Quick Links: Liverpool FC Forum | ShoutBox | Podcast | KopTalk.TV | Help | Upgrade to VIP forums

Register Log In

KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum Klopp - Is he all that?

Print Thread

Rate Thread

Page 5 of 5

1

2

3

4

5

Re: Klopp - Is he all that? Welsh_Wizard #476458 28/04/15 05:41 PM
Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 6,262 Beneath that trapdoor cjkent 1st Team Squad
cjkent 1st Team Squad Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 6,262 Beneath that trapdoor	I don't BR can do his spin doctor role no more because many see through it

Re: Klopp - Is he all that? Darcus #476460 28/04/15 05:45 PM
Joined: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,381 B bigredkop Under 23 Player
bigredkop Under 23 Player B Joined: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,381	Originally Posted By: Darcus Originally Posted By: bigredkop Originally Posted By: Darcus ...which is exactly what I just said!!!! You said Rodgers would be involved in the attraction. He would have nothing to do with it. Rodgers wouldn't attract great talent, Liverpool would be attracting the talent with money. But even that is a pointless statement, because any club could with enough money, the point is that with someone like Klopp, we likely could get some better players without having to put even more extra (impossible and unrealistic) cash on the table. I didn't think I had to spell it out for you, my bad. I can see where you've gone wrong now - a little misunderstanding. The point I was trying to get across, was that the manager is irrelevant when players are only interested in the money. "More often than not, It's about how much they can earn, not who they are playing for.".....I thought that bit made it clear enough without me having to 'spell it out for you'..... Sarcasm/cynicism doesn't come across too well on the internet at times. Never mind. That said, I strongly disagree with you that Klopp's presence would mean we wouldn't have to offer higher than the going rate. Again it seems to have gone over you head and for the last time as I'm tired of spelling it out for you, is that this is a conversation about Rodgers vs Klopp, and whilst Liverpool will have to pay higher than market rate (I never said we wouldn't so another error on your part, I said "even more extra cash") due to lack of Champs league, Klopp is a much bigger and better name than Rodgers, so the amount above market rate we will have to pay (though STILL higher than market rate) is likely to be less.

Re: Klopp - Is he all that? bigredkop #476464 28/04/15 05:51 PM
Joined: May 2012 Posts: 3,661 W Welsh_Wizard OP Under 23 Player
OP Welsh_Wizard Under 23 Player W Joined: May 2012 Posts: 3,661	If I was a footballer I would be more inclined to sign for Klopp than BR.

Re: Klopp - Is he all that? bigredkop #476465 28/04/15 05:52 PM
Joined: Aug 2013 Posts: 2,813 Darcus Under 23 Player
Darcus Under 23 Player Joined: Aug 2013 Posts: 2,813	Originally Posted By: bigredkop Originally Posted By: Darcus Originally Posted By: bigredkop Originally Posted By: Darcus ...which is exactly what I just said!!!! You said Rodgers would be involved in the attraction. He would have nothing to do with it. Rodgers wouldn't attract great talent, Liverpool would be attracting the talent with money. But even that is a pointless statement, because any club could with enough money, the point is that with someone like Klopp, we likely could get some better players without having to put even more extra (impossible and unrealistic) cash on the table. I didn't think I had to spell it out for you, my bad. I can see where you've gone wrong now - a little misunderstanding. The point I was trying to get across, was that the manager is irrelevant when players are only interested in the money. "More often than not, It's about how much they can earn, not who they are playing for.".....I thought that bit made it clear enough without me having to 'spell it out for you'..... Sarcasm/cynicism doesn't come across too well on the internet at times. Never mind. That said, I strongly disagree with you that Klopp's presence would mean we wouldn't have to offer higher than the going rate. Again it seems to have gone over you head and for the last time as I'm tired of spelling it out for you, is that this is a conversation about Rodgers vs Klopp, and whilst Liverpool will have to pay higher than market rate (I never said we wouldn't so another error on your part, I said "even more extra cash") due to lack of Champs league, Klopp is a much bigger and better name than Rodgers, so the amount above market rate we will have to pay (though STILL higher than market rate) is likely to be less. Well, that may be partly true but the status/position of the club is also a consideration. Dick Advocaat is a well respected coach but would a player go to Sunderland for £60k per week rather than play for Rodgers at Liverpool for £90k per week? That seems to be what you are saying.... If actual offers/figures were available to the public, I would be very surprised if more than a handful of players could be found, that opted for a lower wage just so that they could play under a more well known manager.

Re: Klopp - Is he all that? Darcus #476534 28/04/15 08:05 PM
Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 591 Cheshire M Mr Ruddock Under 18 Player
Mr Ruddock Under 18 Player M Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 591 Cheshire	I would prefer to sign for someone called "that" than BR. The guy is a total joke.

Re: Klopp - Is he all that? Darcus #476697 28/04/15 11:06 PM
Joined: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,381 B bigredkop Under 23 Player
bigredkop Under 23 Player B Joined: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,381	Originally Posted By: Darcus Well, that may be partly true but the status/position of the club is also a consideration. Dick Advocaat is a well respected coach but would a player go to Sunderland for £60k per week rather than play for Rodgers at Liverpool for £90k per week? That seems to be what you are saying.... It isn't what I'm saying in the slightest and getting that from what I said is a huge stretch even for you! You've confused multiple things there so I don't even know where to start. Put simply, I believe that should we go up against spurs for a player for example, Klopp could be a difference maker in getting the signature whereas Rodgers would not be. We would instead need to offer more money. Going up against Arsenal or Utd, we are obviously (like you rightly say) going to have to stump up a sh!t load more cash (at this point it's all hypothetical because that's never going to happen, for one they're richer than us), but the exact sum of that hypothetical sh!t load, is likely to be less because seeing Klopp at the helm will make a lot of players think hmm maybe he's building something there. No players will think that of Rodgers. Originally Posted By: Darcus If actual offers/figures were available to the public, I would be very surprised if more than a handful of players could be found, that opted for a lower wage just so that they could play under a more well known manager. I think you're probably right about that, but 1. as I said this has very little to do with what I was saying, and 2. The kind of player where such a thing might matter are likely to be in the upper echelons of a top league, where most title aspiring clubs pay similar massive wages. Whilst I don't agree with your stance on Rodgers and FSG regarding a lot of things, let me say it is refreshing that you dont flip flop on your opinion just because we lose to Hull or draw to West Brom. Many people called me a doomsayer but my position hasn't changed much from the point we signed Lallana for 25 million last summer, I think it's good to not let a couple of bad results significantly sway an opinion on long term decisions for the club.

Page 5 of 5

1

2

3

4

5

Moderated by KopTalk Team

Link Copied to Clipboard

Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.

Advertisements

Liverpool FC Discussion

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5