Go listen to his take on Kobbie and it will soon go down again
Klopp to leave Liverpool at the end of the season
- Thread starter RonaldoVII
- Start date
No shame in being below the likes of Wenger and SAF who have been at their clubs three times longer than Klopp has, I think those ones are fairly obvious. Pep is getting close due to his success rate, depends on how long he'll keep it up at City (with the obvious and glaring caveat that he had unlimited resources of course).
Mourinho based on his Chelsea stint deserves to be ahead of Klopp but his Tottenham and Utd passages have put a dent in his claim imo. I'd put it like this:
Tier 1: SAF - Wenger
Tier 2: Pep
Tier 3: Mourinho - Klopp
I think describing Klopp's reign at Liverpool as "just one title" is selling him short (to be expected on here but still), because he totally transformed the general feeling around and sentiment towards the entire club - the likes of Benitez are not even fit to lace his boots in that regard, even though he also won a CL with us. What Klopp has done for us can't be put in just achievements and trophies. He "made us believe" sounds super corny but in some way it's simply true, nothing else to say about it.
It's a bigger indictment on Klopp that he twice dropped below 70 points in the league after great seasons, than him only winning one league title. He's had three seasons with point hauls that could reasonably have won the league, but was just pipped by City. Fergie and Pep just have a different level of consistency over many years that Klopp hasn't managed to achieve.
I'd put him below Wenger who was also far more consistent even if he only picked up 3 titles in nearly 2 decades.
One could argue he's on par with Mourinho, however Mourinho won more titles but Mourinho's lows are much lower than Klopp's in the league.
Yes, Wenger had a different kind of consistency in getting them top four for that many seasons with a quite limited budget and many young players. It was another kind of achievement. What maybe drags Wenger down a bit is the fact that he never won the Champions League, and those last years where it became quite bad for them.
Dunno he took over a shit Liverpool team and has been competing a dominant City side managed by Guardiola and made 2 CL finals, winning one and losing out on another pl title by 1 point despite an abusurdly high points tally. Without spending silly. He's hard to compare to Wenger since Wenger was here for ages. He's not been flawless, but in context, he's done a brilliant job.
Based solely on the Premier League Wenger is the 2nd best manager in its history. Mourinho 3rd.
Pep - F
We used to make fun them making top 4 and winning Fa cups galore. And Wenger didn't spend anything close to what we've done post Fergie.
The context does matter when we're talking about how much these achievements say about a manager's abilities, though; and then it has to be pointed out that they won the CL with a final against Tottenham of all clubs, and even got an absolute freak lottery penalty in the first seconds of the game, as if getting to play a CL final against Spurs wasn't lucky enough in and of itself. And the 2021 final was reached via probably the easiest lineup of opponents in CL history throughout the knockout stages, never once facing any big team. Inter, Benfica and Villareal, that's got to be the luckiest draw possible at each stage. In their 2017-18 run, they also drew Porto in the 1/8ths and Roma in the semis, although getting City in the quarterfinals just quite stops it from being yet another insolently fortunate path through the tournament. Nevertheless, they have been unrealistically lucky in the CL under Klopp.
And in the league, while he has done well to challenge City, his tenure has coincided with a period of time where all the other big English teams have been varying degrees of shit. Aside from the 2016/17 season, Chelsea have been nowhere near a title challenge. United in the wilderness for this entire period. Arsenal only just emerging as a serious contender last season. By and large, the PL has been a two-horse race, and Klopp only managed to win it in the Covid season which was a total mess because clubs' wildly different approaches to the pandemic turned it into a total wildcard season.
I don't normally care to nitpick and dismiss accomplishments, but the fact of the matter is that all of Klopp's happen to come with big asterisks like "literally the easiest CL draw anyone has ever had" and "happened during the Covid season where most clubs didn't even try to compete." That does bear mentioning in a discussion about a manager's accomplishments, because these things very much played a defining role in that.
Last edited:
"I don't normally care to nitpick and dismiss accomplishments"
...
"They got lucky with their opponents!"
"Their league title was during Covid!" [even though they were a gazillion points ahead of everyone else by early March]
The "other big teams are shit" argument is also laughable. Liverpool were shit during most of Utd's reign, Chelsea were a midtable team for half of SAF's tenure and City was pointless back then up until 2009ish. Tottenham was always just Tottenham. So you basically had only Arsenal then?
I haven’t heard what he said about Mainoo yet but I’m not surprised. He’s just used up his one good take for the year, expecting another one from Danny is far too much to ask.Go listen to his take on Kobbie and it will soon go down again
I understand disliking Klopp but you have to agree that he has managed to take a bunch of mostly average footballers and make a very very good team. Totally overachieved.
He hasn't overachieved at all. He's pretty much achieved in line with expectations and money spent.
By "take a bunch of mostly average footballers and make a very very good team" I'm assuming you mean "sell a bunch of mostly average footballers and buy a very very good team"?
Isn't that just football management 101?
I think the point was that he managed to coach players like Henderson, Robertson, Firmino and Wijnaldum to be the very best that they could be, hence the assumption that there will be a big drop off in performances when he leaves at the end of the season.
Get what you mean in terms of expectation, though the only reason for any sort of expectation is due solely to him getting the best from the group of players he has had. Money-wise, and I may be wrong, we are roughly 4th or 5th on net spend for the last few seasons, comfortably behind City, Chelsea, yourselves and possibly Arsenal.
And there is nothing wrong with that. Contrary to armchair fan speak, history is not just about the winners. There have been many quality managers in the league, most of whom have not won the PL.
Back to Klopp: he's been a great manager for Liverpool. He's had some dips but opposed to some in this thread I think he deserves credit for how he pushed Liverpool to within a point of the trophy twice against an insanely good City side with more financial power. Not enough to push him over Wenger/Mourinho, but enough to differentiate him from the rest. Can't think of any other manager that could have done substantially better than him in the same position
Without hearing what Murphy said exactly, but if he's arguing that their won't be any meaningful drop off after klopp leaves then really what he's just said is Klopp isn't all that great then and no matter who's in charge they're going to be as good or nearly as good as they already are.
You can't on one hand say klopps the best in the world and then in the other say their won't be a drop off after he leaves.
I actually don't expect a significant drop off when Klopp leaves, for 2 reasons:
1. Liverpool's structure seems to be less dependent on the coach than our structure was when SAF left
2. They'll probably select a very good coach, and given their well run machine, they don't need a miracle worker. They just need a very good coach.
Similar to how City won titles with Mancini/Pellegrini and Chelsea won titles with Conte/Rachel, and Arsenal is challenging with Arteta. You don't need miracle workers at the coach position if the rest of the hierarchy is great at what they do (recruitment, youth integration, finances, analytics, etc)
So klopp mustn't be that special then. Which is my point.
City have the best structure out of the lot of us but when pep goes they'll see a massive drop off although I don't expect them to go nearly as bad as united, but just not win the league every year.
I think that the players and those that feel that it is also time to move on will also be a big factor for both Liverpool and City (when Pep goes).
Sounds like Salah is definitely going this summer, then once a new manager comes in, no matter how good the rest of the club setup is, the change will be hard for some players to take after years of Klopp. The mentality will be different and I doubt that all players will adjust as seamlessly as some think.
Also, anytime anything doesn’t go there way the comparisons to Klopp will be constant. I just do not see how there won’t be a big drop off and find it unbelievable that the Liverpool love in from their former players can’t see it.
The replacement is on a hiding to nothing…..will be interesting to see who they go for.
Eh? No
If SAF was *shudder* managing City, and they replaced him upon retirement with Mancini, they would go from sweeping the titles every year to maybe winning the title once every other year. That's not a massive dropoff
You're associating massive dropoffs with the quality of the manager, and you're getting it wrong; the massive dropoff is because of the flimsy structure around the coach
He didn't take average footballers anywhere though. He got rid of the average players and bought good ones. Still management 101 of course.
Let him leave then it will become clear. The likes of Milner, Wijnaldum, Firmino, sbolozai, et al have/had no right to run City close.
Remember the team that won the ucl with a midfield of Wijnaldum, Henderson, Fabinho and Milner? Its the way Klopp's teams play, smothering opponents allowing space for the forwards and at the same time protecting the defence resulting in overachievement.
Comparing the success that pep has had in his time vs the same time period before up was a massive change, so reverting back to pre pep would be a massive change again. City will still have success just not close to what pep is having now.
Our opinions on the what constitutes a drop off is obviously different so Im going to agree to disagree on that
I agree, I think Liverpool ex players and their fans will be in for a rude awakening
True Geordie can be a bit of a dick sometimes but him and a couple of others around the table made some good points here. There is a disparity between the way Klopp is portrayed in the media vs the way he behaves towards journalists after losing a game.
He got mediocre players to Run Run Run.. bought a player nobody fancied in Salah and put him in a side that Ran Ran Ran, that took 2 full seasons to get those players in. He's now going imo because he can't get the board to put there hand in there pocket..
If you want or need to win you have to compete with City, if your owners who are American won't do it, the failed ESP , by J Henry and the rest of the Yanks didn't help. I agree with all of what he's said about City and there money compared to other clubs , I don't agree with how he hardly ever excepts the opposition when he loses.
Countino Money that Barca gave was ridiculous and that's money they bought a Keeper and CB in the main that won them the 30 Yr wait for a title..
And it could well be another 30 before it happens again.. I wish him well, imo it won't be long before he ends up at Real Madrid.. .
If you want or need to win you have to compete with City, if your owners who are American won't do it, the failed ESP , by J Henry and the rest of the Yanks didn't help. I agree with all of what he's said about City and there money compared to other clubs , I don't agree with how he hardly ever excepts the opposition when he loses.
Countino Money that Barca gave was ridiculous and that's money they bought a Keeper and CB in the main that won them the 30 Yr wait for a title..
And it could well be another 30 before it happens again.. I wish him well, imo it won't be long before he ends up at Real Madrid.. .
Bloody ell there’s some rewriting of history here.
He’s been up against the biggest cheats of all time to start with, he took over a team in 10th position after they finished 6th the previous season.
However, despite all that has the 3rd highest points per game (2.12) of any manager in Premier League history, only behind the cheat (2.32) and Fergie (2.16).
If Liverpool continue their form this season he’ll likely end up with the same ppg total as Fergie.
He has that record despite managing the 3rd most games (322) of anyone else in the top 10 ppg list (Wenger 1, Fergie 2).
He’s been an absolutely incredible manager for the scousers and I’m fecking delighted he’s leaving, cause they are gonna be fecked, and most of them can’t see it coming, living in complete denial.
He’s been up against the biggest cheats of all time to start with, he took over a team in 10th position after they finished 6th the previous season.
However, despite all that has the 3rd highest points per game (2.12) of any manager in Premier League history, only behind the cheat (2.32) and Fergie (2.16).
If Liverpool continue their form this season he’ll likely end up with the same ppg total as Fergie.
He has that record despite managing the 3rd most games (322) of anyone else in the top 10 ppg list (Wenger 1, Fergie 2).
He’s been an absolutely incredible manager for the scousers and I’m fecking delighted he’s leaving, cause they are gonna be fecked, and most of them can’t see it coming, living in complete denial.
Yup he did alright there and he'll be a big loss to them.
I agree that Klopp is good. Disagree strongly about using PPG. It strongly favours the managers of today at top teams.
Really does cement how good SAF was that despite all those games (over twice as long as Pep and Klopp) he STILL has the 2nd best ppg. Madness!
Oh aye, it’s an absolutely ridiculous record.
SAF: 810 games
Pep: 292 games
Klopp: 322 games
Sir Alex and Arsene managed in an era where there were always a few other teams who could turn up and take points off them where as during the Pep v Klopp era they have been getting 90+ points in seasons where the standard of the league has been poor and the only teams that really gave City and Liverpool a run for there money was each other.
I don't think anyone is denying that Klopp did a good job at Pool or saying he is a mediocre manager.
The discussion changes if you start using the words "legend" and start calling him an elite PL manager and call his time at Pool "highly successful".
The lack of trophies to show becomes a talking point. If we wipe off City's PL titles, still he will have couple more PL, which is the same as what a hapless United would have achieved with an outdated dinosaur and a PE teacher.
The discussion changes if you start using the words "legend" and start calling him an elite PL manager and call his time at Pool "highly successful".
The lack of trophies to show becomes a talking point. If we wipe off City's PL titles, still he will have couple more PL, which is the same as what a hapless United would have achieved with an outdated dinosaur and a PE teacher.
No. I strongly disagree. The standard of the league is far from poor and is better than ever. But, so have City and Liverpool been.
In the seasons City and Liverpool were getting 90+ points the standard of the league was one of tbe poorest its been with the other members of the so called big 6 clubs (Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, and Man Utd) all struggling while other teams like Newcastle, Leeds, and Villa who in the Sir Alex and Wenger years had been competitive were either down the bottom battling relegation or were in the lower tiers.
The team that won the UCL started Alisson, Alexander-Arnold, Matip, van Dijk, Robertson, Henderson, Fabinho, Wijnaldum, Salah, Firmino and Mane in the final.
Klopp has always preferred a workhorse-heavy midfield at Liverpool, but I'm struggling to see that line up as "a bunch of mostly average footballers".
Poch messed up in that final when he brought Harry Kane back in to the starting line-up instead of continuing with Son who's goals had got them there in the first place, as a result Spurs failed to score despite probably being the better side overall and lost through a pen and a stoppage time goal.
He’s bang on
I'm not discussing how the final played out or how Spurs came about losing it, I'm disagreeing with the idea that Klopp's success at Liverpool was a result of him taking "a bunch of mostly average footballers" and turning them into "a very very good team", which is essentially the claim being made by that poster. It isn't true, and most of the average ones were gone by the time they actually won something, with the rest being relegated to bit-part squad filler.