The only context that matters that season is that without an Ole masterclass, they'd have the longest winning streak in the PL and probably first division history.
Klopp to leave Liverpool at the end of the season
- Thread starter RonaldoVII
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
Heh!
I disagree. During his time only City prevented Liverpool from probably winning 3 titles. At the end of the day, it's disingenuous to not factor in City and Guardiola as a massive factor in any manger not winning the league over the past 7 seasons. They aren't normal. They're bankrolled by a country and led by arguably the best manager in world football. You just HAVE TO be perfect to win the league with them in it and Klopp did well over the past few years. There's no way managers like Wenger or Fergie would have won the league with this current City team over 38 games.
Disagree, and not just because I'm a Liverpool fan. I think that if you had to name 10 PL era managers, even 20 years from now, Klopp would be high up there, up with Fergie, Wenger, Pep, Mourinho and maybe one or two that don't immediately spring to mind. He should possibly have won more, but given the fact that he completely turned around our expectations, with nowhere near the amount of resources as United, City and Chelsea deserves massive credit.
Haha what the feck is this based on? The long list of managers Fergie failed to beat to the title?
Probably based on Fergie only managing 90+ points 3 times. Peps done it 4 times in not even half the time he’s been in the prem.
It's progress i suppose - they're upgrading from a cnut to a whole Slut.
The farewell tour of this one time PL winning manager has been absolutely nauseating.
Fergie didn't even get this much fuss.
Fergie didn't even get this much fuss.
That’s because the league was way more competitive in its first 21 seasons compared to its last 11 seasons.
More due to the nature of the league these days than anything. You used to need 40 points to survive, now less.
Yup. I do remember seeing some oppo fans giving him his proper dues though.
90+ seems like a random bar. Fergie always got enough points to win the league. Why should he get more and wear out his players? He wasn't at a financially doped club that can stack the bench with expensive players. Plus, even Pep in 3 out of these 4 times, just got 1 or 2 more points than second place and ended up squeaking home.
Exactly. In his last season, he got 89 points. If we had beaten Chelsea, it would have been 92. If we had beaten Arsenal, it would have been 94.
Cya goofy
Given this forum would (rightly) strip Man City of all their titles, that would give Klopp an extra couple to his name and make his trophy count far more respectable.
He made them a team to be feared, but got unlucky in Europe vs a legendary Madrid side the same way Ferguson got unlucky meeting those legendary Barca sides.
Still won a few major trophies and made Liverpool fans actually enjoy watching their team, which I’d have thought United fans would value the importance of given the misery of the last 10 years.
He made them a team to be feared, but got unlucky in Europe vs a legendary Madrid side the same way Ferguson got unlucky meeting those legendary Barca sides.
Still won a few major trophies and made Liverpool fans actually enjoy watching their team, which I’d have thought United fans would value the importance of given the misery of the last 10 years.
Dunno how. Theirs more money in the prem nowadays. Teams like Villa are signing decent players. It’s probably the same, our biggest challengers back in Fergie era was probably Chelsea. City’s was Liverpool and then Arsenal in the last few years.
Of course, he matched about 1/13 of SAF's success so he is basically his equal. Now baldy is clearly the best with about half the titles.Up there with Fergie?
The Van Dijk of Managers. Impressive peak for one year.Up there with Fergie?
Yaaaaaawwwnnnn
Some United fans here are miserable. Could he have won more? Sure.
But 3 Champions League Finals, 1 CL victory, 1 EL final, 1 PL title, bunch of cup titles- how is that not a great success given where they came from?
What manager has been loved equally by United fans or any other club for that matter. Like him or not but he will be regarded as a legend.
Rarely have I seen a club so enamoured by a manager.
But 3 Champions League Finals, 1 CL victory, 1 EL final, 1 PL title, bunch of cup titles- how is that not a great success given where they came from?
What manager has been loved equally by United fans or any other club for that matter. Like him or not but he will be regarded as a legend.
Rarely have I seen a club so enamoured by a manager.
Jesus I just actually watched the entire clip of Klopp singing Arne Slot.
What's the English word for plaatsvervangende schaamte anyway?
What's the English word for plaatsvervangende schaamte anyway?
People, we have our meme.
It’s true that the Premier League now is by far the strongest in Europe. However, we also had Arsenal running us close from the late 90s to the early 00s. We only won the league in our treble season by one point on the final day, having come from 1-0 down against Tottenham Hotspur
I suppose the lack of money is probably the difference. The financial disparity between the top teams and the rest wasn't as big as it is now.
These days midtable teams can spend £50m on new players but when the big 6 can spend £200m every single summer the gap will keep growing.
Simply put, the worse teams are a lot worse. They are less able to win or draw games against the better sides. In large part, I think this is because over the last decade or so, near enough every team has tried to "play football" in near enough every game. It's earned individual managers plaudits, but ultimately left these teams being played off the park when they come up against better footballers. We no longer see the bottom sides shutting up shop and playing an incredibly physical game to make the better side uncomfortable and maybe find themselves stealing a goal or two. They're just not as good at passing the ball about as the teams they're playing, so they lose.
You can argue that the top teams are getting better, but I don't think performances in Europe actually show much evidence of that.
Believe it or not, but if you place him fifth on a list of the greatest PL managers (which is fair) he'd be on that list with Fergie. He'd literally be up there (on the list) with Fergie. I don't underdtand why United fans seemingly take personal offense by such a statement (or really any statement regarding Klopp and Fergie).Up there with Fergie?
He should have won more, and that is a big regret.
Overall, he did a very good job at the club, and i don't think Liverpool or him have many regrets, they did right by each other.
Overall, he did a very good job at the club, and i don't think Liverpool or him have many regrets, they did right by each other.
I mentioned the 90+ points because that’s what we would have needed to win the league nowadays. Peps raised that bar. Plus the football in general as changed a lot since back then. Teams could win the league by counter attacking. That won’t win you the league now.
Fair point.
Fergies in a league on his own mate. You can put him up there with the others. But Fergie didn’t spend even close to what city have to achieve his treble and he could win games in Europe by fielding 7 defenders on the pitch. I doubt any of the other managers you’ve mentioned would be able to pull that of.
I don’t disagree. A few others have jumped one the 'up there' as though I think Klopp's achievements put him alongside Fergie....that's not what I meant - I simply meant that he is in the upper tier of managers in the PL era, not ranking them in any way. Obviously Fegie is out in front, I was simply saying that, for me, Klopp's up there purely for how he got us back to the (relative) top, whilst fighting it out with other financial juggernauts.
Oh absolutely. I agree with you… he’s done a top job in getting yous back to challenging and I’ve said this before, if Guardiola wasn’t at city you’d probably have a few more titles. He’s been one of guardiolas closest challengers and losing the league by a point on 2 occasions is harsh. I rate Klopp higher purely for the fact he can build teams on a lower budget.
How can that be when the legendary Arsenal side from 1998 to 2004 who are praised as all time greats in the English game failed to make as much as a semi final in Europe? Compare that to how many English teams appearances in the CL final in the Klopp and Pep era?
As would all other managers in Premier League history. I'm not sure what your point is other than "weeeee don't mention Klopp And Fergie in the same sentence weeeee".
He'd be closer to Mancini, Ranieri and Pellegrini than he would Fergie.
You can't talk about the greatest managers in English football history and claim a guy who won one 1 title ''would be high up there, up with Fergie''.
No, no he wouldn't. You can say Klopp would probably be on the list of the top 10-15 managers in PL history but that's it.
He's right up there apparently. But not as high as some people are up Klopp's arse it seems.
I would have him at fifth, which probably would be the most reasonable ranking at this point. Then he'd be up there with Fergie, Pep, Wenger and Mourinho (as in behind them, on the fifth spot). Which is literally exactly what that poster said, he even entertained that there might be a few other managers above. What bothers you so much about that? Why do you stop reading at "up there with Fergie"?
I wouldn't, he might sneak into my top 10, so no he isn't up there with any of the managers that have won multiple titles.
What bothers you so much about me laughing at the ridiculous notion that Klopp is right up there with Fergie?