Bollocks. Is Rafa remembered as the guy that brought in aquallani or the guy that won the CL and FAC in his first 2 years? Atm, Rodgers for me is remembered as the manager that took us closest to winning the league for 25 years, all managers make good and bad signings it's very rare that a manager is only remembered for those.
I think a lot said it probably wasn't the best and wouldn't suit us but could see a tiny bit of logic given he obviously has talent. Once it was confirmed, like all signings quite a few got behind him and supported him until he gave us no option but not to
sooo.. rodgers will be remembered for his cup wins then? ok maybe second place i suppose you just proved the point BTW rafa: legend for winning lc and fa cup.... 2009? not so much frankly. Rodgers: ehhh... well he went on a good run you see and even though ctiy were always likely to win it wer got this close.. if only gerrard hadn't slipped... nahhhhh... don't think so.... failures get remembered for their failures... funny that hodgson is not really remembered for leaving us in 18th we've blocked that misery out..... he's remembered for signing poulsen and konchesky.
The other choice was Eto'o and that piece of **** would have been a far greater insult than Balotelli
Youre saying raa isn't remembered for winning the CL and FA cup? (He didn't win the league cup from what I remember so don't know if that's a typo or you're thinking of someone else). Maybe that's difference between some fans. I like to remember the good things, the successes where as some fans are continually looking at the negatives and want to use them to have another moan because it seems cooler. I wouldnt say a manager that is at a club more than 2/3 years will be remembered for just 1 signing and mother else in their tenure. Rodgers hasn't achieved anything yet really, but he still has time. Win a couple of trophies and he'll be remembered for that.
no i'm saying you SAID he was and i agreed and said he's not remembered for getting 2nd or reaching a carling cup final either (which he did in 2005) when (not if) rodgers fails he'll be remembered in the context of said failure... an inevitably when his years are looked back upon the absence of a cup will have mad mario flashed up as an image.... thats jsut the way it is. when sky do prem years 2014/15 they'll only mention suarez going and how awful balotelli was....
ahhhh yes.. ****t'o thts right.. thanks astro. if i was offered that choice i'd say save the money you'll need it in january. It was ridiculous to buy markoivc and balotell when faced with suarez leaving (both done after) when the combined fee and wages would have bought a top striker.
Eto'o was a shocking move in hindsight, soon as he was shipped out form improved and squad harmony did.... However at £50k a week he was risk free and his wages shipped on to another club now... One thing we did get from him was goals in his limited appearances, but no effort
I'm with MITO - don't waste money on players because they're a last resort. Bide your time and wait for a player is the better option. There are plenty of options out there but I'm a firm believer that Rodgers wanted a strong target man up front which is why we were linked with Bony and Balotelli, and inevitably didn't go for Lacazette, Son etc etc.
It wasn't that ridiculous - Markovic was bought for the future. Lallana was the one bought to replace Suarez in the starting line up. Reason I say that is because Rodgers wanted to play 4-2-3-1 - he's always wanted this. Which meant Sturridge played as the lone striker and Lallana would replace Suarez.
If you want to be pedantic then it had a risk on the team that nobody could have predicted, he was the smiling assasin But as a transfer it was risk free, just £50k a week and then he wanted to leave on a free...not hang about on £50k
welllllllll then thing there is lallan was sought PRIOR to the world cup so if we think lfc had thought squarez was staying then he could not be said replacement. I think given the position rodgers bought lallana to replace coutinho who at the time coudl not last 90mins. Now 25mil on lallana was atrocious... but... if suarez left and then after it in comes markoivc and we are left with not enough money to get a good striker? well... at the very worst we should be saying it was extremely poor judgement to buy for the future when the now was lacking. however you could be right on the 4231... i don't think always is right he started more of a 433 with wide men but 4231 and 433 are not that far apart.
I think the only plus we got from the move was his european experience. You could see the impact he had in a difficult group and how he had the know how to get through the games....no surprise we crashed out once he left.....but our league form improved ten fold
the point is it doesn't matter if its not true it's what (i think) will be said truth and whats said rarely coincide it seems
