Jurgen Klopp Is Wrong, Liverpool FC Has No ‘Ceiling’ But Newcastle United Did

Liverpool FC manager Jurgen Klopp is no stranger to the passive-aggressive jibe about an opponent.

Through trademark gritted teeth and sarcastic tone, he’s fond of the barbed comment dressed up as fact.

But in the pre-match press conference for the game against Manchester City, the German was almost theatrical in trotting out a well-worn complaint about rivals’ spending power.

To a relatively innocuous question about whether Liverpool could “compete” with the Mancunians Klopp replied: “City won’t like it, nobody will like it, but you know the answer. What does Liverpool do? We cannot act like them. It’s not possible, not possible.”

“Nobody can compete with City. You have the best team in the world and you put in the best striker on the market. No matter what it costs, you just do it.”

Clearly wanting to press home his point about finances, Klopp roped in the other two clubs known for their vast resources Paris Saint-Germain and Newcastle United.

“It’s just clear: there are three clubs in world football who can do what they want financially. It’s legal, everything is fine, but they can do whatever they want. Competing with them? It’s not possible to deal with that,” he added.

Most curiously he then preceded to reference a comment by Newcastle United sporting director Dan Ashworth that there was “no ceiling for the club.”

“He’s absolutely right. There’s no ceiling for Newcastle,” Klopp said, adding sarcastically “congratulations – some clubs have ceilings.”

It’s not the first time Klopp has taken aim at the club, who finished 43 points behind the Reds last season, in somewhat strange circumstances.

As Liverpool FC was still recovering reputationally from being one of the driving forces behind the ill-fated European Super League, the German bizarrely compared the debacle to Newcastle United being taken over by the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund [PIF].

“With the Super League, the whole world was justifiably upset about it. It’s basically like the Super League now – just for one club. Newcastle is guaranteed to play a dominant role in world football for the next 20 or 30 years,” he said.

Klopp appears to be more preoccupied with commenting on finances than any other Premier League manager, the question is why?

Where’s Liverpool’s ‘ceiling?’

The strangest part of Klopp’s ‘ceiling’ comment seemed to be the suggestion that Liverpool somehow had limits that were restricting its ambition.

Reaching the Champions League Final last season and challenging for an unprecedented quadruple until the last minutes of the campaign is pretty much the opposite of having a barrier to what a club can achieve.

Subsequently strengthening that squad with a record-breaking $95 million striker and making your 30-year-old star player the highest-paid employee in the club’s history, with a $60 million contract, are also not the actions of a club with a ceiling.

Liverpool did let Sadio Mane depart this summer, but the economic case for any club, regardless of resources, spending more than $100 million on contract renewals for stars in their thirties is hardly a strong one.

Five years ago it might have been possible to argue Liverpool had a ceiling when Phillip Coutinho left to join Barcelona feeling he couldn’t do what he wanted at Anfield.

But today it’s simply not true and history shows us wealthy new challengers can be a good thing for elite sides like Liverpool.

A ‘Big Two’ to a ‘Big Six’

While it would be wrong to argue that heavy investment or the presence of a wealthy benefactor is bad for a club, it is totally incorrect to suggest it guarantees lofty ambitions.

For example, since Chelsea was taken over by billionaire Roman Abramovich in 2003, it has been the Premier League’s biggest spender in seven of the subsequent 19 seasons.

The noticeable thing about this investment is that it hasn’t resulted in Chelsea dominating the division. Five titles have been achieved, but sporadically, nothing like Manchester United’s sustained success of the 90s or Liverpool’s in the 80s.

With well over a billion dollars spent, Manchester United has also matched rivals Manchester City’s outlay over the past decade. But as is often highlighted the club has no title in that time and has rarely mounted a sustained challenge.

On the other hand, Manchester City, who’ve topped the spending charts six times, since its 2008 takeover by the Abu Dhabi Group, has earned six titles four of which came in the last five years.

But if investment capability or money spent always resulted in success then Chelsea and City would have monopolized the division.

In fact, the emergence of these two new powers did not lower the ceilings of any of the traditional giants, if anything the greater depth of competition has benefited the league overall.

Before the investment in Chelsea, the Premier League had a ‘Big Two’ Arsenal and Manchester United.

When the West Londoners began splashing the cash in the early 2000s Arsene Wenger, who’d just led his side on an unprecedented unbeaten run expressed concern: “It is very difficult for any club to cope with that kind of competition when there is financially no logic between what comes in and what goes out,” he feared.

Ultimately, however, Chelsea’s cash-boosted rise to the top table of the Premier League did not destroy the competition.

What happened was the number of teams challenging at the top expanded, largely thanks to increases in Champions League revenue, Chelsea and Liverpool made it a ‘Big Four.’

Fears were raised once again when Manchester City was purchased in 2008 and supercharged its spending to join the elite as soon as possible.

The result, again, was an expansion of the most powerful teams, Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester City made it a ‘Big Six.’

Newcastle United and the real ceiling

At the top of the league, competition has not suffered from the investment, arguably it’s improved.

No side has held the title for three consecutive years since Manchester United did between 2007 and 2010. While the two back-to-back titles achieved by Manchester City in the past five years have both been earned by single points.

Spurs and Liverpool, neither of whom have been bought by billionaires, emerged as challengers for the title during that time and famously Leicester City lifted the crown.

The ‘ceiling’ that emerged in this period was not for clubs like Liverpool, whose revenues had been raised by the Champions League in the noughties, it was for teams like Newcastle United.

Until it was bought by PIF, Newcastle could not really have any hope of joining the elite, the gap in revenue and on-pitch investment was too big.

If they produced a talented player, like Andy Carroll or Yohan Cabaye, wealthier clubs with bigger ambitions hoovered them up.

Fans of sides like Newcastle may have held wild dreams that they could replicate the Leicester miracle of 2016-17 and win the title but the brutal truth is the ‘Big Six’ has held a monopoly on the Champions League places for the past decade.

So when it comes to ‘ceilings’ Jurgen Klopp should welcome Newcastle United’s burgeoning ambition, history shows the disruption caused by investment in a club outside the established elite has been beneficial.