FSG only have eyes for Michael Edwards to become Liverpool’s surpreme leader and usher in the post-Jurgen Klopp dawn, and he did do a pretty good job in his first stint.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!But we’ve come up with five really brilliant and totally reasonable reasons why he would actually be a terrible appointment…
He doesn’t want to go back
Quite simple really. Liverpool contacted Edwards as soon as they were aware that Klopp was leaving the club, a couple of months before the announcement, hoping he would return to provide continuity of sorts and ease the transition to a new manager. Edwards said no – citing a desire to spend more time with his family and to focus on his work with advisory firm Ludonautics.
Hog-tying and dragging someone away from their children kicking and screaming perhaps isn’t the best of new beginnings.
Control
We’re half expecting Edwards to be picking the team and doing the post-match press conferences, such is the reported control and power he’s been promised should he return to Anfield. Desperation isn’t typically a strong position from which to negotiate from, and FSG are on their knees at Edwards’ feet.
Like a sporting despot, he apparently wants ‘total control’, heading both the recruitment and analytics departments, while leading the appointment of Klopp’s successor. He is being wined and dined into becoming one of the most powerful men in football.
Rumour has it Edwards left because Klopp’s influence had increased to the point where his own opinion was superfluous. Would a similar trajectory of success for Xabi Alonso, or whomever else, result in a similar shift in the power dynamic? Or will Edwards have it written into his contract that a new boss always now play second fiddle? Managing Liverpool will surely be a harder sell if that is the case.
The end of Van Dijk and Salah
Klopp’s powerbase had expanded to the point where he was making all of the key decisions over transfers and player contracts by the time Edwards left in 2022. A reality that made Edwards uneasy, with ‘robust discussions behind the scenes about the merits and value of some new deals for older players’ reportedly playing a significant role in his exit.
Mohamed Salah’s bumper deal was a good footballing call, but contributed to a financial loss, and Liverpool may now think themselves fortunate that Sadio Mane rejected new terms to leave for Bayern Munich, while talks to extend Naby Keita’s deal should never have started.
Given Edwards’ reluctance to hand players over 30 new deals back then, astutely on the basis of the above examples, Virgil van Dijk and Salah – whose contracts expire in 2025 – may not remain at Liverpool beyond the summer, at which point they would need to be sold to avoid losing them for free a year later.
Mohamed Salah celebrates winning the League Cup with Virgil van Dijk.
Multi-club harbinger
Edwards’ appointment is neither a definite precursor to a move into multi-club ownership for FSG, nor is multi-club ownership definitely a bad thing.
But given FSG president Mike Gordon initially offered him a senior role in FSG rather than at Liverpool, along with reports that he would become ‘Head of Football Operations’, or be given a similar role under a different name suggests not only that his remit will stretch far further than deciding how much Liverpool will spend on Florian Wirtz this summer, but also which lowly outfits in Ligue 1 or La Liga may make for useful feeder clubs for FSG’s prized pig.
FSG has previously declared interest in broadening their football club portfolio, and Liverpool CEO Billy Hogan was far from categoric when asked in the summer whether they would follow Manchester City and Chelsea’s lead. “For the time being we’re focused on what Liverpool is doing,” he said.
Multi-club ownership could benefit Liverpool, and likely wouldn’t harm them, but it’s the scourge of football and shouldn’t be encouraged.
Transfer flops
Everyone is all too eager to point out Edwards’ brilliant acquisitions, including Salah, Van Dijk, Andrew Robertson, Fabinho, Alisson etc. etc., and we’re almost certain he called on a higher power to sell Christian Benteke, Mamadou Sakho and Jordon Ibe for a combined £70m. But too few people talk about his two transfer flops in seven years, the first of which boils a delightful amount Liverpudlian p*ss.
Guys, Keita was rubbish. If that guy had done what he had done in five years at Liverpool for Manchester United it would have been his name combined with the other midfielder for mocking purposes. We much prefer McKeita to Freita, if anyone’s asking.
The other one is Takumi Minamino by the way, and he definitely doesn’t actually count as they sold him for a £5m profit. Just Keita then. He was really rubbish though.
