Re: Brendan Rodgers Sacked: Now at Celtic

by El Gunner Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:03 pm

Curtinho wrote:
Lex wrote:
Hapless_Hans wrote:And no, it wasn't just Suarez, Liverpool were very well coached that year. Rodgers performed fantastically that year.
Except, you know, in defence which, ultimately, led to their demise. 50 goals conceded, was it?

That's not a coaching issue it's a personnel issue, and the defence didn't 'lead to their demise' if you're referring to not winning the league. That was a slip that really crushed the confidence and swagger hey had going into the final stretch because it allowed City to close the gap.

Uhmmm. No.
Yes, you have/had shit defenders, but are you going to tell me no level of the defensive capabilities of a squad also falls on the coaching staff. I mean, if your team concedes left, right and center you have to work something out to rectify that, because simples as, no team goes on and wins the league after conceding so many goals. I know that sounds a little bit crazy as you guys almost pulled it off. But obviously you guys are going to pin it down on that Palace and Chelsea games because that was the telling point/climax of the season. Doesn't change the fact though that the season is played over 38 and most if not every one of those games are vital and play a part at your total at the end of the season. It's logical and simple mathematics (one more goal scored leads to the next point gained, just as much as one more goal conceded leads to the next point dropped - approximately, of course). And I see that as a better analysis rather than living in moments by picking out 'make or break' moments.

by DeletedUser#1 Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:35 pm

Honestly, in tears in prospect of Uncle Kloppo being our manager.

I'm all ready to fall in love with football again

by McAgger Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:58 pm

Natalie Portman wrote:Honestly, in tears in prospect of Uncle Kloppo being our manager.

I'm all ready to fall in love with football again

Feel the same way. Can't believe one piece of news completely changes your passion for something. I was dead beat in the water with football over the last 6 months.

by El Gunner Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:12 pm

inb4AlanCurbishley

by Unique Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:32 pm

Natalie Portman wrote:Honestly, in tears in prospect of Uncle Kloppo being our manager.

I'm all ready to fall in love with football again

until he loses a few games

by DeletedUser#1 Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:35 pm

Unique wrote:
Natalie Portman wrote:Honestly, in tears in prospect of Uncle Kloppo being our manager.

I'm all ready to fall in love with football again
until he loses a few games

Every manager loses games.

by windkick Mon Oct 05, 2015 7:23 pm

It's gonna be work in progress, but I expect the football itself to actually be enjoyable to watch. I mean there is nowhere to go but up at this point for L'Pool.

by RealGunner Mon Oct 05, 2015 7:24 pm

Eventhough I don't really want another strong rival for top 4, It would be great to have Klopp in the PL

by Unique Mon Oct 05, 2015 7:31 pm

if Liverpool drew every game this season 0-0 I would have said give Rodgers time. losing suarez should not mean stoke put 6 past us. the problem with Rodgers is he coached the team at the wrong end.

by Red Alert Tue Oct 06, 2015 8:51 am

Natalie Portman wrote:Honestly, in tears in prospect of Uncle Kloppo being our manager.

I'm all ready to fall in love with football again

!!!

by Red Alert Tue Oct 06, 2015 8:55 am

El Gunner wrote:
Curtinho wrote:
Lex wrote:
Except, you know, in defence which, ultimately, led to their demise. 50 goals conceded, was it?

That's not a coaching issue it's a personnel issue, and the defence didn't 'lead to their demise' if you're referring to not winning the league. That was a slip that really crushed the confidence and swagger hey had going into the final stretch because it allowed City to close the gap.

Uhmmm. No.
Yes, you have/had shit defenders, but are you going to tell me no level of the defensive capabilities of a squad also falls on the coaching staff. I mean, if your team concedes left, right and center you have to work something out to rectify that, because simples as, no team goes on and wins the league after conceding so many goals. I know that sounds a little bit crazy as you guys almost pulled it off. But obviously you guys are going to pin it down on that Palace and Chelsea games because that was the telling point/climax of the season. Doesn't change the fact though that the season is played over 38 and most if not every one of those games are vital and play a part at your total at the end of the season. It's logical and simple mathematics (one more goal scored leads to the next point gained, just as much as one more goal conceded leads to the next point dropped - approximately, of course). And I see that as a better analysis rather than living in moments by picking out 'make or break' moments.

Don't talk logic. Throwing Gerrard as the deepest man in midfield was a master piece.

As was playing with 9 men behind the ball for half the season. (And 8 when Sterling found some consistent game time) Greatest tactician EVERRRR.

by Red Alert Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:03 am

Curtinho wrote:
Lex wrote:
Hapless_Hans wrote:And no, it wasn't just Suarez, Liverpool were very well coached that year. Rodgers performed fantastically that year.
Except, you know, in defence which, ultimately, led to their demise. 50 goals conceded, was it?

That's not a coaching issue it's a personnel issue, and the defence didn't 'lead to their demise' if you're referring to not winning the league. That was a slip that really crushed the confidence and swagger hey had going into the final stretch because it allowed City to close the gap.

So Rodgers takes ALL the credit for "SAS" yet takes no blame for not knowing how to set up a team?

Gerrard in a post game presser said it himself:

The tactic was to defend and let "SAS" do THEIR thing. There was no tactical wonders in display. Just two simply brilliant players taking advantage of a league that was weakened moving into the new era. (SAF retiring, Chelsea, Spurs, City and United all getting new managers that season.)

Teams feared SAS; not Liverpool. Teams would prioritize in closing "SAS" down which would lead Henderson, Sterling and co to exploit that space.

Now, don't get me wrong. It was a good season and many players performed. But it wasn't because of Rodgers ffs. He only won one game away in the first 7 months of the season or something ridiculous like that. SAS brought the momentum, which brought the fans into it, which brought the fear factor. No teams feared Liverpool after Suarez left, and that's because "greatest manager in the world" had no idea. Which lead to his deserved sack.

by Red Alert Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:08 am

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:The only ones who say SAS carried Liverpool that year are the people who didn't watch Liverpool.

*bleep* off. rofl

Just proves all you did was MOTM and have no clue. rofl

I watched every single game that season. And have watched majority of the games after that. In fact, I called for Rodgers sacking in THAT season where we were almost won the title because he wasn't competent then, wasn't competent now.

Mid-table manager at best that simply got lucky and went for the short-term glory (building a system around two players was never going to work in the long term) rather than building a legacy. Shame, because I really did like him once upon a time.

Also, if he was competent he would of replaced "SAS".

He didn't "lose" Suarez. You people claim like he left for nothing. He spent 200m in 2 seasons to replace him and still couldn't do it.

by Helmer Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:21 am

I remember Rodgers tried various formations before we settled on diamond (SAS). So Rodgers of course got SAS and whole thing playing. So credit goes to him. He even started getting best of Coutinho and Sterling, using them intelligently when needed.

by Curtinho Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:56 pm

Notes from a Barrett interview about the whole situation:

After finishing with the press, Brendan went to the dressing room & spoke to the players. Everything was very normal, none of the players or Brendan thought anything out of the ordinary would happen.It was when they got back to Melwood, Rodgers got the call from Mike Gordon who told him his services were no longer required. Apparently Rodgers took it well, given the surprise, he has to take a lot of credit for that. He went home (15 miles from Melwood) & was greeted by Ayre who met with him as well.The transfer committee was doomed to fail. thought it was a mistake for Rodgers to insist on not working with a DOF(Director Of Football). There was clashes immediately over Sturridge (club wanted him, Rodgers wanted Dempsey). Rodgers wanted Allen for 15m but the committee thought he was too expensive. Rodgers wanted one player, the committee wanted another. Rodgers' good faith in agreeing to signing Firmino (committee) was repaid by LFC meeting Benteke's clause. LFC have let 31 players out and 33 players in. The return on the pitch is the worst in the club's history. Rodgers had stopped believing in the committee and the committee in him. Sakho's contract renewal was for me the first sign that Rodgers's time was limited. Had Rodgers given the owners a list of top players to purchase, they would have been on his side. The problem is the committee didn't really deliver on their side of the bargain either. The club feel that if they get a manager who believes in the commitee signings & gives them a system to flourish in. Klopp looks like its going to be done. The new LFC manager will manage a club that needs shaking up. There are people at LFC who need a kick up the backside. The restrictions (resources/finances) will be similar to Germany. Mike Gordon (FSG president) is the one with the most hands on role. He'll be leading the chase for the new manager.This is an appointment where LFC have to get right because these opportunities don't come around often.

Sounds like a pretty toxic situation regardless of whether you like the committee signings or Rodgers' signings better. Hopefully all this background non-sense can be resolved regardless of who is brought in. Now, where the blame is placed can be taken with a pinch of salt...depending on if you think that Barrett is a mouthpiece for the club.

by Hapless_Hans Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:58 pm

sounds to me like the transfer committee was actually balancing Rodgers' terrible transfer instincts to the better

by Helmer Tue Oct 06, 2015 10:18 pm

it is very important that new manager doesnt fall pray to this BS from FSG.

by Unique Tue Oct 06, 2015 10:35 pm

A transfer should work like this. A manager tells the club what players he wants. Then the club should negotiate a price for the players if they can afford them he gets them. If not they tell the manager they can't afford the player and to look at other options. No way should the club be signing players and then saying to the manager here you go fit him into the team.

by urbaNRoots Tue Oct 06, 2015 10:57 pm

Unique wrote:A transfer should work like this. A manager tells the club what players he wants. Then the club should negotiate a price for the players if they can afford them he gets them. If not they tell the manager they can't afford the player and to look at other options. No way should the club be signing players and then saying to the manager here you go fit him into the team.

So the club should not inquire at all about said player so long as he is affordable? That's BS.

I admire Liverpool for creating a transfer committee, I don't know if these people are competent but the idea is right. Clubs shouldn't accept mediocre players just because the manager thinks it'll be worth it, unless they well agree on it and make the decision themselves.

If anything no club should rely on one person doing everything like most English clubs do.

by Sri Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:33 am

word.

by Red Alert Wed Oct 07, 2015 10:23 am

Well known that:

Committee signs Sakho (Rodgers wanted Williams), Coutinho, Sturridge (Rodgers wanted Dempsey), Markovic (flopped to be fair but was never given consistent game time), Balotelli (again flopped because was never given a proper chance)

Rodgers signs Lallana for 25m (flopped so far under Rodgers), Lovren for 20m ( rofl

), Clyne (good signing to be fair), Benteke (again decent player but a massive massive fee; do feel he has the ability to be a beast under Klopp though). Allen for 15m (couldn't even get a game yet spoken in the same breathe as Xavi), Borini for 10m for him to never get a chance... Milner ("free" signing that will end up blowing in our faces. Stupid wages for that length of time taking in considering his age) Lambert (to replace / give us depth after losing Suarez. eco smile

)

Rest are up in the air. Although I'm pressure Firminho was a committee signing, too. Who again was mismanaged.

As bad as this committee is, all the "good" signings under Rodgers came from the committee. He's a joke in the market, just as much as a joke as the whole committee sets itself up.

I hope we give up with the committee and get Klopp a DoF. Or give Klopp a little bit more say in this committee. Which could of just been Rodgers targets were never the best so were overruled. End of the day he had the final say though. I don't know. I lost all faith in this whole management. Fully trust Klopp to turn this all around though. Proud

by Unique Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:09 pm

my point is if the club need non football people to sign players because they don't trust the manager then why higher said manager in the first place. if the club are looking at the team and thinking we will buy this player or that player then why have a manager in the first place. imo the manager should be the only person to pick players. the club should then negotiate the price. you might aswel let the committee buy the players and pick the team.

by Unique Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:12 pm

Red Alert wrote:Well known that:

Committee signs Sakho (Rodgers wanted Williams), Coutinho, Sturridge (Rodgers wanted Dempsey), Markovic (flopped to be fair but was never given consistent game time), Balotelli (again flopped because was never given a proper chance)

Rodgers signs Lallana for 25m (flopped so far under Rodgers), Lovren for 20m (), Clyne (good signing to be fair), Benteke (again decent player but a massive massive fee; do feel he has the ability to be a beast under Klopp though). Allen for 15m (couldn't even get a game yet spoken in the same breathe as Xavi), Borini for 10m for him to never get a chance... Milner ("free" signing that will end up blowing in our faces. Stupid wages for that length of time taking in considering his age) Lambert (to replace / give us depth after losing Suarez. )

Rest are up in the air. Although I'm pressure Firminho was a committee signing, too. Who again was mismanaged.

As bad as this committee is, all the "good" signings under Rodgers came from the committee. He's a joke in the market, just as much as a joke as the whole committee sets itself up.

I hope we give up with the committee and get Klopp a DoF. Or give Klopp a little bit more say in this committee. Which could of just been Rodgers targets were never the best so were overruled. End of the day he had the final say though. I don't know. I lost all faith in this whole management. Fully trust Klopp to turn this all around though.

how do you know all of that. ive never seen a statement from the club saying who signed what player. give me a link to where you get your information.

by Unique Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:16 pm

urbaNRoots wrote:
Unique wrote:A transfer should work like this. A manager tells the club what players he wants. Then the club should negotiate a price for the players if they can afford them he gets them. If not they tell the manager they can't afford the player and to look at other options. No way should the club be signing players and then saying to the manager here you go fit him into the team.

So the club should not inquire at all about said player so long as he is affordable? That's BS.

I admire Liverpool for creating a transfer committee, I don't know if these people are competent but the idea is right. Clubs shouldn't accept mediocre players just because the manager thinks it'll be worth it, unless they well agree on it and make the decision themselves.

If anything no club should rely on one person doing everything like most English clubs do.

yes. no point in Liverpool asking how much barca want for naymar is it. its like me trying to find out how much the new aston martin costs. it don't matter I could never afford one. but that was not my point. I ment the manager should target a player. then let the club negotiate. if the players current club want to much money for him then we tell the manager we cant do a deal look for somone els.

by Great Leader Sprucenuce Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:19 pm

The reason why that doesn't happen is because most managers are clueless when it comes to signing players.

by Unique Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:21 pm

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:The reason why that doesn't happen is because most managers are clueless when it comes to signing players.

but that means the club don't trust the manager they are about to put incharge.

by Sponsored content