Stolen from RAWK. Written by user roybrendo http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=294288.msg10428081;topicseen#new Brendan Rodgers is now the manager of Liverpool Football Club. Let's not use this thread to mourn the loss of managers past - we have plenty of scope to do that elsewhere - let's stick to our progress from this point on - the team building, club integrating process. The club has hired a manager whose preferred approach to the game is broadly as follows. Keeper as an 11th outfield player All players with playmaking responsibilities Centre halves who can advance with and recycle ball Wing backs with energy and discipline Spine in 'echelon' - movement to guarantee passing triangles Arguably a shift from a '3 bands' formation to an '8 Zone' approach Defensive midfielder - playmaker, circulator, destroyer 2 advanced midfielders - energy, linking, support for front three, pressing Inside forwards - pace, crossing, goalscoring, energy, directness, pressing Striker - reference point, goalscorer, bringing support runners into play A belief in 'if you're good enough, you're old enough' A preference for multifunctional players, as a means to add flexibility, cut squad numbers, and get more from resources. Collectively, the manager favours possession as means of control. He talks about 'resting with the ball', the value of possession for possession's sake to build confidence and tempo, and to tire the opposing side, and to grow into games as a prerequisite for dominant football. It's here that his Swansea side has been talked down in some quarters. Unlike Barca, Swansea didn't use possession to relentlessly dominate - to pin sides into their defensive third. They lacked the quality to do that, but boasted enough commitment to exert it as far as was practical with the players at their disposal. As a result, their possession stats for the season were just shy of Manchester City's, while their goals scored tally was far less impressive. To bring it back to good old Rinus Michels, the reason is simple - this type of football is "sensitive to quality". The first question is whether the current playing staff fits his way of playing the game. Keeper? A resounding yes. Centre halves? Yup - but one who doesn't, and who is something of a 'sacred cow'. Wing backs? Yup, albeit one who needs clear tactical parameters for his game. Defensive midfielder? One perfect candidate, but We could use another like him. 2 advanced midfielders? For me, yes - we have several players who are capable of that kind of game, but the more quality we can boast here the better. Inside forwards - there's great debate here, but with the right coaching, for me we have very good players here, and others on the cusp of breaking through. Striker? Again, there's plenty of debate on this one. Can the wee fella muster enough discipline? Can the big fella play enough football? Can others deputise effectively? Long-Term Progress and the 'Methodological Beating' Mourinho, arguably the biggest direct influence on Rodgers in his career to date, talks of the value of a 'methodological beating' in engendering lasting long-term improvement in a club's fortunes, as opposed to the short-term benefits an unthinking change of manager can bring - the 'psychological beating'. "[T]he methodological beating... produces long-lasting effects because it brings about structural changes... changes in the work philosophy and the model of play". Rodgers has of course seen and digested the Mourinho 'bible' during his time at Chelsea, and was responsible for implementing its ways with their youth players. He was one of the people putting the rubber to the road in that context. So there's a starting point. It means little in itself, but what you can maybe infer is that his 'methodology' will have seeped in a little, and it's arguably the case that his Swansea side bore this out. Some snippets I personally feel are borne out in Swansea's football. Relevant to the 'advanced midfielders', Mourinho says a player in that area "must display a high tactical level in order to be a link between the defence and attack, but not the defence and attack of the opponent". They mustn't lose the ball, or collectively empty their area of the pitch. I think that role's going to be crucial, and the big challenge in getting the most out of Gerrard in particular. This mode of football insists on players who can coordinate the link between midfield and attack. Swansea was Different, Rodgers stays the same Football at a newly promoted Swansea City is different to football at Liverpool. Whether it's reasonable or not, Liverpool fans expect their team to impose their game, and to win games more often than not. At Swansea, while the collective solidarity was impressive in their group, there wasn't the pressure to dominate week in and week out. Again, the key points. No hiding place for Liverpool players - they need mental strength But... in the Rodgers mode of football, the system is the star In that context, Rodgers takes responsibility for errors, insisting that it's his coaching and expression of the system that's at fault when things go wrong - that provides a 'comfort blanket' that arguably many of Liverpool's players could benefit from Rodgers is couthie by nature - over time that will set exactly the right tone at the club Whether reasonable or not, Liverpool will be expected to be competitive in multiple competitions With the intensity of the mode of football, Rodgers will need to rotate players The 'decision point' - when the ball is won - this needs a paragraph or three on its own. When the mode of football insists on winning the ball back as quickly as possible whenever it's lost, and when it's won, having the player with the ball make a pivotal decision: "is it 'on'?", it's here that the whole thing becomes sensitive to quality. At that stage, does it look likely we'll open the other side up? If it does, then 'GO!' and do it calmly and quickly. If it doesn't, keep the ball, rest, and work to tire them and draw them out of their shape. With the greatest of respect to Swansea, it's here that things will differ most over time at Liverpool (albeit the same transition would have been likely had he stayed at Swansea). If you're making that pivotal decision each time you win the ball at Swansea, and the players ahead of you are a little more limited, your game will lack penetration, because time and again you'll make the other choice - to rest with the ball. But if you're doing it at Liverpool, and Luis Suarez or someone of that quality is ahead of you, there's maybe more chance of it being 'on'. There's scope for your game to be a little more direct and penetrative. It's here that the whole thing is most sensitive to quality. Potential Benefits of Devotion to this System The system espoused by Brendan Rodgers and others of his ilk introduces a little more 'fungibility' into the mix. Things are far less reliant on key men - the Xabi Alonsos, or the Lucas Leivas - because the actual structure of the play - the way it ensures passing options and triangles, the encouragement of possession for possession's sake... it makes it easier to do all of the following. recruit new players establish a clear coaching syllabus and scouting criteria establish a clear and measurable internal notion of 'value' replace individuals game-to-game and season-to-season align the Academy to Reserve to First Team pipeline improve decision making engender confidence and belief... ...and so forth. The club, if it's going to be competitive long-term, must find a way to get the best use of its resources (while hoping those ahead of it fail to do the same). That means savvy in the transfer market, as much parsimony as it can muster in contract negotiations, and investment of resources and prominence to youth development - somewhere we've made massive strides in recent years. Rodgers gives us a great deal of that for free, I'd argue. You can only hope the shift to a bigger club sees him continue in that vein. But he does seem to have a clear eye for players who can make his system more effective, and often for peanuts. Why FSG must help Rodgers assert genuine authority Growth takes time, and usually involves growing pains of some description. If the club is to have the chance of becoming what it really could be, then reasonableness and patience are going to be needed in abundance. With that in mind, I'd personally hope the structure put in place engenders the kind of support, patience, and commitment to the long-term plan that an aspiring dynastic architect such as a Brendan Rodgers will need to work effectively. Undermine that in any way, be it via PR gaffes, legalistic oversights, giving players too much power, or just plain remoteness, and you put the whole thing in jeopardy. If we're being asked to forget what's gone on before and move on from a new 'year zero', then here's what I think we demand in return. The manager must be allowed to assert his authority, and if there are going to be limits to its expression, be they structural, personnel, or budgetary - whatever their source, you must communicate with him clearly and let him know where he stands at all times. Do that, and we might just re-establish some stability. Don't, and we'll be another controversial incident away from resetting the year clock.
I started reading it at 2 o clock In my day footy were a simple game of stickin the ball in the onion bag
good article but the author seems to think we've the players we need unfortunately. this is a mistake IMO and while the article is high quality i fear us reds are indeed as the WUMs suggest deluded about the quality of our players. Rodgers mentioned 3/4 players which is standard manager speak but it shows he's at least looking for new players. I hope he gets them.
It was a good read mate so apologies for resorting to a one line reply straight away I guess the obvious issue I have is the part about it requiring patience...it very much does but in the modern world many fans will be on his back after a few games. Let's just say we lose our first 3 home games which are very tricky then I can hear the moaners getting in to gear instantly. This is not the sort of project that guarantees quick results. Yes we have the nucleus of a squad good enough to adapt in time (with quality additions obviously) but will he be given time? My gut says yes because he is FSGs man but if we are way off the pace by xmas and finish as far off the top 4 as this year then will we see this plan ditched? Either way it is definitely going to be a very interesting time to be a Red. Usually I think most of us go into a season with a pretty reasonable idea of where we are at as a squad and roughly who will be the star performers but this year I'm not so sure its that easy to call. I'm actually looking forward to the Europey this year too as I think the early stages of that might give BR a bit more leeway to experiment with players/positions.
Yeah but I think it may have been Frank who pointed out the other day that having such a hard start fixture wise might get him a bit of leeway and certainly over the last few years we have definitely upped our game against the stronger sides. Basically it will be impossible to make solid judgements for a good 12 to 18 months. I just hope there is a level headed response whether it is going well or not so well. The other way to view the opening few fixtures is that it might suit the style of play he wants to adopt to have our first 3 home games against teams who won't necessarilly just come to "park the bus"
It could go either way, if we turn over Utd and City then we will all be bouncing. You are right though some of the not so patient fans will need to get a grip and give Rodgers time to get his ideas accross.
I got about half way through but felt that it was written by an over-optimist. Despite the change in manager, if we already have the players, why did we finish eighth...? We need recruitments IMO
I don't mind the optimism; I think we have a tendency to swing from the extremes of "nothing is good" but expect everything to be perfect. I took from the article that the author was hopeful that we'd have a system and an identity again that we could unite whoever played for us around and of course us fans. For all our talk of LFC and it's history & identity, I feel that's been diluted a little bit, that we've strayed from the path. I don't mean a lack of success i mean a solid definable drivable goal to become obsessed about.and we've all been kinda lost for a while, fans & club. I think that's really important for young fans & don't forget young players. Instead of young players ( & managers) coming in to try and replicate the hero ghosts of the past through an almost mythical culture they can't see or touch, they get together through a new Liverpool identity which inevitably means less pressure because they have ownership; it's theirs to build.. It doesn't mean throwing away the past in fact if successful it will be a revamp of the old. LFC 2.0 Think about it; the boot room wasn't some eternal entity; it was invented, it was new, risky & untested at one point. This new structure if it works, a decade or two down the road will feel exactly the same. The whole club with a plan, ethos & culture that a generation of fans will grow up with & 2-3 generations of players. As for here and now, well the next 3 years is the acid test for the dream. Can a club reinvent itself in today's game without a Arab prince? I think in the absence of that level of cash we We need that separate ethos to gel the players rather than stars together which will make the team the star. More importantly have we taught the new generation of fans enough to stand back & not be a herd of media driven sheep like so many others. If not, if we've failed & the club is driven by unethical business men & a spoilt generation that suffers from collective ADHD; that demands instant gratification then it's probably better that the old girl slide into mediocrity. It means the true fans will be left with a real club. So, I'm game to throw my faith at another rebirth.
Not mourning bur previous managers are relevant. Rodgers' past is brought up in support of his methods and so is the club's. You can't throw stones but cry when they get thrown back. Firstly, let's just remember the excellent and lengthy discourse on the similarities between Arrigo Sacchi's methods and Rafa's. That's what this article reminds me of. That article didn't change how fans and media reacted to Rafa. It's also true that the player qualities listed largely exist throughout the squad left by Rafa and Kenny. Rodgers doesn't have to perform a revolution so lengthy articles suggesting he can seem overblown. This relates to the common complaint that English players can't keep the ball. If that's true - and it's arguable - then what's the solution according to Rodgers? Did Swansea just not have the quality or is there something inherent in the English game which prevents players holding onto the ball? it's not like the league is full of talentless Englishmen. And does anybody ever remember Chelsea playing that way under Mourinho? Possession for possession's sake doesn't guarantee anything other than a lot of successful passes around midfield, as we've seen with Barca and Spain at times, both sides which can seem devoid of ideas when their pretty triangles don't get anywhere, usually against parked buses of which we've seen many in the PL in recent years. This is significant. Mourinho beat Ancelotti's Chelsea with mind games, talking of his players and his houses leading up to the game. He was negative as a cynical electron on the pitch but it worked. So was Steve Clarke. And? But he said earlier it was quality. Now it's pressure. Or it's both. Or neither. Or something. Managers have to defend their players. This didn't do Kenny any good at all during the Evra hysteria and he was almost lynched by the media for daring to defend Suarez. As much as Rodgers can blame himself and his tactics - or Mourinho's or whatever - it won't be contagious amongst the media, which is the divining rod for a lot of modern fans now. Seriously why does anybody even need to state this anymore? Did we not get enough of this rotation debate during Rafa's reign? Has it really not been accepted yet so it seems like some kind of innovation now? Again, high pressing is nothing new to Liverpool. "Decision-making" is a misnomer to my mind. Skillful players tend to make better decisions according to pundits because they have the skill to execute their decisions. A good decision is one which works. Lawro is one of the worst for hindsight "Shoudlve gone the other way" type of muppetry but it's quite common among the bad decision makers in the media. We should've taken more shots right at the keeper, then maybe we wouldn't have hit the woodwork so much. Simple, really. Covered already in the possession section. Ah yes, the "Champions' League" question. I've never heard the system brought into this debate, though. Certainly the name 'Liverpool' gets more attention than going to Cypress or Belgium to play CL footy. That can't last forever but it's still a draw, moreso than any system. I'm not sure the owners would agree without a clear definition of 'value'. A lesser player who fits a system won't sell as many shirts as a star player, no matter how well the system works. Again an innovation already established at our academy by Rafa. The irony here is that the author doesn't seem to have discerned Rodgers' view that he's continuing a legacy of attacking pass-and-move football which has been such a part of this club it's now in the DNA. LFC are synonymous with it so talk of a 'year zero' isn't something Rodgers has come anywhere near suggesting. This is not a sleight on Rodgers but simply an attempt to calm the raving that he's bringing something sparklingly new and innovative because I don't even think he believes that now, any more than Kenny did when he took over from Joe ***in or Joe was when he took over from Bob. Kenny was "his own man" and Rodgers will be the same. That's the Liverpool Way and I sense Rodgers appreciates it.
So to be clear Mupp, you didn't like the article? It's a good counter piece, everyone has different opinions I like some of your points.
