Liverpool FC Team Talk, Gossip, Rumours 2024/25

No, it's not a completely fair summary of my posts. You are focusing too much on one single aspect of the points I made.

It obviously is very impressive if you can have back to back wins and defend your titles. And that certainly always was something that was considered important for those great Liverpool sides. But it's not necessarily essential to be considered a great team. It's more about a period of dominance.

Ferguson's teams had those periods of dominance domestically, but they were never dominant for any period in Europe. And you are correct to mention the Barcelona side of recent times. I have been critical of the fact that they failed to defend any of their CL titles, because they certainly had the talent to do it... they fell a bit short in this regard. However considering overall how much they won in that era both domestically and in Europe, and the manner in which they did it, you would have to consider them one of the great teams.

It's also the manner in which you win. Ferguson never built any side, that was capable of doing what that Barca side did to them in those two finals. Both his 2 wins were scrappy and very close games. 2 wins in 27 years would also not be considered good enough, had he been managing either Barcelona or Real Madrid... Also a little known fact, Fergie's team that got outclassed in those two finals against Barcelona actually cost more money to assemble than the Barca teams!

Fergie had plenty of money to spend and a very strong youth system at United, so there is no reason why he couldn't have built a great side that might have been more dominant in Europe. But he didn't.

I do think Clough's forest side should be considered one of the great teams. Partly because they were such a small club, and English football was unquestionably the strongest league in Europe at that time. But I said nothing about that Barcelona side not being on their level. That is just something you've invented yourself to help make your argument look stronger than it actually is...

We've no idea which sides would win from different eras. It's practically impossible to know this. But plenty of people make lazy generalizations about different eras, which are not always supported by anything concrete. And besides, it's about the relative strength you're facing in your particular era.

When Fergie won the treble, you could make a similar argument for why he should have won more CL's with that team. There weren't really any great dominant teams around in the following few years. You had teams such as Valencia who made back to back finals, despite not having the same level of talent or money that Fergie's team had. You had teams like Leverkusen etc, who were useful but not great teams, knocking out United teams that were stacked full of world class talent. Porto and Monaco both making the final one year. So no reason why Fergie's teams should not have been good enough to make some of those finals. But his teams very often flopped at key moments in big games, and his tactics were very often found wanting in those big games too.

Your argument about the standards going up, doesn't really stack up. Should Fergie's teams standards not have been going up too? After all he is considered by many to be the greatest manager ever? If smaller clubs with smaller budgets could find a way to be highly competitive, then there is no reason why Ferguson's teams couldn't at least match their level or surpass it. It's a hollow and weak argument, rather than just admitting the obvious truth that Fergie's teams flopped in Europe at high pressure moments. And this is all part of the test for whether a team is great or not.

The famous game against Real Madrid, where Ronaldo scores a hattrick at Old Trafford. Nobody disputes that Ronaldo was an outstanding player, but what about all the talent in that United team? Fergie had comparable talent to work with, but his teams very often under-performed in key high pressure moments in Europe.

The statistics seem to suggest that the greatest team Fergie ever built, was his last team. And yet this team was comprehensively outclassed and outplayed in two CL finals against a Barcelona team that cost less to build. People will say this is an unfair assessment, because Barca's youth system La Masia produced generational talent in Messi, Xavi, Iniesta etc...

But then Fergie also had generational talent from his own youth system in that treble team, with Giggs Scholes & Beckham etc. So perhaps he should have made more of that talent?

The statistics may say his last team was the best, but for me the treble team was the real lost opportunity in his career. That team should have been more dominant in Europe after winning that treble. Roy Keane never got another opportunity to play in a CL final. Beckham never played in another final... Van Nistelrooy at the prime of his career never played in a final for United etc etc. When you've got talent like that at your disposal, you've got to be winning more in Europe. It was a big underachievement. That generation of players could and should have been more dominant.

I don't even really like being critical of the last part of Fergie's career, because for me he was past his prime as a manager and some of his players like Giggs and Scholes were well past their prime too. But yet he was still producing highly competitive teams. Which is impressive in it's own right. He made it work domestically, but I wasn't really surprised that they got outclassed in those finals. You can't really expect to rely on aging stars like Giggs and Scholes and beat teams like Barca in their prime.

But I stand by opinion. He may have produced some very good teams, that were very consistent and always highly competitive particularly in the league. But he never actually produced a truly great team. His treble team certainly had the potential to be one of the greats of their era, but they fell short in Europe. The facts strongly support my argument.

For me, Paisley did produce a truly great and dominant team. He may have had a much shorter career at the top than Fergie. But sometimes quality is more impressive than quantity. Fergie has a big trophy cabinet because of his longevity and consistency, but he still never produced a great dominant team like that Liverpool side.

I guess some of us are just more impressed by exceptional quality regardless of how long it lasts.

Quietly????, we've had a problem all season, its just getting worse each week

Hasn't really though for a while, only Thiago has been out lately, it's really been the poor form of both Henderson and Fabinho that's killing us. Surely Curtis or Ox could play some role, I'd trust Ox to put the effort in, unfortunately I think Kieta can't be trusted to put in the effort. I'd rather have lads putting in the effort even if playing poorly than a lad not being bothered like Kieta. Could we look at someone else in midfield, maybe try Tsimikas or Firmino, I dunno, options are severly limited. I definitely think we should look at packing the midfield to stop teams running through us. We can't continue to keep playing the same formation and tactics as we no longer have the players to do that.

Much prefer to see the teenagers than Hendo and Milner though I do not see Elliot as a midfielder as he is not athletic enough. Would not have minded seeing Milner at right back though as TAA with Elliot ahead of him is asking for trouble. Great to see Nunez back and hoping he is through the centre, for all the abuse he has got which I don't understand, I think he will be massively important in anything we achieve in the next few years, going for a 3-1 win