Ameritoon Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Liverpool target Johan Cruyff for senior role By Ben Smith BBC Sport Johan Cruyff is among the names being targeted by Liverpool after Damien Comolli's departure as director of football, BBC Sport understands. Reds owners Fenway Sports Group (FSG) have yet to draw up a definitive shortlist to replace Comolli. But the Dutchman, 64, has impressed FSG chief John W Henry in his senior roles with Ajax and Chivas in Mexico. It remains to be seen if Cruyff, who currently manages the Catalan national side, would be open to the approach. I dont like the sound of that, Cruyff is a very smart man and pretty much the reason Barca are where they are today. If Liverpool got him as a DOF i wouldnt be suprised if hes a success. He's also a maniac. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7bkeqSsAD1qdoghio1_500.png Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Cruyff would be mentally too strong for KD. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Be a monumental clash of egos if nowt else? Isn't Cruyff somewhere odd at the mo? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattypnufc Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I'm sure Cruyff is back at Ajax... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacko Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I think there are parallels here with Ashley. In both cases the new owners had to hit the ground running, but were inexperienced in running a major football club, and made mistakes as a result. However, whereas Ashley got to grips with the task over time and formed a coherent strategy, I don't get the impression that the Fenway group are any further on. There are cultural as well as practical differences between running an English football club and running an American baseball team. Inevitably, the learning curve for the Americans was always going to be a longer one. They're making these confident pronoucements, but I don't think they know what they're doing and deep down they're probably wondering what they've let themselves in for. The Chairman, Tom Werner, gives the impression of being a spectator rather than a leader. Running a chain of sports shops is closer to running a football club than running a baseball club is? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 There are cultural as well as practical differences between running an English football club and running an American baseball team. Inevitably, the learning curve for the Americans was always going to be a longer one. That is true, but there is an easy answer to that - you appoint people who do know what they're doing to run the club day to day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I think there are parallels here with Ashley. In both cases the new owners had to hit the ground running, but were inexperienced in running a major football club, and made mistakes as a result. However, whereas Ashley got to grips with the task over time and formed a coherent strategy, I don't get the impression that the Fenway group are any further on. There are cultural as well as practical differences between running an English football club and running an American baseball team. Inevitably, the learning curve for the Americans was always going to be a longer one. They're making these confident pronoucements, but I don't think they know what they're doing and deep down they're probably wondering what they've let themselves in for. The Chairman, Tom Werner, gives the impression of being a spectator rather than a leader. Running a chain of sports shops is closer to running a football club than running a baseball club is? here's hoping it takes fenway as long to come to terms with it as it did ashley Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I think there are parallels here with Ashley. In both cases the new owners had to hit the ground running, but were inexperienced in running a major football club, and made mistakes as a result. However, whereas Ashley got to grips with the task over time and formed a coherent strategy, I don't get the impression that the Fenway group are any further on. There are cultural as well as practical differences between running an English football club and running an American baseball team. Inevitably, the learning curve for the Americans was always going to be a longer one. They're making these confident pronoucements, but I don't think they know what they're doing and deep down they're probably wondering what they've let themselves in for. The Chairman, Tom Werner, gives the impression of being a spectator rather than a leader. Running a chain of sports shops is closer to running a football club than running a baseball club is? It’s not easy to put your finger on it, but there are so many subtle differences between Britain and America in terms of business practice, culture, personal presentation etc – and it shows in the world of football. I’m not convinced that the Americans have got to grips with it at all. As an example, when everything was kicking off with Suarez and Evra, the owners seemed to be spectators, whereas I think an English owner would have recognised much earlier that Dalglish had got himself in a mess. I also think an English owner, even with a moderate knowledge of football, would have recognised that £35m for Carroll was too much. You could say they should delegate to people who know what they're doing, but I think the owners of a football club need to be much more hands on. There's a lot of emotion and pressure involved in football decisions and somebody needs to draw the line and keep the football people on the side of good sense - something that Ashley has done very well I'd say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wacko Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I'm with brummie on this one. The owners' job, especially if they don't have a lifetime of football experience behind them, is to bring in people who know what they're doing and let them get on with it. Every man and his dog knew that £35m was too much for Carroll. Fenway have said that all they cared about was bringing in a replacement for Torres, and that the cost was passed onto Chelsea in Torres's transfer fee. Still a lot of money down the drain, but I can imagine Torres would have gone for £35m if Ashley had asked for £20m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 There are cultural as well as practical differences between running an English football club and running an American baseball team. Inevitably, the learning curve for the Americans was always going to be a longer one. That is true, but there is an easy answer to that - you appoint people who do know what they're doing to run the club day to day. You make it sound like that is the easiest thing in the world. It's not, as we know from personal, bitter experience, and Liverpool have also just found out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 The Carroll fee was too much to turn down, but I'm not so sure if it was that much too much to pay. At the time you were talking about the most exciting young English player in the league, a lad who could dominate any defender and was pretty much unplayable on his day. In hindsight it looks mental for Liverpool to have paid that, but at the time it was probably only a bit over what would normally have been needed to get him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 The Carroll fee was too much to turn down, but I'm not so sure if it was that much too much to pay. At the time you were talking about the most exciting young English player in the league, a lad who could dominate any defender and was pretty much unplayable on his day. In hindsight it looks mental for Liverpool to have paid that, but at the time it was probably only a bit over what would normally have been needed to get him. True, I was on my lunch break when all the shit about bids coming in for him came about and I was like, there is no way we're getting value if he goes for £25m, even with it being the last day of the transfer window. All the press reports at the time were valuing him at about £25m. I wouldn't have taken £30m on the day and I remember the Carroll thread was full of debates back and forth with people saying any chairman in the world would take £30m but I was just left thinking, if Carroll goes, who on earth is going to score and keep us in the league? Looking back on it and not having the Newcastle bias, he's probably a £20m player when he plays like he did for us and a £5m as he's playing for liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 The Carroll fee was too much to turn down, but I'm not so sure if it was that much too much to pay. At the time you were talking about the most exciting young English player in the league, a lad who could dominate any defender and was pretty much unplayable on his day. In hindsight it looks mental for Liverpool to have paid that, but at the time it was probably only a bit over what would normally have been needed to get him. Nah no way, it was only those who bought into this local boy bias that thought he was worth anywhere close to 35M. The difference between his form for us and how he is playing now can only point to the fact that he did well for us primarily because of the system we played, that he was limited in more ways than one (and those flaws are now being revealed when he expected to be more than just a target man) and at best was only a potential top notch striker. The more objective amongst us could see this and I myself said at that time that his market value was around the 20-25M mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Do they really believe Johan Cruyff would be even remotely interested in being their new DoF? Also, seems like their version of Moneyball is a heap of shit: http://tomkinstimes.com/2012/04/moneyball-statistics-and-damien-comolli/ I'd suggest they focus on assists provided and goals scored as meaningful statistics that correlate with games won. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Do they really believe Johan Cruyff would be even remotely interested in being their new DoF? Also, seems like their version of Moneyball is a heap of shit: http://tomkinstimes.com/2012/04/moneyball-statistics-and-damien-comolli/ I'd suggest they focus on assists provided and goals scored as meaningful statistics that correlate with games won. Interesting. Thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I would imagine chances created and assists are the key stats. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 As much as I'd like to believe Dalglish signed all those players, I really don't think he did, not in the traditional sense anyway. He obviously had a say but I doubt he had a say in fees and wages. He hardly starts Carroll and keeps rotating the likes of Downing and Henderson. If they were HIS signings, he'd surely play them more often, especially from the start?! I personally think those players were put to Dalglish and he said "ockh aye", the fact Comolli has 'left' suggests he could be the main culprit in regards to the fees paid, wages and players identified. Dalglish saying otherwise is him saying he has absolute control. It will be interesting to see who they now buy without their 'DOF' and what kind of players too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucaAltieri Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 As much as I'd like to believe Dalglish signed all those players, I really don't think he did, not in the traditional sense anyway. He obviously had a say but I doubt he had a say in fees and wages. He hardly starts Carroll and keeps rotating the likes of Downing and Henderson. If they were HIS signings, he'd surely play them more often, especially from the start?! I personally think those players were put to Dalglish and he said "ockh aye", the fact Comolli has 'left' suggests he could be the main culprit in regards to the fees paid, wages and players identified. Dalglish saying otherwise is him saying he has absolute control. It will be interesting to see who they now buy without their 'DOF' and what kind of players too. Ian Rush, I imagine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 As much as I'd like to believe Dalglish signed all those players, I really don't think he did, not in the traditional sense anyway. He obviously had a say but I doubt he had a say in fees and wages. He hardly starts Carroll and keeps rotating the likes of Downing and Henderson. If they were HIS signings, he'd surely play them more often, especially from the start?! I personally think those players were put to Dalglish and he said "ockh aye", the fact Comolli has 'left' suggests he could be the main culprit in regards to the fees paid, wages and players identified. Dalglish saying otherwise is him saying he has absolute control. It will be interesting to see who they now buy without their 'DOF' and what kind of players too. Isn't Comolli the one who signed about 20 midfielders for Spurs when they needed full backs and defenders? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
80 Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 As much as I'd like to believe Dalglish signed all those players, I really don't think he did, not in the traditional sense anyway. He obviously had a say but I doubt he had a say in fees and wages. He hardly starts Carroll and keeps rotating the likes of Downing and Henderson. If they were HIS signings, he'd surely play them more often, especially from the start?! I personally think those players were put to Dalglish and he said "ockh aye", the fact Comolli has 'left' suggests he could be the main culprit in regards to the fees paid, wages and players identified. Dalglish saying otherwise is him saying he has absolute control. It will be interesting to see who they now buy without their 'DOF' and what kind of players too. Isn't Comolli the one who signed about 20 midfielders for Spurs when they needed full backs and defenders? Yep, total charlatan. Was delighted when Liverpool appointed him, you can trace Spurs' rise to him leaving more than Redknapp joining them. Can well imagine he's been giving the spiel in that article. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GlenJohnson Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Hello all. I am a Liverpool fan, but I enjoy making fun of Liverpool fans more than anyone else. My trolling successes on RAWK are testament to this. I hope to come on here more often with any findings of my mine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Hello all. I am a Liverpool fan, but I enjoy making fun of Liverpool fans more than anyone else. My trolling successes on RAWK are testament to this. I hope to come on here more often with any findings of my mine. You'll fit in very well in this forum Welcome onboard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VegasToon Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Hello all. I am a Liverpool fan, but I enjoy making fun of Liverpool fans more than anyone else. My trolling successes on RAWK are testament to this. I hope to come on here more often with any findings of my mine. Mike? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishmael Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 So, we're all Liverpool fans for the day. All clear on that? http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01799/dalglish_1799754c.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now