The competition is higher than ever with 3 oil rich clubs in the league. Liverpool performance in the CL is pretty good over these few years and have broken the 90pt barrier more times than Ferguson.
Why are Pep and Klopp so good?
- Thread starter PeteManic
- Start date
thats because Pep has invested £1 billion into his team so his individual players are far better than the opposition. If he had Liverpool's players it would be the same. Pep needs all the advantages over his opponents to succeed
I can't tell if you actually believe this, or if you've just been saying it so often that you're starting to believe this.
Liverpool has a better squad than City, but have been getting outplayed by City in the past 2 years. Pep's coaching must have something to do with it, don't you think?
They are both passionate about the sport and clearly enjoy football. They are brilliant coaches of course and all that but their enthusiasm about the sport is clear and is transferred to the players.
That's one thing I felt someone like Mourinho lost it post Madrid Stent. For the last few years Mourinho always gave the impression he hates the sport and isn't enjoying it as much as before and suffers under pressure, unlike his enthusiasm and passion he was showing earlier in his career with his crazy antics on the touchline which no doubt have their effect on his players.
Klopp and Pep just look like they really do enjoy football and it's rubbing on their teams.
That's one thing I felt someone like Mourinho lost it post Madrid Stent. For the last few years Mourinho always gave the impression he hates the sport and isn't enjoying it as much as before and suffers under pressure, unlike his enthusiasm and passion he was showing earlier in his career with his crazy antics on the touchline which no doubt have their effect on his players.
Klopp and Pep just look like they really do enjoy football and it's rubbing on their teams.
Pep must be the only coach in the world who builds a squad for 1b all by himself and people would still say somehow has a weaker squad than his competitors
.Are you saying this current City team is better than Liverpool's on paper?Pep must be the only coach in the world who builds a squad for 1b all by himself and people would still say somehow has a weaker squad than his competitors
Even Liverpool fans agree that they have a better squad. The hate for Pep is so strong that you can't see that?
Also, do you think the price of a player is only due to how good he is? Transfer fees depends on a lot of factors : the club selling, the club buying, the age of the player, how many years he has left in his contract, his release clause, his potential or current level, etc... A player being expensive doesn't necessarily mean he's a world-class or even top of player yet.
None of the players Pep bought were top 5 player in their positions when they joined City, they were however great potentials. But a potential is just that, until it's developed. A lot of players with big potentials never get to hit the heights we expect, it's not a given.
And yes Pep/City has more financial resources than Liverpool, but some of you really need to stop acting like Klopp is operating on a shoestring budget which is clearly not the case.
The armchair critics can talk about money spent, but there's a reason why Pep is very highly rated amongst his colleagues as well all the great players he's coached (even players like Eto that didn't like him and thought he was a nobody when he got the Barcelona job, rate him extremely high, even higher than Mourinho).
How could Liverpool possibly have a better squad? Pep has bought 1 billion pounds worth of players and Liverpool's board are tight as hell. I am thinking you are trolling. Pep has former PFA player of the season (Mahrez) coming off the bench
Yes, I would say so. Look at the thread predicting the top 6 of this season, most had them placing 3rd-5th place, just because they are playing really well doesn't mean their players are better individuals. Especially knowing Klopp's teams and how worse his players perform when they switch teams.
And where is the "hate" for Pep FFS
? I literally said that he was together with Klopp the two best managers currently. Do I have to claim that he is by far the best manager to not "hate" him?Of course it doesn't always mean highest fee equals best player. When did I say that? But if you build a team for 1bn as opposed to 500m, you'd expect one team to have a much higher squad depth and on average player of higher quality than the other team, especially when you are able to attract pretty much every single player that is available on the market like Pep with City. And it's not like Pool had a couple of Messis/Iniestas/Xavis coming through their own academy either. I don't know how Pep would've built his team if he didn't have that opportunity like he did now, but one can assume it would be worse than the current one he has if he couldn't spend that much, no? (and in before someone says I'm "hating" him, I don't know how much worse it would be or if his team wouldn't be able to compete for the league anymore)
Regarding you last sentence: I can safely say that all of his players were bought for a fair price compared to their expected quality when they were bought, same goes for Liverpool.
Again, who is saying that? Pep has just vastly more financial possibilities than anyone including Klopp, it doesn't mean that Klopp is operating on a shoestring budget FFS...
And who is saying that Pep is not rightfully very highly rated? I honestly don't get why people would get so offended if you just don't see him as the clear best...
FWIW: I think City is currently the better team, which is also honestly to be expected if you are able to spend that much more TBH. And no, I don't think either one is the objectively better manager.
Last edited:
I'd say that Liverpool maybe have a stronger squad RIGHT NOW but thats from January at the earliest (the Diaz signing) and up until then pretty much everyone would agree that City had the deeper squad. (For example Liverpool's midfield depth is weaker than it was in 20/21 due to the departure of Wijnaldum)
I'm actually thinking you are, and by the way Mahrez is a starter for City.
Makes one wonder if you actually watch them (both teams) play, because there's no way anyone who does doesn't see that Liverpool has a bigger and better squad depth.
The only position where one can say maybe City is superior (in quality, not depth) is the midfield.
Wait, so you actually claim City overpaid for their players and somehow Pep elevate them to play on this current level, and for Liverpool they were all bargains that somehow makes up for the 300m difference in squad cost? I'm honestly interested in your opinion, because if we look at this:
Salah, Mané, Firmino, Diaz, Jota, Minamino (€200m) vs. Mahrez, Grealish, Sterling, Jesus, Foden (€300m)
Fabinho, Keita, Ox, Milner, Henderson, Thiago (€180m) vs. Rodri, Fernandinho, KdB, Silva, Gündogan, Palmer (€250m)
VVD, Matip, Gomez, Konaté, TAA, Milner, Tsimikas, Robertson (€150m) vs. Dias, Laporte, Stones, Aké, Zinchenko, Walker, Cancelo (€250m)
then I don't see how it can be so clear that Liverpool has a better squad, and it's not like Pool pays higher wages, has more luck with talented academy players, can attract better players and has an ageing squad either...
1) A prediction thread hear means nothing to be honest.Yes, I would say so. Look at the thread predicting the top 6 of this season, most had them placing 3rd-5th place, just because they are playing really well doesn't mean their players are better individuals. Especially knowing Klopp's teams and how worse his players perform when they switch teams.
And where is the "hate" for Pep FFS
Of course it doesn't always mean highest fee equals best player. When did I say that? But if you build a team for 1bn as opposed to 500m, you'd expect one team to have a much higher squad depth and on average player of higher quality than the other team, especially when you are able to attract pretty much every single player that is available on the market like Pep with City. And it's not like Pool had a couple of Messis/Iniestas/Xavis coming through their own academy either. I don't know how Pep would've built his team if he didn't have that opportunity like he did now, but one can assume it would be worse than the current one he has if he couldn't spend that much, no? (and in before someone says I'm "hating" him, I don't know how much worse it would be or if his team wouldn't be able to compete for the league anymore)
Regarding you last sentence: I can safely say that all of his players were bought for a fair price compared to their expected quality when they were bought, same goes for Liverpool.
Again, who is saying that? Pep has just vastly more financial possibilities than anyone including Klopp, it doesn't mean that Klopp is operating on a shoestring budget FFS...
And who is saying that Pep is not rightfully very highly rated? I honestly don't get why people would get so offended if you just don't see him as the clear best...
FWIW: I think City is currently the better team, which is also honestly to be expected if you are able to spend that much more TBH. And no, I don't think either one is the objectively better manager.
2) Spending more doesn't mean having a bigger squad depth (as Liverpool actually have a bigger squad depth), it just means that one team spent bigger cash on few players than the other did.
3) Dias, Laporte & Rodri were all overpaid for due to their release clause. Mahrez too to some extent IMO. Let's not even talk about Grealish.
4) No one is offended, atleast i'm not. I just find the mental gymnastics that some try to use in a subtle manner to discredit Pep funny. Talking about how Pep is only good if he has better players than his opponents, when his colleagues and other great players who actually know better due to working with him all talk about his greatness due to his impact in how the game is been played.
5) In your 2nd paragraph, you admitted that more expensive doesn't necessarily mean better, so here why do you say it's expected for City to be better because they spent more?
In Pep's first season in Barcelona, they spent less than Madrid and other big European teams, yet at the end of the season they were undisputably the best team in Europe.
And if spending more is an automatic guarantee, then Everton wouldn't be fighting for top 6 position every season.
Pep is an incredible manager who walked into really good squads with a lot of funds to improve.
Klopp for me though is a level above. He has walked into a weak squad and transformed a lot of decent players into title winning and champions league winners. He has a fantastic ability to improve average players and keep them at the level required on a fraction of the budget which Pep has had for example.
Any manager who can regularly compete at the top carrying Jordan Henderson in midfield deserves all the praise the comes their way.
Klopp for me though is a level above. He has walked into a weak squad and transformed a lot of decent players into title winning and champions league winners. He has a fantastic ability to improve average players and keep them at the level required on a fraction of the budget which Pep has had for example.
Any manager who can regularly compete at the top carrying Jordan Henderson in midfield deserves all the praise the comes their way.
The only exchange most Liverpool will be willing to make if you look at those players are Ox & Milner for KDB and Silva. So yes Liverpool has a better squad and a deeper one in numbers.
If Liverpool have a better squad then that’s a fault of Pep management. Pep has a unlimited budget and free control at City, he should have the best squad in world football by some distance.
Did Liverpool had a better squad than City at the beginning of the season?
Alisson, Kelleher vs Ederson, Steffen.
VVD, Matip, Konate, Gomez, TAA, Robertson, Tsimikas vs Laporte, Dias, Stones, Ake, Walker, Cancelo, Zinchenko, human garbage
Fabinho, Thiago, Henderson, Keita, Jones, Milner, Ox, Elliott vs Rodri, Fernandinho, Gundogan, De Bruyne, Bernardo Silva
Salah, Mane, Firmino, Jota, Minamino, Origi vs Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, Grealish, Foden, Mahrez
Keita and Ox were seen as constant sick notes too
I count 15 starting caliber players vs 17 there, and that may be underrating Fernandinho a bit. Human garbage proving human garbage, Keita not being a sick note and proving genuine starting caliber material and the signing of Diaz in January are what changed the paradigm
Alisson, Kelleher vs Ederson, Steffen.
VVD, Matip, Konate, Gomez, TAA, Robertson, Tsimikas vs Laporte, Dias, Stones, Ake, Walker, Cancelo, Zinchenko, human garbage
Fabinho, Thiago, Henderson, Keita, Jones, Milner, Ox, Elliott vs Rodri, Fernandinho, Gundogan, De Bruyne, Bernardo Silva
Salah, Mane, Firmino, Jota, Minamino, Origi vs Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, Grealish, Foden, Mahrez
Keita and Ox were seen as constant sick notes too
I count 15 starting caliber players vs 17 there, and that may be underrating Fernandinho a bit. Human garbage proving human garbage, Keita not being a sick note and proving genuine starting caliber material and the signing of Diaz in January are what changed the paradigm
OK, so you do claim that City overpaid for all their players and Pep, who is possibly the manager that has the biggest possibilities in world football and built this squad by his own merit, makes up all that by elevating them to play on this level, and Klopp on the other hand got lucky with all of his recruitments? I am also 100% sure that pretty much every single player of Pool would've preferred to join City when they moved and were attainable.
And somehow Dias/Laporte/Rodri/Grealish were overpaid, but VVD/Jota/Ox/Firmino weren't if we go by their reputation at the time they were bought? And you are aware that the City squad I listed had literally one player less, and I could've left out Minamino and/or included another City academy player and it wouldn't make a single difference to their squad strength, no?
Who the hell claims that it's a guarantee? If clubs like Everton or United, who spend only less than City, don't do well they have just been badly managed, simple as that. There is a strong correlation between spending power (hence why it's always the richest clubs who are at the top of their leagues long-term) but it doesn't mean that there aren't few exceptions that prove the rule where the clubs underachieve (in case of United) or overachieve (in case of Liverpool) in respect to their financial prowess. There are also other factors like academy players (Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets, Foden, TAA to name a few) but that has always been the rule of thumb. And that's not to discredit Pep who did an incredible job in rebuilding Barca at that time btw...
Last edited:
Hopefully it stays this way
Everton aren't fighting for a top 6 position every season. Does this mean that spending more is an automatic guarantee then, going by this logic?
Well there's quite a few factors. Firstly they know their football, they know how they want to play and they execute it very well. Secondly they are THE boss, no questions asked. Thirdly they have the full backing of the "higher ups" which makes it so much easier to be the boss. And last but not least. They bring in players that fit in with their philosophy. No super big profile signings needed for them, they just need them to bring in the numbers they are brought for whether that be goals, assists, key tackles, interceptions, pass accuracy etc.
We need to understand how these things work. I know we love to attribute everything to the manager but that’s not how modern football works. For example, Liverpool scouting system is far superior to that of City. Liverpool get their transfers very spot on most times and even though City do get their transfers spot on, they do so largely because their money bails them out but their scouting system is not great in my opinion.
Another point of note is that selling clubs sell in a price differentiation manner such that they will bill some clubs higher than other clubs. A single player can cost much less to club A than club B in the same period even though the selling club is the same. Pep’s old Barca team for example wouldn’t need to break the bank for the most part because they had a functional youth and scouting systems.
If I’m being honest, there is nothing City has in terms of quality that Liverpool does not have also. The teams are evenly matched. The presence of Thiago, VVD and the likes of Salah and co have anything that Citycan boast of. Liverpool do their buys more efficiently than City but in terms of quality, both teams are evenly matched so it’s not a David Vs Goliath situation at all. Add to that the incredible levels of fitness that the Liverpool team possesses, then you’re definitely not looking at a David vs Goliath situation. Many a times City miss very key players in important matches and find a way to cope. Liverpool on the other hand can play with key players for 2 - 3 years without any serious time out.
Another point of note is that selling clubs sell in a price differentiation manner such that they will bill some clubs higher than other clubs. A single player can cost much less to club A than club B in the same period even though the selling club is the same. Pep’s old Barca team for example wouldn’t need to break the bank for the most part because they had a functional youth and scouting systems.
If I’m being honest, there is nothing City has in terms of quality that Liverpool does not have also. The teams are evenly matched. The presence of Thiago, VVD and the likes of Salah and co have anything that Citycan boast of. Liverpool do their buys more efficiently than City but in terms of quality, both teams are evenly matched so it’s not a David Vs Goliath situation at all. Add to that the incredible levels of fitness that the Liverpool team possesses, then you’re definitely not looking at a David vs Goliath situation. Many a times City miss very key players in important matches and find a way to cope. Liverpool on the other hand can play with key players for 2 - 3 years without any serious time out.
A few months ago I looked at what some teams paid for players versus their transfermarkt value at the time and based on that, City do overpay for players, by about 10m per player (consistently, not because of a single superoverpriced purchase).
Training methods. They use that time to get to know the players individually and as a group to design the best system.
I don't think throwing the money card at Pep is very convincing.
We all operate in a world where we need money to be competitive at the top of the PL. So you're basically taking a prerequisite for success and using that against a guy who has unparalleled success. What next, Messi was only great on grass pitches? We're not going to come across a "great" trophy winning, poor manager.
It's about as basic an analysis as those people you hear that scoff and ask how he'd do at Stoke as if the best manager in the world is not wise enough to realise that is a slightly different task and cut his cloth accordingly. Luckily he won't ever need to as even the hypothetical is nonsense.
We all operate in a world where we need money to be competitive at the top of the PL. So you're basically taking a prerequisite for success and using that against a guy who has unparalleled success. What next, Messi was only great on grass pitches? We're not going to come across a "great" trophy winning, poor manager.
It's about as basic an analysis as those people you hear that scoff and ask how he'd do at Stoke as if the best manager in the world is not wise enough to realise that is a slightly different task and cut his cloth accordingly. Luckily he won't ever need to as even the hypothetical is nonsense.
Yeah, just read some wild stuff on this page in order to make it seem as if Pep didn't have the most resources in the league.Pep must be the only coach in the world who builds a squad for 1b all by himself and people would still say somehow has a weaker squad than his competitors
No we wouldn't, the problems at our club wouldn't have stopped him from building his squad and training it.
For example we have Ronaldo, probably the greatest aerial threat ever and yet there isn't a basic default tactic (that's been practiced) to cross to him. This has nothing to do with the club's administration but with what happens on the 5 or 6 days the players train.
And as basic that tripe (to call it analysis is frankly insulting, even by armchair expert standards) is, if you had told me in 2011 that cartoon of Pep just throwing talent in a game and telling them to score, and him splunking cash on Ibrahimovic, would gain a life of it's own and embed itself in serious football discourse at every level I would have called you insane.
No, and that's the point i'm making. Spending more doesn't guarantee success.
Commanding absolute respect from the dressing room, being tactically astute and understanding the modern game - and fitness, often overlooked, but Pep and Klopp teams are all super athletes - not a coincidence they are deemed ‘lucky’ with injuries. I think the one other thing they focus on is team spirit. They both build teams that play for each other and not themselves.
What Klopp achieved and is achieving at Liverpool is even greater than Pep at City. He took a top 6 squad and turned them in serial winners domestically and in Europe. I think apart from Klopp being a very astute tactician. He has such a clear vision of the type of players he wants and the type of style he wants. On top of that all, he is a lovely guy. Pep is awesome too, but Klopp has a personality that is so powerful that he can carry the fans and the club any which way he wants.
That just shows people are terrible at predicting. Look at how many people have Manchester United in the top 2.Yes, I would say so. Look at the thread predicting the top 6 of this season, most had them placing 3rd-5th place, just because they are playing really well doesn't mean their players are better individuals. Especially knowing Klopp's teams and how worse his players perform when they switch teams.
And where is the "hate" for Pep FFS
Of course it doesn't always mean highest fee equals best player. When did I say that? But if you build a team for 1bn as opposed to 500m, you'd expect one team to have a much higher squad depth and on average player of higher quality than the other team, especially when you are able to attract pretty much every single player that is available on the market like Pep with City. And it's not like Pool had a couple of Messis/Iniestas/Xavis coming through their own academy either. I don't know how Pep would've built his team if he didn't have that opportunity like he did now, but one can assume it would be worse than the current one he has if he couldn't spend that much, no? (and in before someone says I'm "hating" him, I don't know how much worse it would be or if his team wouldn't be able to compete for the league anymore)
Regarding you last sentence: I can safely say that all of his players were bought for a fair price compared to their expected quality when they were bought, same goes for Liverpool.
Again, who is saying that? Pep has just vastly more financial possibilities than anyone including Klopp, it doesn't mean that Klopp is operating on a shoestring budget FFS...
And who is saying that Pep is not rightfully very highly rated? I honestly don't get why people would get so offended if you just don't see him as the clear best...
FWIW: I think City is currently the better team, which is also honestly to be expected if you are able to spend that much more TBH. And no, I don't think either one is the objectively better manager.
started 13 league matches this season despite being in the match day squad for 32. didn't even get on in 7 matches.
he/she is really spinning a strange narrative. Must be Klopp son
yep.
Primarily PED’s, coupled with the financial capacity to stockpile talent.
A lack of average teams willing to play traditional, direct football; mediocre players trying to play out from the back against the doped presses just plays into their hands. Arsenal used to struggle against the likes of Bolton and Blackburn because they’d play to their own strengths rather than conform to dubious obligations to play ‘good’ football that doesn’t suit the players they can afford.
City’s bench should really be distributed amongst the rest of the top 4 - the fact that Grealish, Gundogan and Mahrez would have teams built around them at practically every other club in the league, rather than rotational options to neutralise the impact of injuries and fatigue sums up why City and Pep SHOULD win the league every season.
Today they had two £50m defenders out, yet Ake was the cheapest of the back 4 at ‘only’ £45m. He himself should be starting for a Spurs or Arsenal, not bumming about as a 4th choice centreback/utility man. Ferguson generally pulled his Ake’s from the academy, ala O’Shea or Gibson, and that’s why Pep’s ‘achievements’ aren’t comparable.
A lack of average teams willing to play traditional, direct football; mediocre players trying to play out from the back against the doped presses just plays into their hands. Arsenal used to struggle against the likes of Bolton and Blackburn because they’d play to their own strengths rather than conform to dubious obligations to play ‘good’ football that doesn’t suit the players they can afford.
City’s bench should really be distributed amongst the rest of the top 4 - the fact that Grealish, Gundogan and Mahrez would have teams built around them at practically every other club in the league, rather than rotational options to neutralise the impact of injuries and fatigue sums up why City and Pep SHOULD win the league every season.
Today they had two £50m defenders out, yet Ake was the cheapest of the back 4 at ‘only’ £45m. He himself should be starting for a Spurs or Arsenal, not bumming about as a 4th choice centreback/utility man. Ferguson generally pulled his Ake’s from the academy, ala O’Shea or Gibson, and that’s why Pep’s ‘achievements’ aren’t comparable.
West Ham United are the 'Workhorses' so are there also PED involved?
https://sport.optus.com.au/articles...ance-covered-this-season-statistics-opta-data
https://sport.optus.com.au/articles...ance-covered-this-season-statistics-opta-data
Exactly. Liverpool's scouting system and recruitment is superior to Manchester City's. The scouting department stopped Klopp from getting Brandt and they recommended Mohammed Salah instead. For all of the talk about Manchester City's money and squad, they play Zinchenko an attacking midfielder, Delph a midfielder and Cancelo a right back at Left back in almost all of Pep Guardiola's tenure.
Pep Guardiola is always having to adjust. If Pep Guardiola was at Liverpool, he scouting department would probably get him players that suit his style.
Liverpool's squad is deeper, more varied and superior to Manchester City's. If Pep Guardiola can overhaul them to the Premier League and the Champions League, it would be by far the greatest feat in his career as he is going up against a team that is better than his. If he loses this battle, I'm afraid it would taint his legacy.
Liverpool hit the jackpot that Klopp turned down Man Utd.
Both are amazing personalities and besides all the other merits also pushing each other for the last couple of %.
In general I‘d think that if more managers would get backed by the boards 100% (not just on the transfermarket but also that no bypassing by players is allowed / player power is very restricted) and would be allowed to stay for longer periods we would see more coherent football being played. Of course this is easier said than done and also not fully explaining the results of those both but even a proper manager like Tuchel would need to build squad over a couple of seasons to be realistically able to challenge them for the title eye to eye.
In general I‘d think that if more managers would get backed by the boards 100% (not just on the transfermarket but also that no bypassing by players is allowed / player power is very restricted) and would be allowed to stay for longer periods we would see more coherent football being played. Of course this is easier said than done and also not fully explaining the results of those both but even a proper manager like Tuchel would need to build squad over a couple of seasons to be realistically able to challenge them for the title eye to eye.
It's only deep now that they've signed Diaz, before that they were playing Mane, Salah and Jota up front every game. In comparison Pep has had Sterling, Mahrez, Foden, Jesus, Grealish and Bernardo and Ferran to an extent too to play in attack. It's no surprise that Liverpool have managed to reduce the deficit now that they can rotate the attack a bit.
Liverpool are finally reaching parity depth wise but for the majority of their tenure City has been way ahead on that front and it shows, especially in the league.
Or maybe they actually train their player and make them fit.
Unlike our crying for training till evening
I think Klopp would get Stoke promoted.
He’d forge a motivated hard working pressing side that would get to at least at 6th on effort and further up with some transfer and injury fortune.
Pep’s stoke would play beautiful football one week and get mugged by shithouses the next and end up 9th.
btw. Did anyone here think Sadio Mane would be a superstar?
He’d forge a motivated hard working pressing side that would get to at least at 6th on effort and further up with some transfer and injury fortune.
Pep’s stoke would play beautiful football one week and get mugged by shithouses the next and end up 9th.
btw. Did anyone here think Sadio Mane would be a superstar?