ENIC

[Bedfordspurs]

Presumably he wanted other than what we got. We know Dias was the primary choice for RWF and we did not get him. Maybe he wanted someone else other than Bentancur and maybe he wanted a RWB. Maybe the players we have added aren't of the be quality he hoped for so now he is speaking his mind.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

I don’t know who our primary targets are or we’re
We know we bid for Diaz
We also know he was never rumoured about before the window which Kulu was
We can guess and assume things of course as fans
But I do think for him to say the squad is making better balance now and then to potentially contradict that a week later to me shows something ain’t right in his head
I’d need to read the transcript rather than the snippets that may well be taken out of context (as they normally are)

 

[Lilbaz]

Your first point is incorrect
In Klopp’s first four transfer windows they actually had a deficit of circa fifty million ( 150 million spend and just over 100 million recouped)

Im not sure why comparing conte’s transfer window now against klopp’s first is relevant.

the key is conte’s comments which allude to the fact that our strategy is to buy young taleknt and in his view for short to medium term success you need to buy experienced players which is in direct contrast to Liverpool( despite Bedfordspurs view that all they did was buy young and inexperienced), in those four transfer windows they identified targets and strengthened their team( including two who were apperently on our radar in Mane and Wijnaldum ).

Klopp joined in october 2015.
Liverpool spent £5.1m in jan 2016.
In 2016/17 season they made a profit on transfers of £4.93m.
17/18 they made a profit of £9.56m on transfers. (If we are just talking jan, they brought no-one in and 5 left).

As for contes comments he says he understands the clubs vision.

 

[Gazza]

Klopp joined in october 2015.
Liverpool spent £5.1m in jan 2016.
In 2016/17 season they made a profit on transfers of £4.93m.
17/18 they made a profit of £9.56m on transfers. (If we are just talking jan, they brought no-one in and 5 left).

And Klopp was backed to the hilt when he identified players that he wanted and got his first choices in key areas to make his system work, not his second, third, forth or no choice players.

 

[RigorMortis]

Yes we are all aware lewis doesn't put money into the club. It doesn't change the fact that since klopp joined liverpool our net spend on players has higher than theirs.

The question is so what?
You could argue that the last few years where we have taken over it’s because Liverpool have had minor tweaks to strengthen on your base

Just using net spend at various different points in time to suit your argument is pointless without the context.

At the time when We were at a position of strength and at our peak and Liverpool were behind us and then at our level, Liverpool’s net spend was higher than ours.

yes in the last three years we may have spent more but Liverpool have added where it matters and in my opinion shown far more conviction.

There’s also the intangibles where none of us know,
some of us believe that we could have pushed out on a Fernandes or a Dias in stead of a Lo Celso or a Rodon

ENIC fans will argue that down with we were never close or they wouldn’t have joined anyway.

To me it boils down to a basic problem
ENIC are risk averse, dilly dally and don’t have a coherent strategy on strengthening the team

Yes they are great at infrastructure projects and I’m bursting with excitement to go and watch Guardins of the Halaxy volume IV at the new cinema after we have lost 3-1 at home to West Ham on a rainy Sunday afternoon after paying for the most expensive tickets in england( and by association probably in European and world football)

Do I ever see them having a strategy of having us challenging sustainably at the top table with the odd trophy or two along the way, probably not

 

[RigorMortis]

Klopp joined in october 2015.
Liverpool spent £5.1m in jan 2016.
In 2016/17 season they made a profit on transfers of £4.93m.
17/18 they made a profit of £9.56m on transfers. (If we are just talking jan, they brought no-one in and 5 left).

As for contes comments he says he understands the clubs vision.

In Their Klopp’s first fourtransfer windows which would be January 2016, June-August 2016, January 2017 and June to August 2016 Liverpool spent 152.3 million, they recouped 108.05 million, their net deficit was 44.25 million.

They did not make a transfer profit

 

[Lilbaz]

The question is so what?
You could argue that the last few years where we have taken over it’s because Liverpool have had minor tweaks to strengthen on your base

Just using net spend at various different points in time to suit your argument is pointless without the context.

At the time when We were at a position of strength and at our peak and Liverpool were behind us and then at our level, Liverpool’s net spend was higher than ours.

yes in the last three years we may have spent more but Liverpool have added where it matters and in my opinion shown far more conviction.

There’s also the intangibles where none of us know,
some of us believe that we could have pushed out on a Fernandes or a Dias in stead of a Lo Celso or a Rodon

ENIC fans will argue that down with we were never close or they wouldn’t have joined anyway.

To me it boils down to a basic problem
ENIC are risk averse, dilly dally and don’t have a coherent strategy on strengthening the team

Yes they are great at infrastructure projects and I’m bursting with excitement to go and watch Guardins of the Halaxy volume IV at the new cinema after we have lost 3-1 at home to West Ham on a rainy Sunday afternoon after paying for the most expensive tickets in england( and by association probably in European and world football)

Do I ever see them having a strategy of having us challenging sustainably at the top table with the odd trophy or two along the way, probably not

I agree enic are risk averse and could have gotten players we missed out on. I also want new owners.

I just think if we are going to have these discussions they should be based on facts. Not made up numbers or untruths made up to suit an agenda. Because otherwise people start believing them.

 

[Lilbaz]

In Their Klopp’s first fourtransfer windows which would be January 2016, June-August 2016, January 2017 and June to August 2016 Liverpool spent 152.3 million, they recouped 108.05 million, their net deficit was 44.25 million.

They did not make a transfer profit

Source? I've posted mine.

 

[RigorMortis]

https://www.anfield-online.co.uk/stats/jurgen-klopp-lfc-transfer-signings.html

You could probably work it out from your link as well

 

[Gazza]

I agree enic are risk averse and could have gotten players we missed out on. I also want new owners.

I just think if we are going to have these discussions they should be based on facts. Not made up numbers or untruths made up to suit an agenda. Because otherwise people start believing them.

Do you believe Levys end of year statements for the upcoming seasons? Always sounds amazing on paper, but in reality its not worth its weight. He is a spin master and its hilarious to see some fans still hold on to his words for optimism. I for one have had premium seats in the stadium and will not be renewing next year. Ill support Spurs for free and get the biggest bang for my hard-earned cash. Ironically i have had numerous calls from Spurs asking me the reason as to why I am not renewing. I have had some really funny conversations but ultimately I know I am not the only one walking away from being a season ticket holder.

If Levy doesnt pull his finger out im afraid our attendances will CONTINUE to fall.

 

[Lilbaz]

https://www.anfield-online.co.uk/stats/jurgen-klopp-lfc-transfer-signings.html

You could probably work it out from your link as well

Thanks. My bad i was including jan 2018.

 

[parklane1]

Started supporting Spurs in 1961 when I was nine. Talk about being one of the big boys - wow - we were always in the mix. Should have won the European Cup - two iffy off side goals by Greavsie in Lisbon - would have beaten Real in the final. Always challenging and winning really well - smashed Atletico Madrid in final of Cup Winners Cup.

BUT we were - even then - a bit sexy, losing games we should have won at a canter. Many of the players were big drinkers and so results became a bit in and out - Bill NIck couldn't solve that and we should have won three more titles from 62 through to 67. The death of John White really knocked the side back and Danny Blanchflower was done by 1963. Bill tried to sign Johnny Haynes as the replacement but Johnny was a one club man. He tried to sign Bobby Moore who was keen to come but Ron Greenwood wouldn't sell him. and the side just sort of slipped away - some really good buys in Mullery and England but never as good again.

We were the big spenders then but we can't compare then to now really as the game is now doped by Oligarch and/or oil money - and therefore only those clubs can really compete nowadays. BUT that Double winning side was magnificent - they didn't just win - they blew teams away...

The same time as i started supporting our GREAT club( no matter what some kneejerkers say), everything you say is spot on and Bobby Moore was the one we really should have got as he wanted to come here. We should have won more for sure but as much as i loved Sir Bill he failed to see that the game was changing and we really never moved on from our style at the time ( he became disillusioned with the game and that was the main reason he walked away). But like you i have the memories and they will always be there.

 

[Gazza]

The same time as i started supporting our GREAT club( no matter what some kneejerkers say), everything you say is spot on and Bobby Moore was the one we really should have got as he wanted to come here. We should have won more for sure but as much as i loved Sir Bill he failed to see that the game was changing and we really never moved on from our style at the time ( he became disillusioned with the game and that was the main reason he walked away). But like you i have the memories and they will always be there.

That's why you are so content as you can always go back and relive those great days being on a bounce every game ... what do the current fans have to look back at over the last 25 odd years?

Are we not making the same mistake again? Failing to move on from our current modus operandi? So far it shows there is no glory or anything to look forward to.

 

[parklane1]

That's why you are so content as you can always go back and relive those great days being on a bounce every game ... what do the current fans have to look back at over the last 25 odd years?

Nothing what so ever with be content about it at all like everyone else here i want us to win everything we can and as soon as we can. However there has been a lot of comparison to Liverpool in the last few pages and you could not really pick a worse comparison ( not saying you are/have). Much as i hate to say it but Liverpool are a much bigger/successful club then we are. Since we won the double they have won 40 odd trophys compered to what we have achieved and like it or not they ARE a far bigger club ( and it hurts me to say that) and because of that have has the finances to spend.

 

[Jeff Brooks]

Hi parklane1 - it is wonderful to have those memories - watching that great team at White Hart Lane - loved it - even saw my hero Pat Jennings there in 1963 when he moved from my home town of Watford where I had also seen him.
I think autotext changed my word sexy into sexy - I meant sexy - one Easter we went to Liverpool and got beat 5 - 2 on Good Friday - think the players couldn't be asked (!). I was pretty fed up - 3 DAYS later we stuffed them 7 -2 back at the Lane!

Bill Nick kept us relevant until the mid seventies - League Cup, Uefa Cup wins - but couldn't re-build that quality of team. With all those great memories I am puzzled at your tolerance for what we have seen in the last 20 years - I want to see us win things again before I meet my maker but at current levels I cant see that happening - and looking at the last 20 years, and including the gooners, 85% of the three domestic trophies have been won by Utd, City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Gooners - that's a horrible near monopoly that needs breaking up.

Anyway those were the days my friend - we thought they'd never end, we'd sing and dance (you know the rest)

 

[parklane1]

Hi statlover1 - it is wonderful to have those memories - watching that great team at White Hart Lane - loved it - even saw my hero Pat Jennings there in 1963 when he moved from my home town of Watford where I had also seen him.
I think autotext changed my word sexy into sexy - I meant sexy - one Easter we went to Liverpool and got beat 5 - 2 on Good Friday - think the players couldn't be asked (!). I was pretty fed up - 3 DAYS later we stuffed them 7 -2 back at the Lane!

Bill Nick kept us relevant until the mid seventies - League Cup, Uefa Cup wins - but couldn't re-build that quality of team. With all those great memories I am puzzled at your tolerance for what we have seen in the last 20 years - I want to see us win things again before I meet my maker but at current levels I cant see that happening - and looking at the last 20 years, and including the gooners, 85% of the three domestic trophies have been won by Utd, City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Gooners - that's a horrible near monopoly that needs breaking up.

Anyway those were the days my friend - we thought they'd never end, we'd sing and dance (you know the rest)

Amen brother.

I do not disagree with what you say but lets take a closer look at the teams you mentioned.


Utd/ Since the Munich air crash they have become one of the biggest teams in the world and still are.

City/ Finacially doped to the extreme

Chelsea / Same as City

Liverpool/ As my post above explains they have won over 40 trophys since we won the double and have a worldwide fan base to earn their money from.

Arse / Now i will admit they are not the same as the others above but Wenger turned them in a top team ( sad to say).

 

[Gazza]

Surprisingly good debates on GG of late.

Going back to these financially doped clubs, they have often referred to the owners as a "Play thing" and we sit here arms folded and proud, claiming that we would and should never be that ... but are we not Levy and Lewis' play thing? After all they are just playing the game to get as much money out of us when they sell vs owners that are willing to put in as much money required to win.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Surprisingly good debates on GG of late.

Going back to these financially doped clubs, they have often referred to the owners as a "Play thing" and we sit here arms folded and proud, claiming that we would and should never be that ... but are we not Levy and Lewis' play thing? After all they are just playing the game to get as much money out of us when they sell vs owners that are willing to put in as much money required to win.

We’re their cash cow
I doubt there are many people in the world who have only invested something around £30m and stand to make £3B on that investment
I mean that’s mental growth for anything

 

[Jeff Brooks]

Amen brother.

I do not disagree with what you say but lets take a closer look at the teams you mentioned.


Utd/ Since the Munich air crash they have become one of the biggest teams in the world and still are.

City/ Finacially doped to the extreme

Chelsea / Same as City

Liverpool/ As my post above explains they have won over 40 trophys and have a worldwide fan base to earn their money from.

Arse / Now i will admit they are not the same as the others above but Wenger turned them in a top team ( sad to say).

Can't argue with any of that - just fed up with same old same old - sometimes change is necessary - and I'd take my chances with a new owner - could be worse, I know that, but its really hard to dream these days - what happens after Conte gets fed up? On to Potter and so on and so forth... sigh...

 

[DubaiSpur]

Surprisingly good debates on GG of late.

Going back to these financially doped clubs, they have often referred to the owners as a "Play thing" and we sit here arms folded and proud, claiming that we would and should never be that ... but are we not Levy and Lewis' play thing? After all they are just playing the game to get as much money out of us when they sell vs owners that are willing to put in as much money required to win.

Absolutely. It's apparently fine that we are a vehicle to make a tax exile in the Bahamas even more fabulously rich at no cost to him, but owners spending money to make the plebs who support their clubs happy, to make the clubs they own win things? Big no-no, apparently.

'Excuse me, we're not a plaything, we're a property acquisition vehicle for a Bahamian tax exile and his mediocre, duplicitous henchman, thank you very much'.

Bit strange.

 

[RigorMortis]

I agree enic are risk averse and could have gotten players we missed out on. I also want new owners.

I just think if we are going to have these discussions they should be based on facts. Not made up numbers or untruths made up to suit an agenda. Because otherwise people start believing them.

I don’t think anything posted anything untrue

The same time as i started supporting our GREAT club( no matter what some kneejerkers say), everything you say is spot on and Bobby Moore was the one we really should have got as he wanted to come here. We should have won more for sure but as much as i loved Sir Bill he failed to see that the game was changing and we really never moved on from our style at the time ( he became disillusioned with the game and that was the main reason he walked away). But like you i have the memories and they will always be there.

I agree they are a bigger club and more successful but they were in a period of flux when we had Poch.

with football being an international game now we had the added advantage of being a london based club in the CL and could have pushed on, it’s that inertia that grates me.