Rafa Benitez or Kenny Dalglish.

Kuled wrote:Fergie didn't spend over 100 Million in his first year.

Scouser_Dave wrote:Has to be Kenny for me. His style is more suited to how we play. Rafa will probably end up at Villa or City next season.

Alan wrote:

Kuled wrote:Fergie didn't spend over 100 Million in his first year.

He spent big money back then.

1987 Viv Anderson Arsenal 250.000
Brian McClair Celtic 850.000
Steve Bruce Norwich 825.000

1988
Jim Leighton Aberdeen 750.000
Lee Sharpe Torquay 180.000
Mal Donaghy Luton Town 650.000
Ralph Mine Bristol City 170.000
Mark Hughes Barcelona 1.800.000
Giuliano Mairoana Histon 30.000

1989
Mike Phelan Norwich 750.000
Gary Pallister Middlesbrough 2.300.000
Neill Web Nott. Forest 1.500.000
Brian Carey Corke 100.000
Danny Wallace Southampton 1.200.000
Paul Ince West Ham 1.500.000

1990
Denis Irwin Oldham 625.000
Les Sealey Luton Town Free
Neil Withworth Wigan 150.000

1991
Andrei Kanchelskis Donetsk 650.000
Peter Schmeichel Bröndby 550.000
Paul Parker QPR 2.000.000

1992
Dion Dublin Cambridge 1.000.000
Pat McGibbon Portadown 100.000
Eric Cantona Leeds Utd. 1.200.000

Mark Hughes was signed for 1.8 million and that was a club record for Manchester United at the time and very close to being as much as the british transfer record at the time.

When Fergie bought Pallister for 2.3 million that was national record for a defender at the time, as well as being the highest fee between British clubs and the second highest fee to be paid by a British club – second only to Ian Rush's return to Liverpool from Juventus a year earlier.

So 2.3 million was big money back then and that was a few quid he spent back when he first took over at United. And im not saying Dalglish is going to get anywhere near Fergie, and im not saying Dalglish is going to be the man to get Liverpool back into the top 4 and be succesful in the long run. But Fergie spent big cash but he got more than one full season to turn things around and after 3 years at United lots of fans wanted him to be sacked after he had finished 11th and 13th in 2 of his first 3 full seasons at United.

In 1989, Michael Knighton made a takeover bid of £20 million for Manchester United. At the time, this was a record figure for a British football club and the offer was accepted by chief executive Martin Edwards.^[2] Knighton promised to invest £10 million in the team's stadium, Old Trafford, as well as re-establish the club as England's top side.

That shows how big 20 million quid was back then, you could have bought Manchester United for 20 million back then.

Scouser_Dave wrote:Has to be Kenny for me. His style is more suited to how we play. Rafa will probably end up at Villa or City next season.

moscowmadeit3 wrote:But then look at those signings and it was good business.
Mark Hughes, Pallister and Cantona (plus a few others there) were instrumental in premiership and fa cup winning sides.

Glen Damon wrote:

moscowmadeit3 wrote:But then look at those signings and it was good business.
Mark Hughes, Pallister and Cantona (plus a few others there) were instrumental in premiership and fa cup winning sides.

So you're saying that buying the new Alan Shearer, the best attacking header of the ball in world football, for 35 million is not good business?
You're saying that buying Jordan Henderson, the best young English midfielder and the most "Liverpool" player of all time, for 16 million is not good business?
You're saying that buying Stewart Downing, the best crosser of the ball in the Premier League, for 20 million, is not good business?
You're saying that buying Charlie Adam, the man that nearly singlehandedly saved Blackpool last season, the man that Ian Holloway himself said is on par with Xabi Alonso, for just 8 million is bad business?

Please, the bias in this thread is sickening. Absolutely revolting.

Glen Damon wrote:

moscowmadeit3 wrote:But then look at those signings and it was good business.
Mark Hughes, Pallister and Cantona (plus a few others there) were instrumental in premiership and fa cup winning sides.

So you're saying that buying the new Alan Shearer, the best attacking header of the ball in world football, for 35 million is not good business?
You're saying that buying Jordan Henderson, the best young English midfielder and the most "Liverpool" player of all time, for 16 million is not good business?
You're saying that buying Stewart Downing, the best crosser of the ball in the Premier League, for 20 million, is not good business?
You're saying that buying Charlie Adam, the man that nearly singlehandedly saved Blackpool last season, the man that Ian Holloway himself said is on par with Xabi Alonso, for just 8 million is bad business?

Please, the bias in this thread is sickening. Absolutely revolting.

Rick Rosstrich wrote:

Alan wrote:He spent big money back then.

1987 Viv Anderson Arsenal 250.000
Brian McClair Celtic 850.000
Steve Bruce Norwich 825.000

1988
Jim Leighton Aberdeen 750.000
Lee Sharpe Torquay 180.000
Mal Donaghy Luton Town 650.000
Ralph Mine Bristol City 170.000
Mark Hughes Barcelona 1.800.000
Giuliano Mairoana Histon 30.000

1989
Mike Phelan Norwich 750.000
Gary Pallister Middlesbrough 2.300.000
Neill Web Nott. Forest 1.500.000
Brian Carey Corke 100.000
Danny Wallace Southampton 1.200.000
Paul Ince West Ham 1.500.000

1990
Denis Irwin Oldham 625.000
Les Sealey Luton Town Free
Neil Withworth Wigan 150.000

1991
Andrei Kanchelskis Donetsk 650.000
Peter Schmeichel Bröndby 550.000
Paul Parker QPR 2.000.000

1992
Dion Dublin Cambridge 1.000.000
Pat McGibbon Portadown 100.000
Eric Cantona Leeds Utd. 1.200.000

Mark Hughes was signed for 1.8 million and that was a club record for Manchester United at the time and very close to being as much as the british transfer record at the time.

When Fergie bought Pallister for 2.3 million that was national record for a defender at the time, as well as being the highest fee between British clubs and the second highest fee to be paid by a British club – second only to Ian Rush's return to Liverpool from Juventus a year earlier.

So 2.3 million was big money back then and that was a few quid he spent back when he first took over at United. And im not saying Dalglish is going to get anywhere near Fergie, and im not saying Dalglish is going to be the man to get Liverpool back into the top 4 and be succesful in the long run. But Fergie spent big cash but he got more than one full season to turn things around and after 3 years at United lots of fans wanted him to be sacked after he had finished 11th and 13th in 2 of his first 3 full seasons at United.

In 1989, Michael Knighton made a takeover bid of £20 million for Manchester United. At the time, this was a record figure for a British football club and the offer was accepted by chief executive Martin Edwards.^[2] Knighton promised to invest £10 million in the team's stadium, Old Trafford, as well as re-establish the club as England's top side.

That shows how big 20 million quid was back then, you could have bought Manchester United for 20 million back then.

But money isn't why Fergie is such a great manager... Manchester United had a shit squad when Fergie took over too, Liverpool had a fairly decent one when Dalglish took over but he just added to it with shit. He should be sacked for the Carroll purchase alone.

Cadbury wrote:Tough one.

Problem is, I appreciate Rafa more because I witnessed what he'd done. If I was a little bit older and could remember Kenny's best years, then I think I'd vote him. But I can't, so I'm voting Rafa. Though I shouldn't, because Kenny's arguebly done more for us than Rafa.

No doubt the older generation such as Liverpoolfc for Ever, will vote Kenny.