Jürgen Klopp

[little dave hedgehog]

it's interesting who we get compared to, especially if you look at someone like city. i think there's an argument to be made that we had a better season than they did last time around. we each entered 4 competitions, and we outlasted them in 3/4 and at half time on the last day it looked like we might finish above them in all 4. plus we did win two and were beaten finalists in the champions league. we are 7 months on from a staggering achievement for a club with no sugar daddy.

it's going to take a minute to rebuild the squad, you don't think they've earned any goodwill for being maybe the best-run club in the world after they get settled in with klopp? the club doesn't turn on a dime, they have to build the next dynasty.

[baitman]

Invent some fake companies and get them to sponsor our boot laces for gazillions

City and the other oil cunts will be all over this smoke and mirrors shenanigans

[Le Chef]

TBF to the City group, they have invested in infrastructure as part as a main group, also added feeder clubs etc, etc, all outside the City bubble.
I am surprised FSG didn't follow that kind of model especially in the US and South America.

[little dave hedgehog]

i'm not sure those work at an elite level. especially when you're fsg and you've always been super good at getting top-dollar for young players who aren't going to make it at the club. can't do that if your feeder club has first option.

[Charly]

Fair point re sale of players - it wouldn't be a negative amortization charge though, it'd be in a separate disposal account. Not sure how FFP deals with this, do you?



I hope you're wrong re Edwards but I guess we will find out sooner or later. I don't think we need a huge revamp as such, but agree we need 3+ in, especially if we have players going the other way. Hoping that having been relatively inactive we have a bit of spare cash

I am pretty sure the income from sale is accounted in full in year. Obviously offsetting the remaing value of the contract on the p&l.

If Ox signed a new contract, the remaining value would be written off over the life of the new contract, so technically I dont think it can hit zero unless he signed a new contract after the initial one expired.

This means (for example) when Salah signed a the orginal contract for 5 years, costing 35m (7m a year), when he resigned in year 5 he only had 7m left, spread over 3 years (so 2 and a bit million). This gave us 5m extra a year which we could spank on his wages at no extra cost

[Charly]

TBF to the City group, they have invested in infrastructure as part as a main group, also added feeder clubs etc, etc, all outside the City bubble.
I am surprised FSG didn't follow that kind of model especially in the US and South America.

American law enforcement probably means FSG would be damn careful about breaking any rules and paying for **** off book. They might see those sorts of investment as being too risky.

[BG1973]

Amortization also needs to be considered when selling players - if we sold Ox for 15m last season then it would be all “credit” assuming his first contract cycle had passed. The point I am trying to make is for a few years we were elite at squad management - when Edwards was in the driving seat. I think Klopp’s success has given him a little more control and we are making emotive decisions. Extending Henderson, extending Milner, not selling Origi when his market value was high, same for Ox, same for others…..

I genuinely think it’s why Edwards left - we’ll never know. We’ve let our squad age together and extended a bunch of them when it would’ve made more sense to sell and we’ve let others run down their contracts. Klopp is partially to blame here due to his loyalty. We need a big injection of cash to revamp the squad - 3 or even 4 midfielders needed

Needs to be different examples than Henderson and Milner to buy into that because given the timing of the extensions its really easy to understand why they were given new contracts. And when were Origi and Ox not for sale when fit?

[Irishnev]

Needs to be different examples than Henderson and Milner to buy into that because given the timing of the extensions its really easy to understand why they were given new contracts. And when were Origi and Ox not for sale when fit?

Henderson was already on the decline with a couple of years left on his contract when he was given a new 4 year deal in increased wages. He played the club through the media - now we have a few more years of him waddling around in midfield. I great he is a great captain and was a very useful player but now we are stuck with that large contract.

Milner was already too old last season and he was given a one year deal where for the most part he is way out of his depth (City aside)

Origi wasn’t good enough yet he scored some legendary goals. Post champions league his stock was never higher and we could have cashed in. If you ever watch that back you’ll see how absolutely **** he was when he came on yet he scored. Then we let him leave for free

Ox could’ve been great, was flying until the Roma game and we know the rest. He should’ve been shipped last summer, same with Naby

[Exiled_red]

I think you have to consider multiple factors when looking at selling players or renewing contracts etc. The amortisation value means little in the real world, we could have sold Origi after the winning the league or CL and got £10-15m on paper you'd turn a nice profit, in footballing terms you are a player down and have £10-15m to replace him. Could you replace him for that? Maybe but it's doubtful. Same applies to Henderson and Milner, you get a fraction of what it would cost to replace them, selling them only impacts on your ability to strengthen other areas of the squad. Milner we would have got nothing for so it just becomes a question of is his contribution worth his wages?

The Ox situation is different because of his injury record I doubt that many clubs would be willing to take a gamble on paying any significant fee, so I suspect even if we wanted to sell we would struggle.

It also cuts the other way we signed Salah for £40m a year or 2 later his value in the accounts had dropped by 20 or 40% but we could have sold him for £100m+...

[badpiggy]

That's probably true, the issue here is that the only way to compete is to join them in becoming state owned but is that what we want and is that realistic expectation? They aren't perfect but in a world where there was something resembling a level playing field (FFP or whatever) they would be considered good owners IMO. Wanting state ownership because others have got it isn't really a sensible approach

Or a European Superleague which starts with actual enforced rules about FFP. Which FSG definitely wanted into.

[Exiled_red]

Or a European Superleague which starts with actual enforced rules about FFP. Which FSG definitely wanted into.

The idea of a super league is dead for a while at least, I suspect it will be a good few years before anyone dares mention it as a serious prospect again...

[S-RED]

i reckon by 2025 there will be a superleague

[Kenneth]

It’s probably Barcelona’s only survival tactic at this point.

[Norbs]

There has to be a change now, not in the manager but how he is backed. He looks lost and forlorn, I can see him resigning

[Rafa Justice]

There has to be a change now, not in the manager but how he is backed. He looks lost and forlorn, I can see him resigning

Yup. He's too proud to be shopping at Primark for dinner at the Ritz.