them backwards. It is also brave to describe the most successful domestic manager in modern sport as lucky.

 

I agree that we need to get lucky in signing players, the dead certs will plump for the big money, CL football, and winning honours.

 

I disagree that a change of ownership could not improve our fortunes ( it could also send them further backwards). Good judgement? If you want it you sign the best manager and CEO you can afford. We haven’t.

 

Looks like lady luck then.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We continually buy poorly, by going for potential (sell on value) rather than World class proven quality.

Nothing changes 

Ayre is in the job he is.

Nothing changes

We very often fail to get the star player we are courting for months. 

Nothing changes

The transfer committee

Nothing changes 

 

 

 

The only people who could change any/all of the above is FSG.

They appear to be very quick and decisive with changing things they believe to be wrong.  It implies to me they are happy with the current situation and the club is being run to orders.

They spend the same amount each year, despite doing a good job on increasing revenue streams and the increased tv money. 

 

I don't thing they are good owners.

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

×