Topic: Comolli and Bruckner leave by mutual consent

[rafathegaffa83]

It's one thing failing at Barca with that squad, but another here right now. The players listed as failures for Beguiristain are good players and the cultural issues arguably played a big role.

Well noted. Players of the ilk of those that "failed" at Barcelona would be good enough to reach our primary goal of earning a CL spot.

[BEAST]

Yeah "failing at Barca" and "failing" are two different things since it could just be that you didn't adapt to their system but are still a good footballer.

So if the plan is to go young - what the fuck was the Downing transfer about?  20m for a 27 year old of his stature obviously wasn't part of the plan.

Who is going to be this summers Oxlade-Chamberlain?

[Gnurglan]

Today's Sunday Times says FSG spoke to Johan Cruyff this week and he recommended Txiki Begiristain for the DoF position. Also says we'll have a transfer budget of £20m-30m, with recruitment focused on under-21s.

Article by Duncan Castles.

I believe the 20-30M is accurate. It's rare that we spend as much as we did last summer. I'd be very surprised if we went for U21s. At least if we spend the big money on them. Never expected Cruyff to come to LFC and I don't see a real need to get Begiristain for DoF.

[thekitkatshuffler]

If the plan remains the same as last year and we want someone young and British, then I'd go for Walcott.

[rocco]

Our net spend over 3 transfer windows is around £12-13m per window average , so I was expecting we might have a more cash in the bank to spend , that's if we're spending our profits ?

[rafathegaffa83]

Our net spend over 3 transfer windows is around £12-13m per window average , so I was expecting we might have a more cash in the bank to spend , that's if we're spending our profits ?

Wages probably eat up a significant portion of our revenue.

[CraigDS]

Our net spend over 3 transfer windows is around £12-13m per window average , so I was expecting we might have a more cash in the bank to spend , that's if we're spending our profits ?

We don't make much profit so not sure where the cash in the bank will of come from.

[SenorGarcia]

If the plan remains the same as last year and we want someone young and British, then I'd go for Walcott.

1. Why would Arsenal sell him to us?
2. Surely the Americans have made it clear that last year's plan failed?
3. Hell no.

[rocco]

We don't make much profit so not sure where the cash in the bank will of come from.

thought we were making around £30m ?
Suppose that was with champions league money ?
Wasn't that around the figure we were paying interest under G+H

[thekitkatshuffler]

1. Why would Arsenal sell him to us?
2. Surely the Americans have made it clear that last year's plan failed?
3. Hell no.

1. Last year of his contract.
2. The American owners haven't made it clear the plan failed.  They made it clear that the implementation of the plan failed.
3. Liverpool fan, in the best form of his life.  Hell yes.

[eirwen]

I'd like us to aim a bit higher than Walcott.

[montysmum]

I would be disappointed if we only went for U21's or spent only £20-30m.

By the look of things we are going to finish below 5th, and if the owners would have been disappointed with not getting a CL spec this season, I doubt they are going to feel any happier about it next.

Buying U21's solely, or spending minimum amounts are not going to get the improvements they (and we) want.

While our performances on the pitch have not been too bad, our inability to put the ball in the net on any consistent basis has cost us dearly, and our lack of team players who can threaten the goal strongly has been evident.

To get players to enable us to do that and make a threat on the prem top spots is not going to come cheap, and I do not think looking for kids with talent is going to do it either.

[eirwen]

30m plus sales is not that bad really. How many clubs spend more anyway? Probably just City and Chelsea, and we don't have those kind of owners.

[MolbyLovesGravy]

Hey it took 100 pages or so, but now we have another stealth transfer thread...
Good job boys...
You know Comolli is back in France. I wonder what match he is wtching...

[filopastry]

I'm not really sure why we would expect a net spend over that range in the absence of CL football, to be honest that's a pretty decent net spend given where we are right now, and if we can manage that you'd have to say credit where its due to Ayre for the work that's been done on the commercial side of the business

[Il Capitano]

If the plan remains the same as last year and we want someone young and British, then I'd go for Walcott.

 

Good one.

[rocco]

30m plus sales is not that bad really. How many clubs spend more anyway? Probably just City and Chelsea, and we don't have those kind of owners.

I'd very happy with 30m plus sales but can't see much from sales this summer window

[No666]

thought we were making around £30m ?

Wasn't that around the figure we were paying interest under G+H

30-35 profit, wasn't it? Which is why the figure of 20m should raise an eyebrow. Al555 said it for me, too:

People who would recognise the pretty limitless potential of LFC and put in the place the funding required to realise that potential. People with the vision and bottle to speculate to accumulate. To run the Club as a World famous Icon and not run it like a corner shop, with the money in the till dictating what stock you buy.

FSG seem to be the American Doug Ellis more interested in being cautious and financially prudent than actually understanding what has fallen into their lap and the potential it has.

& what Al's suggesting does NOT require spraying money about witlessly. After all the objection to Hicks and Gillett was not debt per se, but that we were in deep debt simply because of a leveraged buy-out. Yet prudence to the point of fearfulness will only return us to the stagnation of the Moores era.

[rocco]

30-35 profit, wasn't it? Which is why the figure of 20m should raise an eyebrow. Al555 said it for me, too:

& what Al's suggesting does NOT require spraying money about witlessly. After all the objection to Hicks and Gillett was not debt per se, but that we were in deep debt simply because of a leveraged buy-out. Yet prudence to the point of fearfulness will only return us to the stagnation of the Moores era.

But were we making 30-35m with champions league money ?

So can't see us making any were near that now ?

[SportBilly]

I would be disappointed if we only went for U21's or spent only £20-30m.

By the look of things we are going to finish below 5th, and if the owners would have been disappointed with not getting a CL spec this season, I doubt they are going to feel any happier about it next.

Buying U21's solely, or spending minimum amounts are not going to get the improvements they (and we) want.

While our performances on the pitch have not been too bad, our inability to put the ball in the net on any consistent basis has cost us dearly, and our lack of team players who can threaten the goal strongly has been evident.

To get players to enable us to do that and make a threat on the prem top spots is not going to come cheap, and I do not think looking for kids with talent is going to do it either.

My take on it is that when the Yanks came in, the world and his dog knew we had a ton of cash to spend and we got fucked over when it suddenly became a Sellers' Market where LFC were concerned. I'd imagine they're likely to make it look like we're not going to spend big to give us more bargaining power this Summer. Fingers crossed anyway 

[Socrates7]

But were we making 30-35m with champions league money ?

So can't see us making any were near that now ?

Lack of champions league is surely compensated by improved shirt sponsor and kit deals.

[filopastry]

My take on it is that when the Yanks came in, the world and his dog knew we had a ton of cash to spend and we got fucked over when it suddenly became a Sellers' Market where LFC were concerned. I'd imagine they're likely to make it look like we're not going to spend big to give us more bargaining power this Summer. Fingers crossed anyway 

I know everyone wants to think there's some big pot of cash to spend, and if it doesn't work out there'll be a big pot again next summer, and every summer until we get it right, but the owners have been pretty clear time and again that they're not here to support "deficit spending" we'll be able to spend what we earn and that's pretty much it, it's what nearly every other team in the league is doing as well with a small number of obvious exceptions.

We'll almost certainly have a decent but not spectacular budget, and we'll just need to make sure we spend it a lot more wisely than we have in recent windows.

FFP if enforced restricts their ability to indulge in spending cash we don't generate anyway, if its not enforced then the owners probably won't be here for long.

[paddypower]

£30m profit

At our most profitable ever we havn't even got close to that.

[Harinder]

People who would recognise the pretty limitless potential of LFC and put in the place the funding required to realise that potential. People with the vision and bottle to speculate to accumulate. To run the Club as a World famous Icon and not run it like a corner shop, with the money in the till dictating what stock you buy.

FSG seem to be the American Doug Ellis more interested in being cautious and financially prudent than actually understanding what has fallen into their lap and the potential it has.

Hi. I may be pointing out the obvious but every large organisation I know does actually use the profits earned to dictate what they do for the future. That profit is also known as the money in the till that gets banked.

I'm sure you don't mean this but the way the above came across is almost as if you want FSG to do an Abramovich money wise? I say this because of the speculate to accumulate aspect. Chelsea did this way back when and hoovered up anything that moved (Duff, Parker, Sidwell just off the top of my head).

I get what you are saying potential wise due to the history and iconic nature of our club. What I'm not feeling is a bankrolling of a boom and possible bust. Doug Ellis is the worst comparison to really place against FSG. Doug would simply have sat on the monies and done fuck all with it. I don't see FSG like that. The ruthlessness and message I see from getting shot of Commoli underlines more of a tone that will go for successes.

This summer will be another interesting one. FSG seem to think they've not got what they want from the considered direction they want our club to go in. In business terms, if seems this is a hole to fix and it will be one they can chose to operate out of (allow revenue alone to fix it which would be long term) or patch and move on (throw money at it now).

I think personally it will be a mix of the two. The only way I can see Commoli having not got a pay off is if he was performance managed out of the role in HR terms or due to considered reorganisation of the business the role was no longer required. From all information thus far it wasn't the latter. IF the former was a consideration then Commoli would have known he was being performance managed against set metrics. Thus I believe he was paid off (I honestly don't know if he was btw... I can only speculate). The QED therefore would be they will be looking to spend to get what they want and then push profit into club acquisitions.

This figure The Times is banding around is not one I can trust. They can "believe" what they want 

[CraigDS]

We weren't making 30m+ under G&H with that being wiped out by the debt repayments. H&G were having to rollover a lot of the debt repayments (or cover some themselves) as the club wasn't making enough to pay for them.

I don't have the accounts infront of me at the moment but even with a good CL run we weren't making that much of a profit.

[The G in Gerrard]

FSG seem to be the American Doug Ellis more interested in being cautious and financially prudent than actually understanding what has fallen into their lap and the potential it has.

What? They are? Damn them to hell

[SportBilly]

I know everyone wants to think there's some big pot of cash to spend, and if it doesn't work out there'll be a big pot again next summer, and every summer until we get it right, but the owners have been pretty clear time and again that they're not here to support "deficit spending" we'll be able to spend what we earn and that's pretty much it, it's what nearly every other team in the league is doing as well with a small number of obvious exceptions.

We'll almost certainly have a decent but not spectacular budget, and we'll just need to make sure we spend it a lot more wisely than we have in recent windows.

FFP if enforced restricts their ability to indulge in spending cash we don't generate anyway, if its not enforced then the owners probably won't be here for long.

I agree - at least with the money thing. I don't think we'll see the same kind of spending we saw when FSG first came along for a long time to come. My point is that if you're going to enter into serious negotiations, you don't want everyone thinking you're loaded, whether you are or not. If it ended up being speculated that we've got 30 million to spend, I'd guess that means we've got 40m for example. Saying publicly that you're not going to splash the cash gives you the power to splash it - even just once - when the right deal is there.

[eirwen]

Lack of champions league is surely compensated by improved shirt sponsor and kit deals.

How? That's not even close.

[CraigDS]

People who would recognise the pretty limitless potential of LFC and put in the place the funding required to realise that potential. People with the vision and bottle to speculate to accumulate. To run the Club as a World famous Icon and not run it like a corner shop, with the money in the till dictating what stock you buy.

FSG seem to be the American Doug Ellis more interested in being cautious and financially prudent than actually understanding what has fallen into their lap and the potential it has.

It's not only that is needed - that doesn't always get you instant success (see Man City) and doesn't always lead to continued success (see Chelsea).

What is needed is a solid management team who can use their business knowledge to take advantage of our limitless potential, which would need investment clearly, but not on any sort of (dangerous) grand scale.

[vagabond]

I think it's important to note that this season much of our poor form has coincided with the fallout from the Suarez affair. I think this current squad is good enough to push for at least top 6 and doesn't really need more than two or three well considered players to muscle into the cl fight. In all the doom let us not forget that we have played some quality football this season, our defense is already one of the best and the middle crux of lucas, gerrard and suarez is yet to play a prolonged period together.
While I mentioned above that I wouldn't trust the figures being conjured by journalists, the money from aquilani (oh the despair!), joe cole, kuyt etc plus 20m should be enough to get this team purring into a well oiled engine. And then we can all enjoy kenny's smile.

[rocco]

How? That's not even close.

must be worth £10-15m extra a year ? Plus didn't Ian say theirs the potential to double that with us taking a slice of profits from jersey sales that adidas kept to Adidas ?

[CraigDS]

Lack of champions league is surely compensated by improved shirt sponsor and kit deals.

That just maintains the revenue though not increase it, so doesn't really help as weren't making a decent profit with the CL money.

And to be honest he shirt deal and sponsorship only add an extra £20-25m is a year to it which isn't that close to what the CL brings in.

[Gnurglan]

I think it's important to note that this season much of our poor form has coincided with the fallout from the Suarez affair. I think this current squad is good enough to push for at least top 6 and doesn't really need more than two or three well considered players to muscle into the cl fight. In all the doom let us not forget that we have played some quality football this season, our defense is already one of the best and the middle crux of lucas, gerrard and suarez is yet to play a prolonged period together.
While I mentioned above that I wouldn't trust the figures being conjured by journalists, the money from aquilani (oh the despair!), joe cole, kuyt etc plus 20m should be enough to get this team purring into a well oiled engine. And then we can all enjoy kenny's smile.

Maybe we have more quality tyan we have seen, but this is the third year in a row that we are 6-8th, so I think we need to acknowledge that we have some distance to go. We have at least six teams who are better than us. That's clear. If we accept that, our chances to improve will be greater.

Last summer we made a big thing of Comolli and our new approach and it's not worked. That's why Comolli got sacked. And I believe our poor return in the transfer market, paired with the loss of quality players in recent years, has put us in a very difficult position. to be honest, if we look 3-4 years ahead, I think we are in greater danger of cementing ourselves as a mid-table side than being title challengers. We don't have too many players who can bring in lots of money if we sell them. We are nowhere near a CL spot. The supposed 20-30M in transfer budget is what we can expect and we need to catch up. Means our margins for error in the transfer market are quite slim if we want to fight with the teams above us. Now look at our older players: Carra, Aurelio, Gerrard, Kuyt, Bellamy, Maxi. We will have to replace them all soon. That won't be easy. won't bring in much if we sell and expensive to replace.

We need to be very, very good over the next few windows. Very clever. Sami, Reina, Arbeloa, Gary Mac, Babbel,... those are the types of signings we need to match in terms of value for money. Every big money signing has to be a Mascherano, Torres, Suarez type of deal. Guaranteed first pick and a consistent, top level player. The effects of last summer's mistake can come back to haunt us for quite some time.

[No666]

I do remember being sat in Off The Pitch four years ago being told I was doom-mongering about Hicks and Gillett. It's made me cautious: some of you sound positively Candide-esque in your refusal to keep a watching brief.

[djschembri]

I do remember being sat in Off The Pitch four years ago being told I was doom-mongering about Hicks and Gillett. It's made me cautious: some of you sound positively Candide-esque in your refusal to keep a watching brief.

I think everyone is cautious after what happened with the previous owners.

I remember an article in the Guardian about two months after the transfer window in 2007 closed which said that Torres, Babel & co were bought using loans, and no one batted an eye lid then. We're more wary now but things aren't as bad as they were. They said they would make mistakes along the way, and that if they do, then they would correct them as soon as possible. This is exactly how I read the Comolli sacking.

I'd rather they admit they made a mistake and tried to correct as soon as possible, no matter what the financial implications may be. They took the decision early too, to give us the best possible chance of doing well in the transfer market.

It hasn't been perfect, far from it, but it's a far cry from the days of H&G.

[Stevie07]

I would be disappointed if we only went for U21's or spent only £20-30m.

By the look of things we are going to finish below 5th, and if the owners would have been disappointed with not getting a CL spec this season, I doubt they are going to feel any happier about it next.

Buying U21's solely, or spending minimum amounts are not going to get the improvements they (and we) want.

While our performances on the pitch have not been too bad, our inability to put the ball in the net on any consistent basis has cost us dearly, and our lack of team players who can threaten the goal strongly has been evident.

To get players to enable us to do that and make a threat on the prem top spots is not going to come cheap, and I do not think looking for kids with talent is going to do it either.

I agree. Considering we need to build the squad up and improve the team, selling any of our better players to allow us to spend more doesn't make sense. To provide a budget of £20-30 million to be spent on inexperienced players and then expect Champions League football seems to be asking a bit much.

We should be doing better in the league with the players we have and we do need to be looking at getting more value in the players we sign but the size and quality of the squad still needs major improvement.

[CraigDS]

U21 could just mean we are looking to spend the money on younger players and not the 26+ age. After all the likes of Hazard are classed as U21 still.

[The G in Gerrard]

Why have we loaned out Pacheco if we are looking at youngsters and will he return?

[RideTheWalrus]

Not sure youth is the main policy, really. Afterall the only time we've played young players from the reserves and academy this year was when first teamers were injured. i.e Kelly, Flanno, Spearing, Shelvey. We've not actually dropped an available first teamer much, in replace of a young lad.

[Robert_B]

Why have we loaned out Pacheco if we are looking at youngsters and will he return?

Because he's not rated?