Sorry Abramovich boy, but not everyone is as venal as each other.
Klopp confirming his hypocrisy is only evidence of Jurgen Klopp confirming his hypocrisy, not some transparent, self-serving 'they're all as bad as each other' false equivalence.
What next for Jürgen Klopp?
- Thread starter Skills
- Start date
-
Nik (@Rood), Jamie (@Vault Dweller) and Ed (@That'sHernandez) give their end of season awards out! They celebrate the best players, goals and moments of the season (there were some, honestly) and also give out awards for the worst and most disappointing players/moments of the season.
They then discuss all the latest transfer rumours and get into the potential ins and outs this summer at Old Trafford.
Sorry Abramovich boy, but not everyone is as venal as each other.
Klopp confirming his hypocrisy is only evidence of Jurgen Klopp confirming his hypocrisy, not some transparent, self-serving 'they're all as bad as each other' false equivalence.
I get the point, but did Klopp reinvent himself more than some of those other guys? It would be interesting to hear your take.
For example, Wenger had success with Monaco in a French 4-4-2 (which is typically more of a diamond shape). He moved to Arsenal and succeeded with a very traditional anglo flat 4-4-2 set-up. Then he redesigned his team into a more technical counter-attacking outfit, usually playing 4-2-3-1. That team looked very different to his first title-winning side. And then as he saw the emerging changes about to sweep across Spain, he moved away from the big physical midfielders (Vieira, Gilberto) to smaller ball retainers (Fabregas, Hleb, Rosicky, Edu, Ozil, Nasri, Ramsey, Wilshere). Three very different styles of play at Arsenal alone and each in response to, or in anticipation of, how football was changing.
Klopp has been far less hypocritical here than most seem to believe. Some years ago he already talked about how well RB are working, how exciting it is and simply called it a different approach/background than the traditional clubs. He never really condemned them. He knows how to mezmerize a club and it's fanbase, but he never appeared as an advocate against the kind of thing RB are doing. Only deluded fans thought of him that way.
I think it's not Klopp who was put in the wrong category, but (as you explain) Wenger, who should be called more alongside SAF then alongside Mou.
Yes, Liverpool fans.
We all knew he was fake. Good, great possibly, but still fake.
It's a shame people believe everyone is like him, but there it is.
Definitely latest with Abramovic, which was over two decades ago. Who was the first foreign investor? Al-Fayet?
After Abramovic the floodgates kinda opend: Glazers, Abu Dhabi, Qatar, Fenway, Saudi Arabia etc.
If I am not mistaken, before the PL the clubs were mostly owned by rich individuals/families with ties to the respective region. When that changed, the "selling out" happened - at least for me. Keep in mind, I have a German perspective on this.
Hard to forget with you guys!
More seriously, yeah Al Fayed was the first, but didn't seem particularly problematic (his ownership, that is - him as a person, that's another story), then Abramovic which of course was the beginning of the end. I don't think foreign ownership as a whole is an issue and while I respect the approach in Germany (though the 50+1 is a bit overstated considering you have big exceptions to it), I don't think it's the only right one, depending on your objectives for the league. And I believe the PL could have achieved most of its objectives, i.e. being a or the leading league in terms of viewership, revenue, etc. without selling its soul, by establishing much stronger fit and proper rules - which are frankly speaking a joke.
Hey, it's neither my fault nor merit that I was born there.Hard to forget with you guys!
More seriously, yeah Al Fayed was the first, but didn't seem particularly problematic (his ownership, that is - him as a person, that's another story), then Abramovic which of course was the beginning of the end. I don't think foreign ownership as a whole is an issue and while I respect the approach in Germany (though the 50+1 is a bit overstated considering you have big exceptions to it), I don't think it's the only right one, depending on your objectives for the league. And I believe the PL could have achieved most of its objectives, i.e. being a or the leading league in terms of viewership, revenue, etc. without selling its soul, by establishing much stronger fit and proper rules - which are frankly speaking a joke.
(Which is why I also don't understand nationalism, but that is another topic...) I also live somewhere else now.I didn't want to show a ‘we're better than you’ attitude either. I just wanted to explain why my view of the PL is perhaps a little naive/different. All models of ownership probably have pros and cons, be it monetary or emotionally.
Lawn Ball Klopper76, we don't want to break any rules.
Klopp in 2017: "I'm a football romantic and I like tradition in football and all that stuff. I don’t like multi club ownerships and wouldn’t want to have anything like that.”
Klopp the other day: “I’m a big supporter of Red Bull’s football operation. Their multi club ownership model is something I cannot wait to get started with.”
Klopp the other day: “I’m a big supporter of Red Bull’s football operation. Their multi club ownership model is something I cannot wait to get started with.”
Yes, they've woken up to him, also.
What a piece of shit!Football died in 1992 so obviously it was the establishment of the Premier League 32 years ago when a few top clubs got greedy and wanted the lion's share of the money:
"The first major step to its formation occurred in October 1990, when the managing director of London Weekend Television (LWT), Greg Dyke, met with the representatives of the "big five" clubs – David Dein of Arsenal, Philip Carter of Everton, Noel White of Liverpool, Martin Edwards of Manchester United and Irving Scholar of Tottenham Hotspur. The meeting was to pave the way for a breakaway from the Football League. Dyke believed that it would be more lucrative for ITV if only the larger clubs in the country were featured on national television and wanted to establish whether the clubs would be interested in a larger share of television rights money."
Imagine the amazing riots if Dortmund, Bayern, Gladbach, Stuttgart, HSV, Bremen etc tried pulling away from the DFL with a German Super League
That's also why German fans protest against RB, Dietmar Hopp, and Uefa, the moment they don't push back our greedy CEOs will sign up for the European Super League or make matchday tickets unaffordable and slowly but surely the local fans will be priced out such that 20 years later the Bundesliga will be like the PL: Too expensive for most locals, touristy, sanitised, with docile fans waving plastic flags and clappers on CL nights.I agree. I don't blame German fans for being extremely cautious seeing how bad it's gotten everywhere else.
Very much disagree with this.Football died in 1992 so obviously it was the establishment of the Premier League 32 years ago when a few top clubs got greedy and wanted the lion's share of the money:
"The first major step to its formation occurred in October 1990, when the managing director of London Weekend Television (LWT), Greg Dyke, met with the representatives of the "big five" clubs – David Dein of Arsenal, Philip Carter of Everton, Noel White of Liverpool, Martin Edwards of Manchester United and Irving Scholar of Tottenham Hotspur. The meeting was to pave the way for a breakaway from the Football League. Dyke believed that it would be more lucrative for ITV if only the larger clubs in the country were featured on national television and wanted to establish whether the clubs would be interested in a larger share of television rights money."
Imagine the amazing riots if Dortmund, Bayern, Gladbach, Stuttgart, HSV, Bremen etc tried pulling away from the DFL with a German Super League
No surprise PL fans are in denial that English clubs are sellouts to billionaires from Abu Dhabi to Walmart and twerk hard for TV money, but 1991-92 was also approximately the time (pardon I wasn't yet a sentient being) when the knockout format European Cup got rebranded into the Champions League with a group stage that ensured top CL clubs wouldn't exit the competition as easily in the early stages due to a head-to-head David v Goliath upset. The change in format from full knockouts to partial knockouts put an end to the likes of Red Star Belgrade (1991), PSV (1986), Steaua Bucharest (1988), Aston Villa (1982) winning Europe's top club competition over elite money clubs like Real Madrid, Barca, Milan, Man Utd. Some say 2024's CL format change is also aimed at giving elite CL clubs a playoff if they underperform in the groups but the format change in the 1990s was worse in dealing a critical blow to the possibility of underdog sides claiming the honour of being #1 in Europe.
As someone who's never watched the EC, it's too bad my generation never got to witness the joy of seeing Turkish or Eastern European clubs eliminate Bayern or Chelsea in the 2nd round of the European Cup. So yes the PL and CL were both born out of pure unfettered greed and turned the working class sport of football into a moneyed, 130m transfer fee behemoth it is today teeming with clones of Mino Raiola and Sepp Blatter.
Last edited:
That's not what I said though. But I've had this conversation with another poster above already.
He's such a disingenuous twat.
He obviously just somehow missed they were operating the most hated club in Germany.
https://onefootball.com/en/news/juergen-klopp-defends-move-to-red-bull-40239007
He obviously just somehow missed they were operating the most hated club in Germany.
https://onefootball.com/en/news/juergen-klopp-defends-move-to-red-bull-40239007
I wonder if he regrets his decision to leave with Pep going into meltdown he'd probably be in a similar position to Slot right now.
It feels sad that he's left management behind while still quite young to be a suit at a Jagermeister Mixer company whose clubs have no real history and are just advertising tools.
It feels like Edu's move to oversee the forest owner's clubs has more meaning to it.
It feels sad that he's left management behind while still quite young to be a suit at a Jagermeister Mixer company whose clubs have no real history and are just advertising tools.
It feels like Edu's move to oversee the forest owner's clubs has more meaning to it.
Didn't leipzig just sack their manager?
Could take that job if he fancies it.
No, but Salzburg did. Leipzig's manager lately got a bit air to breathe by beating Frankfurt twice, so he might survive their crisis. Still a much tougher job now than expected I think, as all of Leipzig, Salzburg and Liefering are struggling and the well established "conveyor belt" doesn't work any longer. Klopp has a huge task ahead as head of their total football operations, he doesn't have the time or opportunity to take over one of the failing clubs, it's just too many of them now.
Has he completely given up on football management now and decide to go into C-Suite? It would be a shame, he is still young and I'd love to see him go back into football management again.
Real Madrid in the summer for sure now
Yes, its a hard job to pass on. Personally, liverpool job got too big for him. Teetho never enjoys the pressure of needing to win every year, thats why he chose midtable and build from there and once their expect him to deliver every season, he moves on. Keeping the legend status alive, still a good MO, mind. He thrives with the underdog mentality. In real madrid job the expectation is high from day 1, its so opposite to the clubs he usually join. Lets see.
The idea that the Liverpool job got too big for him is hilariously weird. If it wasn't for Pep's robotic army he'd have cleaned up practically year after year? He reached the end of his cycle there, after many years, and was burnt out, totally normal.
Exactly. If the Liverpool job was too much, why would he join Madrid of all places?
If he's worn out already in his current role, obviously the logical choice is to join a club where he's expected to win everything every single season and will start booing him the moment things don't go flawlessly.
But he didn't because Pep was in the way, so he always stayed the underdog. We will never know but according to that theory he would just have left earlier had he won more.
Proper weird to see a United fan pushing this myth.
All the time he was there, he finished second behind City a grand total of twice. Same as us.
This was my first thought too. Although it would have be different without City it’s not a given that Klopp would have won with Liverpool.
Real will be big pressure. Not sure it’s for him.
He should stick to Trivago.
There's obviously a difference we all feel between finishing 2nd but 20 points behind the leaders and finishing 2nd despite putting up 97 points. One involves zero pressure, the other is a week-in-week out slog with the team having to be perfect for 3 months of the season.
The same way people say there's no way of knowing how Klopp would have done without City, I think it can be reversed and you can ask whether the team falls apart with fatigue and injuries the season after title pushes if it's not expected to have to go against Guardiola's City (funnily enough like Arteta's Arsenal have also done this year). Maybe in a more normal set of circumstances, with greater room to rotate, I don't think it's certain that we only have the three title races under Klopp.
But those are the breaks and it's not Klopp's fault or to his discredit he had to face a league behemoth, just like it would be silly to say Ferguson couldn't handle it because he couldn't lay a glove on Pep's Barcelona when it came to the crunch in the Champions League.
Hilarious take that. Won the league at Dortmund in 2011 and 2012 yet stayed until 2015. Won the CL in 2019 and league in 2020 at Liverpool yet stayed until 2024.
It would of been fecking great if he had of come to United.
We were happy with LVG finishing 4th, when Klopp left Dortmund. If we were a proactive club, we could have had an agreement for him to take over the following season.
I don’t buy the Disney land crap he spouted as Liverpool were in a worse position than us when he took over.
We were never competing with City in either of those 2nd place finishes, it's not really a sensible comparison. I don't want to defend Klopp, but people talk some absolute waffle at times.
But neither win made his team the favourite to win it again the next time. He always stayed at the underdog.
The post I replied to referenced "expectation to win things". I don't think Liverpool fans expected him to win the league again in 2021 but after 2019 and 2020 he had the expectation every season to challenge on all four fronts and at least win some silverware.
Might've been different in Germany because of Bayern's presence.
If we're doing "if it wasn't for Pep and City", then the team second to them would have won the league. Does he want bigger imaginary trophies for winning these imaginary titles by more points? How would he have "cleaned up year after year" if he only even managed second twice?
The Sky narrative of the "Pep vs Klopp era" has been taken hook, line and sinker by a lot of people.
Yes, and a lovely parade please.