Klopp comparison

comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by Bazg (U22412)

Look at it pound for pound i'd say Klopp is comfortably ahead of all of them. Liverpool's 70's and 80's manager's took over teams in a position of strength (bar Shankly) and had funding and board backing that dwarfed any over club.

Klopp took over a genuine midtable side at a club declining at a rate that would make AC Milan blush and has turned them into arguably the best team not managed by Pep since the turn of the millennium.

It's absolutely bonkers!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This Liverpool team is nothing close to the 2nd best team of the millennium lol.

They’re probably the worst PL winners I’ve seen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Best English football team in history as per clubelo.com


----------------------------------------------------------------------
They weren't a midtable team.

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by Bazg (U22412)

Look at it pound for pound i'd say Klopp is comfortably ahead of all of them. Liverpool's 70's and 80's manager's took over teams in a position of strength (bar Shankly) and had funding and board backing that dwarfed any over club.

Klopp took over a genuine midtable side at a club declining at a rate that would make AC Milan blush and has turned them into arguably the best team not managed by Pep since the turn of the millennium.

It's absolutely bonkers!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This Liverpool team is nothing close to the 2nd best team of the millennium lol.

They’re probably the worst PL winners I’ve seen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Best English football team in history as per clubelo.com


----------------------------------------------------------------------
They weren't a midtable team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/34493617

Klopp's first lineup, screams midtable fodder and even worse the bench was full of player's not fit for the top flight.

comment by Bazg (U22412)
posted 5 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Bazg (U22412)
posted 1 minute ago
Look at it pound for pound i'd say Klopp is comfortably ahead of all of them. Liverpool's 70's and 80's manager's took over teams in a position of strength (bar Shankly) and had funding and board backing that dwarfed any over club.

Klopp took over a genuine midtable side at a club declining at a rate that would make AC Milan blush and has turned them into arguably the best team not managed by Pep since the turn of the millennium.

It's absolutely bonkers!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not only that, he's done it without spending anything (net).
----------------------------------------------------------------------

No he hasn’t. The point is valid absolutely but he hasn’t got a negative or neutral net spend.

The amazing thing has been the results, that’s the unprecedented bit. Winning the league with the lowest cost to assemble is with others though. The average difference between squad cost and finishing position in the league is two places. There’s only been two teams that have won it bucking that trend - Arsenal with the invincibles (which was a great an achievement as fling unbeaten that year tbh) and Leicester.

He’s done wonders with the squad building though so like I said, the points a valid one. Not sure if there’s others that deserve credit for that too as I’m not sure how you guys operate on that side of things.

Sorry, meant to say pl era there. Go back further and there’s plenty, that was pre bosman though amongst other things and not really a comparable.

comment by Bazg (U22412)
posted 8 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 3 hours, 21 minutes ago
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by Bazg (U22412)

Look at it pound for pound i'd say Klopp is comfortably ahead of all of them. Liverpool's 70's and 80's manager's took over teams in a position of strength (bar Shankly) and had funding and board backing that dwarfed any over club.

Klopp took over a genuine midtable side at a club declining at a rate that would make AC Milan blush and has turned them into arguably the best team not managed by Pep since the turn of the millennium.

It's absolutely bonkers!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This Liverpool team is nothing close to the 2nd best team of the millennium lol.

They’re probably the worst PL winners I’ve seen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Best English football team in history as per clubelo.com


----------------------------------------------------------------------
They weren't a midtable team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/34493617

Klopp's first lineup, screams midtable fodder and even worse the bench was full of player's not fit for the top flight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
so ignore the facts of positions and whatever and go with your opinion cos you say so.

OK then.

like talking to a trump supporter.

depends entirely on what criteria you compare with.

in terms of media profile and quotability, he's up there with shankly and dalglish, and ahead of paisley who preferred to avoid the media, although even he provided a great quote here and there.
in terms of likeability/connection to the fans, again up there with all 3 of those. although kenny's, with being a such player for us as well, and with his dealing with the aftermath of hillsborough, has a type of connection that no other manager will match.

in terms of pure win percentages, he's definitely up there. in fact, he beats the lot of them. although that's obviously still subject to change.


in terms of trophies won, he's got a long way to go. although he's definitely on the right path now, and as a general achievement, i think winning the league against the financial superiority of city/chelsea/manu is akin to shankly bringing us up from the old div2 to win the league. and all the records tumbling before this team this season shows he's capable of creating something truly special.

If klopps can get back to back league titles and another CL or two plus FA cup and league double then yes. Such is our history it's that sort of achievement that is needed for me.

Didn't Fagan win the treble in his first season for example??

comment by Got_Better (U6241)
posted 51 minutes ago
If klopps can get back to back league titles and another CL or two plus FA cup and league double then yes. Such is our history it's that sort of achievement that is needed for me.

Didn't Fagan win the treble in his first season for example??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you might as well compare aplles and oranges there.

With respect to Joe fagan as a man who was absolutely legendary in the back room staff (Paisley, Fagan and Moran were all different) but he did nothing to the squad in 1984 and tool a league and league cup winning team and went "as you are" and won the league, european cup and league cup.

trophies don't measure the stewardship of a manager.

Klopp has utterly transformed LFC. The different in science, in organisation and in outlook is so different from the shambles that existed with in fighting and just plain disorganisation that led to decisions such as the purchase of benteke and balotelli.

Klopp dragged his team to a europa final, and from 8th to 4th in the table and from there CL finals and winning trophies in the period he has had.

If we are looking back coldly.

King kenny left Liverpool in a terrible state in 1991. It is difficult to really say if that was down to bad management of tragic circumstances from this remove. However he had made a series of bad buys and as he said himself he couldn't make a decision on the sideline so knew he had to go.

Paisley is no 1 not for trophies alone but for me he went and made the decisions that propelled the club form a good position domestically to European giants. Paisley's 1977 team was keegan, toshack, heighway, neal, hughes, lawler etc.

In 1978 paisley had dalglish, souness hanson coming through etc.

By 1981 the team was transformed with rush, whelan, mcdermott, grobellar

For me paisley learned form shankley and took it to another level or ruthlessness with squads


shankly must be a close 2nd for this personality, drive, and teams he built bu he had a long 7 year drought too.

Rafa won 2 trophies. Houllier got 4. but you couldn't measure them up to klopp imo. Klopp's streets ahead in terms of style, collaboration, leadership and eye for a player.

For me klopp doesn't need to win another title to continue doing the right things. The titles either come or don't due to circumstance. The important hing is that klopp's stewardship leaves a great club structure behind that is all pulling one way with good players both young and senior.

Best manager since Bob Paisley. No disrespect to them, but all others in between don’t even come close

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 21 hours, 22 minutes ago
Bob Paisley easily. Anyone over 55 knows that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100% with you manusince.