Roy Hodgson

People must remember that in sport, anything is possible. 6 months ago, would anybody have predicted that Dalglish would be managing Liverpool?

What Liverpool have is BIG name and a illustrious past/history. Right now, that's all they have going for them. They need to capitalise on that and get the best manager they can, harping on about the point that they want to get back to where they were in the 80's.

I would never rule out a top class manager going to Liverpool, though if that happens, he would probably need assurances that he will free reign on how he wants to manage, without any interference. At some point in his career, Mourinho may well manage Liverpool (a big name club, currently going through a rough patch).

The problem with LFC is that they seem content to bring in second rate managers, who perform average/poorly. They will get 6-12 months and then be told to leave. This cycle of bringing in an average manager and then sacking him only takes Liverpool backwards.

Out of the all managers Liverpool have had, I would say that only Benitez had some good credentials coming in. The rest have been 2nd rate managers who would not have got the job of managing Arsenal or Man Utd. Now there is talk of Coyle...I mean give me a break. They may as well bring back Hodgson. Or at least offer Ancelotti the job.

If LFC can somehow persuade a top class manager to join on a long term deal (where they stick with him through thick and thin), they can build and create some form a legacy...just like Arsenal and Man Utd have done. Hell, when LFC were dominating, they also had a long term manager in place.

For me, I can only see Martin O'Neil who would stay for a minimum of 5 years, to create something big. All the other names mentioned either won't want to stay for long, or will be sacked.
 
The problem with LFC is that they seem content to bring in second rate managers, who perform average/poorly. They will get 6-12 months and then be told to leave. This cycle of bringing in an average manager and then sacking him only takes Liverpool backwards.

:confused:

You make it sound like we're continually hiring and firing managers. Hodgson was only our 5th manager in the last 20 years.

As for the rest of your post; of course we will be looking to bring in a top class manager but that manager will not be Mourinho. He wouldn't come here and we wouldn't want him.

edit: and O'Neill won't be appointed either. I ****ing hope not anyway.
 
I think he said that he would never manage Liverpool under the previous owners, but there's still no reason for him to come to us now.

Nah read this, unless he was referring to the owners but i dont believe so.

He said: “Manchester United would be a great challenge for me. But Liverpool is not the club for me. I know why, but I cannot tell you.

“Tottenham, Everton... Arsenal maybe. These are all fine clubs with very good managers.

“You can dream of what happens in one, two, three or four years. Who knows? I cannot say, but I think you have an idea of what I think about.

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/new...-even-Tottenham-or-Everton-article562971.html

**** source but doubt they'd make it up since it isn't transfer garbage.
 
Out of the all managers Liverpool have had, I would say that only Benitez had some good credentials coming in. The rest have been 2nd rate managers who would not have got the job of managing Arsenal or Man Utd. Now there is talk of Coyle...I mean give me a break. They may as well bring back Hodgson. Or at least offer Ancelotti the job.

If LFC can somehow persuade a top class manager to join on a long term deal (where they stick with him through thick and thin), they can build and create some form a legacy...just like Arsenal and Man Utd have done. Hell, when LFC were dominating, they also had a long term manager in place..

So many errors.

2nd rate managers who wouldn't get a job at Arsenal or Manu?

Remind me again how great Fergie was before united and I'd bet you had never heard of wenger. I remember full well the press laughing at this unheard of manager going to highbury. Neither had fantastic pedigree to take on such huge clubs.

"Hell, when LFC were dominating, they also had a long term manager in place"

Long term? Daglish left when they were still dominating and he was hardly there long term.

You need to get over this Mourinho facination, he won't go anywhere without having a mage wage packet and funds to do as he pleases. Then you bang on about stability and long term management, then you bang on about mourihno. A man who has already said he would like the united job and then manage portugal. If you want long term you don't hire jose.

You bring him in, give him 100 million to spend and watch him build a team and leave to go onto the next project when money runs dry.

City is up joses alley, not liverpool.
 
Nah read this, unless he was referring to the owners but i dont believe so.



http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/new...-even-Tottenham-or-Everton-article562971.html

**** source but doubt they'd make it up since it isn't transfer garbage.

IINM, his agent claimed those quotes were rubbish. He doesn't need to say anything to know he won't come here though, just look at his past 3 jobs. He'll join whoever in the best short-term position to be successful and then **** off/be sacked after a few years.
 
People must remember that in sport, anything is possible. 6 months ago, would anybody have predicted that Dalglish would be managing Liverpool?

Well most Liverpool fans were asking for Kenny six months ago, so quite a lot of people would have predicted it...

The problem with LFC is that they seem content to bring in second rate managers, who perform average/poorly. They will get 6-12 months and then be told to leave. This cycle of bringing in an average manager and then sacking him only takes Liverpool backwards.

Er...that happened once. Benitez and Houllier were both at the club for five years or so prior to Hodgson.

Out of the all managers Liverpool have had, I would say that only Benitez had some good credentials coming in. The rest have been 2nd rate managers who would not have got the job of managing Arsenal or Man Utd.

Houllier - former French national manager, won the French league with PSG. Pretty decent credentials. Souness won the Scottish league and League Cup a number of times each prior to coming to Liverpool, at least as good credentials as Ferguson prior to Man Utd. Aside from Roy Evans, that's a pretty good track record for past Liverpool managers.

If LFC can somehow persuade a top class manager to join on a long term deal (where they stick with him through thick and thin), they can build and create some form a legacy...just like Arsenal and Man Utd have done. Hell, when LFC were dominating, they also had a long term manager in place.

I like Arsenal and Wenger, but the only legacy they have built over the last five years is underachievement. Liverpool have been more successful over the last half a decade than Arsenal. If by legacy you mean winning things I'm not really sure why you're mentioning Arsenal.

For me, I can only see Martin O'Neil who would stay for a minimum of 5 years, to create something big. All the other names mentioned either won't want to stay for long, or will be sacked.

O'Neill's a moany, whiney little man who would fall out with the owners after a year or two, having spent millions and not hit the top four. He's fallen out with the Celtic owners, the Villa owners, the Norwich owners, and Peter Ridsdale when there was talk of him joining Leeds. I'm not saying he's a poor manager, but the likelyhood of him staying anywhere for five years plus is slim. For a club that needs stability, he would be way down my list.
 
Last edited:
So many errors.

2nd rate managers who wouldn't get a job at Arsenal or Manu?

Remind me again how great Fergie was before united and I'd bet you had never heard of wenger. I remember full well the press laughing at this unheard of manager going to highbury. Neither had fantastic pedigree to take on such huge clubs.

"Hell, when LFC were dominating, they also had a long term manager in place"

Long term? Daglish left when they were still dominating and he was hardly there long term.

You need to get over this Mourinho facination, he won't go anywhere without having a mage wage packet and funds to do as he pleases. Then you bang on about stability and long term management, then you bang on about mourihno. A man who has already said he would like the united job and then manage portugal. If you want long term you don't hire jose.

You bring him in, give him 100 million to spend and watch him build a team and leave to go onto the next project when money runs dry.

City is up joses alley, not liverpool.

Fagan wasn't there long either if i recall.

He is still the last english manager to win the league right?
 
People must remember that in sport, anything is possible. 6 months ago, would anybody have predicted that Dalglish would be managing Liverpool?

I predicted Dalglish would, unfortunately they appointed Hodgson instead. :)

Out of the all managers Liverpool have had, I would say that only Benitez had some good credentials coming in. The rest have been 2nd rate managers who would not have got the job of managing Arsenal or Man Utd.

Before anyone jumps down your throat on that, you mean recently not ever right? ;)
 
I think thats Howard Wilkinson with Leeds before they imploded. At least I think Wilkinson was in charge when they got it.

Yeah you're right actually, although i guess 70% of the titles have been won by a scotish man, not really far off english =P.
 
Not trying to wind you guys up, but what if Daglish didn't do any better then Roy?

Who's fault would it be?
 
Yours for asking stupid questions.

Had a feeling you'd say something along those lines :D :p

Rafa's, obviously. :D

haha!

While, I don't know if results will improve under Kenny, I think Liverpool will start to play "better" football if that makes sense, so I think when you lose it's easier to take if you actually played well.

Liverpool very rarely played well, or well like Liverpool under Roy.
 
Not trying to wind you guys up, but what if Daglish didn't do any better then Roy?

Who's fault would it be?

Well there are some folks who say that it wasn't roys fault , it was the squad. So if Dalglish does no better then it would be the same, the squad. If anything it would prove those people right and show it was the squad. If however Dalglish does better with the same squad then it would prove those people right who said it was Roy.
 
While, I don't know if results will improve under Kenny, I think Liverpool will start to play "better" football if that makes sense, so I think when you lose it's easier to take if you actually played well.

Liverpool very rarely played well, or well like Liverpool under Roy.

Indeed, as long as we play better and more attacking , then I am happy with whatever results. Will be interesting to see who Dalglish picks for the match , to see whether he selects konchesky or poulsen , or whether he does something totally different like selecting Wilson or Shelvey to start
 
I suspect Dalglish wouldn't have picked the team for tomorrow and I doubt will see any of Konchesky, Poulsen, Wilson or Shelvey.
 
I suspect Dalglish wouldn't have picked the team for tomorrow and I doubt will see any of Konchesky, Poulsen, Wilson or Shelvey.

I guess we will have to wait and see, he may already have in mind who he would start for the match so there is plenty of time for him to make the selection.
 
I thought Baz said he wasn't in the country? Will he be back for the game tomorrow?

I doubt he'll pick the team as Baz said, but whom ever is picking the team might just go with the same team that has been playing.

Any injury worries / suspensions for Liverpool tomorrow?
 
Back
Top Bottom