Pretty sure some of the new guys missed that bit, they were involved in some cup or other and came to the squad late.
You probably could to an extent. And Rodgers was a tangible improvement at the time. However it took him two years to get us playing well and turning over teams. In the early years it was all possession, no end product. Rodgers had a good go and had us playing very well and nearly won it. In the end he became a little too big for his own boots, spent money unwisely, lost a few big players and changed away from what was getting us results, and ultimately knew the guillotine was being wheeled out, as did the players, and couldn't arrest the change in fortunes. Klopp, with someone else's players, has given the whole club a zap with the defibrillator. Very early days, but the improvement is there.
It always happens with new managers, that is why relegation threatened clubs tend to change manager because the bounce effect gains them the extra few points and a chance to stay in the league.
http://www.not606.com/threads/brendan-im-impressed.164911/ http://www.not606.com/threads/progress-or-flattering-to-deceive.174724/ http://www.not606.com/threads/br-and-lfc.170679/ http://www.not606.com/threads/rodgers-interview.167432/ And on that note, goodnight
For relegation clubs it does but you assume that the case for established clubs. It took Rodgers 10 games before he started getting results including losing to West Brom 3-0 at the start, and losses to yourselves and Arsenal. It took him a few years to get things running smoothly and never got a thrashing at Chelsea or City. In Roy's first 1o league games we only won 3 games, losing to City, United, Blackpool and Everton and drawing against Birmingham and Sunderland.
Kloppyflop is mediocre and only look half decent because his failures have been ignored. Don't take my word for it. It is the Turd himself who said it in the most objective and dispassionate way.
You do know that Liverpool is in no position to be talking about how much has been spent, right? The return on investment for Liverpool is terrible!!!
The feel good factor is certainly there with us at the moment, I keep waiting for that kick in the nuts.
Aye, but Rodgers and Hodgson were summer changes rather than mid season ones. Mid season changes are very different - the honeymoon period comes during pre season training rather than in competitive games. Multiple studies have shown that a mid season change at any club creates a bounce of up to half a point per game on average. But that effect lasts only between 12 and 18 games before the performance falls back to the level the club and players are capable of. Like Dalglish at Liverpool - didn't he get the 2nd most amount of points during his honeymoon period at the end of the 2010/11 season? Then you fell right back to 6th the following year as performances returned to the level the squad was capable of without the bounce.
That's what the #stats say. I know how much you love graphs, so here you go: http://www.wbs.ac.uk/downloads/news/2009/10/what-is-the-impact-of-changing-football-manag.pdf
Good reference According to that, we haven't even hit the peak of Klopp's honeymoon yet, still just warming up If the expected trend continues we should well placed by the end of January for a strong push for top 4 or the title
Aye, you'll be right up there come January. Then, as Benitez and Rodgers before him, Klopp will bottle it like a brewery and you'll fall tragically short. Cue much hilarity for all, Coutinho off overseas, and another year of 'rebuilding' The saga continues
Yep, he has no intention of having his pension fund cut short by being judged on the half a billion pounds he'll have spent before then
