Premier League 19-21 Dec

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:Watford 3-0.

Guessing that's it then, we can all put our willies away now that Klopp isn't the second coming of Jesus?

Jest?
He's got be given time to sus which players he can work with and who he needs to get rid. Like Pottichino it's gonna take some time for him to implement his system and work who can actually play that way.

Yeah absolutely he will need time and should be afforded it - I have never claimed anything otherwise.

You do realize though that there are videos on YouTube of Klopp highlights made of his televised appearances in the dugout though right (like they do with players)? That is the type of ridiculous hype stoked by the media (Sky Sports actually tracked his flight to Liverpool in real time FFS) I'm referring to here. We can agree he is human, that it will take some time and he isn't going to walz in and win them the league with just his charisma.

Come on! So what if some Liverpool fans and the media hype machine have gone overboard. That's modern football media and social media for you. All about hype and drama over actual football. Its another entertainment industry as much as anything.

Entertainment by its very nature enables you to ridicule it if it fails to live up to its billing. Perfectly legitimate to criticize the over the top focus on the Klopp narrative when it steals the limelight that the likes of a Flores at Watford for example fully deserves. It might be fun for Liverpool fans to hear about what underpants Klopp is wearing each day, but not for anyone else.

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:I remember some years ago saying the smaller clubs in the PL were improving in general, and fewer and fewer teams could be classed as cannon fodder for the established clubs anymore. Some claimed is was just because the top 4 clubs were becoming worse creating an optical illusion. Yet it's so utterly clear that in the past the PL really only had a handful of maybe one or two club in the bottom half who played with any tactical nous beyond hoofball, merely looking to either survive or not go down with a record number of fewest points. That is no longer the case, the PL now has so many teams capable of playing well organized pressing and attacking football, as once again shown by Watford today, and Bournemouth, Leicester, Palace, Stoke, Swansea, Norwich. Money and shrewd management is evening out the playing field and its all the better for it.

As true as that is, there are still massive and obvious flaws in the traditional big teams. And then you have to consider the PL performance in the CL and Europa. I still think if the big teams sort out their flaws, they'll cruise the league as before and until PL teams start to perform in Europe, the poor squad building of the richest clubs is the main factor of this crazy/brilliant season.

I would simply say that on the whole the bigger/more established clubs (which I would lump Villa and Newcastle into as well) have mismanaged their advantage by over reliance on outspending one another, whilst smaller clubs have become savvy quicker to adopting more creative approaches to how to not only survive but actually grow - namely recruiting tactically astute managers and making use of well researched scouting networks, but just as importantly moving away from the traditional British model of the manager having control of everything and instead establishing a longer term framework where you can switch out the manager if required without having to entirely rebuild from the ground up again. QPR were the last club to maintain the old mentality and fail abysmally at this, versus a Southampton or Swansea (and now best illustrated by Leicester) where it's possible to lose your manager either through being poached by a bigger club or moved along purposefully and the club's structure enables the transition to occur will minimal impact on upward progression.

I agree with that except the likes of ManC, Chelsea, ManU, Liverpool and Spurs already have those structures. They are just failing to execute thier strategies as well as the smaller clubs live Watford and Leicester, relative to resources. Only Arsenal and Eveton of the big clubs retain the old fashioned club manager status.

So yeah thee smaller clubs have definitely modernized their structures and caught up but the richer clubs have attemped to do the same to some extect but just haven't done it as well.

The difference is that those bigger clubs you have named whilst they may have begun moving away from that model at some point, the temptation has been just to try and buy their way to short term success and as such only partially can claim to be as creative and progressive. There's nothing complicated or creative about spending big on big name players. What almost every large club in England has failed to do is get the balance of their squads right in alignment with how they play. It's certainly trickier when there are more competitions to consider so in many ways the smaller clubs have an advantage in that regard, but no mistake about it they are doing much better at extracting value from their wage bills than the big boys are.

I tend to agree with Shaz, Liverpool are a bigger club so more hype for a larger audience is expected.

Where I would share my Magyar mates bitterness is that Spurs were remorselessly mocked for blowing the Bale money, whereas Liverpool seem to have got off Scot free for their similar waste of the Suarez AND Sterling windfalls, plus they spent more on top.

Markovic who cost at least £20mil is on loan after 1 season FFS, nobody critiques it, imagine if that had been a Spurs player.

TBF Im not personally bitter about Klopp's media fanfare despite how it may sound - I like him and think he will be a success so actually any bitterness is not towards the man himself but towards the media building up another target to set it up and gleefully tear down again. It was unfair on him how overblown his entrance has been, particularly given you don't need to egg on an already desperate fanbase like Liverpool's, searching for someone for 20 odd years to bring back their glory years.

Deluded F*ck™ wrote:I tend to agree with Shaz, Liverpool are a bigger club so more hype for a larger audience is expected.

Where I would share my Magyar mates bitterness is that Spurs were remorselessly mocked for blowing the Bale money, whereas Liverpool seem to have got off Scot free for their similar waste of the Suarez AND Sterling windfalls, plus they spent more on top.

Markovic who cost at least £20mil is on loan after 1 season FFS, nobody critiques it, imagine if that had been a Spurs player.

What world are you living in? Liverpool has exposed for how terribly they have wasted money. I mean isn't that one of the main criticisms of Rodgers that he was terrible with the transfer money?

I think you'll find I wanted Ancelotti over Klopp. Until our owners give Klopp at least 50 million we can't really tell much. Laughable defence and keeper and passengers like Allen, Lallana, Firmino along with one world class striker who plays one game in every ten.

I think we'll get better under Klopp but I think someone like Ancelotti would have brought instant success - I don't think Klopp quite understands the demands of the league - the pressing has probably burnt us out already. He's already bemoaning no winter break.

It doesn't matter who is manager though - losing to Newcastle and Watford comfortably is a disgrace and it sums up how little bottle our players have.

Watford are actually really good though.

So Arsenal beat ManC. Wenger and all his loyalists are going to feel vindicated by beating a team that's been loosing to everyone away from home recently.

But this game really showed how poor Arsenal have become at keeping possession and playing the game out. I've lost a lot of respect for Ramsey after this match. Not so much the multiple misses which will make the highlights show. But his total lack of tactical nous and leadership. Giving the ball away repeatedly in the last 35 minutes on hopeful punts rather than play the ball around and steady the team. Just infuriating to watch. And of course he lost Toure for their goal by failing to stay on him whilst around our box. There's a reason why a small and non athletic Cazorla is ahead of you in CM. Grow the f**k up.

Isco Benny wrote:

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:I remember some years ago saying the smaller clubs in the PL were improving in general, and fewer and fewer teams could be classed as cannon fodder for the established clubs anymore. Some claimed is was just because the top 4 clubs were becoming worse creating an optical illusion. Yet it's so utterly clear that in the past the PL really only had a handful of maybe one or two club in the bottom half who played with any tactical nous beyond hoofball, merely looking to either survive or not go down with a record number of fewest points. That is no longer the case, the PL now has so many teams capable of playing well organized pressing and attacking football, as once again shown by Watford today, and Bournemouth, Leicester, Palace, Stoke, Swansea, Norwich. Money and shrewd management is evening out the playing field and its all the better for it.

As true as that is, there are still massive and obvious flaws in the traditional big teams. And then you have to consider the PL performance in the CL and Europa. I still think if the big teams sort out their flaws, they'll cruise the league as before and until PL teams start to perform in Europe, the poor squad building of the richest clubs is the main factor of this crazy/brilliant season.

I would simply say that on the whole the bigger/more established clubs (which I would lump Villa and Newcastle into as well) have mismanaged their advantage by over reliance on outspending one another, whilst smaller clubs have become savvy quicker to adopting more creative approaches to how to not only survive but actually grow - namely recruiting tactically astute managers and making use of well researched scouting networks, but just as importantly moving away from the traditional British model of the manager having control of everything and instead establishing a longer term framework where you can switch out the manager if required without having to entirely rebuild from the ground up again. QPR were the last club to maintain the old mentality and fail abysmally at this, versus a Southampton or Swansea (and now best illustrated by Leicester) where it's possible to lose your manager either through being poached by a bigger club or moved along purposefully and the club's structure enables the transition to occur will minimal impact on upward progression.

I agree with that except the likes of ManC, Chelsea, ManU, Liverpool and Spurs already have those structures. They are just failing to execute thier strategies as well as the smaller clubs live Watford and Leicester, relative to resources. Only Arsenal and Eveton of the big clubs retain the old fashioned club manager status.

So yeah thee smaller clubs have definitely modernized their structures and caught up but the richer clubs have attemped to do the same to some extect but just haven't done it as well.

The difference is that those bigger clubs you have named whilst they may have begun moving away from that model at some point, the temptation has been just to try and buy their way to short term success and as such only partially can claim to be as creative and progressive. There's nothing complicated or creative about spending big on big name players. What almost every large club in England has failed to do is get the balance of their squads right in alignment with how they play. It's certainly trickier when there are more competitions to consider so in many ways the smaller clubs have an advantage in that regard, but no mistake about it they are doing much better at extracting value from their wage bills than the big boys are.

You've hit the nail on the head regarding short termism. There's doesn't seem to be any long term strategy at the big clubs except for ManC. Although their parallel desire for short term success is getting them to make desperate mistakes.

In British football culture long-term stability is centered around the manager and his vision. But these new smaller clubs set ups are showing that its best if planning and strategy comes from the board with the head coach just there to organise the match day squad. I hope it becomes a thing and eventually we start seeing it having a positive effect on English academies.

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:

shazlx wrote:

Isco Benny wrote:I remember some years ago saying the smaller clubs in the PL were improving in general, and fewer and fewer teams could be classed as cannon fodder for the established clubs anymore. Some claimed is was just because the top 4 clubs were becoming worse creating an optical illusion. Yet it's so utterly clear that in the past the PL really only had a handful of maybe one or two club in the bottom half who played with any tactical nous beyond hoofball, merely looking to either survive or not go down with a record number of fewest points. That is no longer the case, the PL now has so many teams capable of playing well organized pressing and attacking football, as once again shown by Watford today, and Bournemouth, Leicester, Palace, Stoke, Swansea, Norwich. Money and shrewd management is evening out the playing field and its all the better for it.

As true as that is, there are still massive and obvious flaws in the traditional big teams. And then you have to consider the PL performance in the CL and Europa. I still think if the big teams sort out their flaws, they'll cruise the league as before and until PL teams start to perform in Europe, the poor squad building of the richest clubs is the main factor of this crazy/brilliant season.

I would simply say that on the whole the bigger/more established clubs (which I would lump Villa and Newcastle into as well) have mismanaged their advantage by over reliance on outspending one another, whilst smaller clubs have become savvy quicker to adopting more creative approaches to how to not only survive but actually grow - namely recruiting tactically astute managers and making use of well researched scouting networks, but just as importantly moving away from the traditional British model of the manager having control of everything and instead establishing a longer term framework where you can switch out the manager if required without having to entirely rebuild from the ground up again. QPR were the last club to maintain the old mentality and fail abysmally at this, versus a Southampton or Swansea (and now best illustrated by Leicester) where it's possible to lose your manager either through being poached by a bigger club or moved along purposefully and the club's structure enables the transition to occur will minimal impact on upward progression.

I agree with that except the likes of ManC, Chelsea, ManU, Liverpool and Spurs already have those structures. They are just failing to execute thier strategies as well as the smaller clubs live Watford and Leicester, relative to resources. Only Arsenal and Eveton of the big clubs retain the old fashioned club manager status.

So yeah thee smaller clubs have definitely modernized their structures and caught up but the richer clubs have attemped to do the same to some extect but just haven't done it as well.

The difference is that those bigger clubs you have named whilst they may have begun moving away from that model at some point, the temptation has been just to try and buy their way to short term success and as such only partially can claim to be as creative and progressive. There's nothing complicated or creative about spending big on big name players. What almost every large club in England has failed to do is get the balance of their squads right in alignment with how they play. It's certainly trickier when there are more competitions to consider so in many ways the smaller clubs have an advantage in that regard, but no mistake about it they are doing much better at extracting value from their wage bills than the big boys are.

You've hit the nail on the head regarding short termism. There's doesn't seem to be any long term strategy at the big clubs except for ManC. Although their parallel desire for short term success is getting them to make desperate mistakes.

In British football culture long-term stability is centered around the manager and his vision. But these new smaller clubs set ups are showing that its best if planning and strategy comes from the board with the head coach just there to organise the match day squad. I hope it becomes a thing and eventually we start seeing it having a positive effect on English academies.

the last paragraph.

I don't know if you've left out Spurs because we're not considered a big club or not in the first paragraph when you mention City, but either way I would say there is a clear long term plan being played out under Pochettino and the club in general currently (given the investment into training facilities and academy - best crop of kids we've seen coming through the academy in many years - and a manager who does not see the need to spend big, but instead wisely and only to compliment a young squad willing to grow together).

The reservations for us though are whether we're actually a big enough club to see this strategy through - will we avoid selling off all our best players and manager? And will Levy have the patience to stick by Pochettino should there by some challenging dips in the process? I'm pretty sure with the stadium bill coming Levy will be in no hurry to sack (compensate) Poch, so the latter is unlikely (particularly after the post Bale debacle). The former will be interesting. If United come in for Kane or Lloris for example in the summer with a silly bid, who knows if we have the nuts to stand firm. I'd like to think so, but seen it happen many times before.