http://anfieldindex.com/11257/rodgers-vs-committee-matter-time.html We’re all experts when it comes to transfers aren’t we? Whether you are an armchair scout who watches hours of football or a more casual fan who relies on YouTube clips, the chances are you have an opinion on who you think the club should buy. As a result, you simply can’t understand why your club isn’t snapping up the players who you know would make all the difference to the team. Now there’s a school of thought that the scouting process is far more complicated than that and there’s no doubt that there is more to it than most of us assume, however I can’t help but think that at Liverpool Football Club the process is more confusing and overcomplicated than is necessary. Granted, my view is an ignorant one. To me the way it should work is as follows: the Manager identifies to his scouts the type of players that he requires to improve the team (basically position and characteristics), they compile a dossier of players who meet the requirements, the Manager says who he wants from the list then the Chief Executive tries to do the deal (obviously with the green light from the Owner/Chairman/Board). The only deviating from this is when a Manager already knows who he wants. Undoubtedly there is more to it than the above, however surely not much more? After all, it’d be a waste of money to sign players who don’t meet the requirements of the Manager’s philosophy wouldn’t it? Cue Liverpool’s much debated transfer committee! Now I don’t know the ins and outs of how the committee works (I dare say those within the club would struggle to explain it!) However, what I do know is that there is a clear divide between “committee signings” and “Rodgers’ signings” which does little more than confuse and frustrate me. Take Mignolet as an example – in order for Rodgers’ philosophy to be successfully implemented he requires a goalkeeper who commands the box, is comfortable with the ball at his feet and who has excellent distribution. Yet “committee signing” Mignolet exhibits little of the qualities required and instead was apparently purchased based on his impressive shot stopping statistics whilst at Sunderland. In the right team Migs would excel as he’s far from a bad ‘keeper, however what is the logic behind spending £10m on the lad with a view to altering his entire game? Why not bring in someone who fits the bill naturally? The fact that we are now looking to bring someone else less than 2 years later says everything to me. In the summer of 2013 Liverpool’s “committee signings” included Aspas, Alberto, Ilori and Sakho on permanent deals. Aspas flopped (to put it politely) and is now on loan with a view to a permanent transfer away from the club. Alberto and Ilori are also both out on loan for this season and Sakho is blatantly not in Rodgers’ long-term plans despite the reported £17m outlay on him just over a year ago. This season the debate has raged on with fans criticising the expensive “Rodgers signings” of Lallana and Lovren who have already been written off by many as being unworthy of their large transfer fees (reportedly £45m combined) and not of the required quality. You then have “committee signing” Mario Balotelli who at present has struggled to fit in with our system and arguably hasn’t received the full backing of the boss. The most notable success that we’ve had in the transfer market under Rodgers’ tenure was in the January 2013 window when the club signed Daniel Sturridge and Phillipe Coutinho for just over £20m to great effect. Their signings were supposed to represent the successful blueprint that would be followed up in subsequent windows, however this has failed to materialise. With a large number of Liverpool fans unconvinced on letting Rodgers take total control of transfers based on his reported previous preferences including Ashley Williams, Ryan Bertrand and Michael Vorm, but the with committee signings being so easily disregarded in the main, then how does the club progress in the transfer market? Surely FSG won’t be happy spending millions on players who Rodgers doesn’t pick and don’t last more than a year or 18 months at the club. Therefore in my opinion it’s only a matter of time before the need for change rears its ugly head. On pitch success will undoubtedly have a major influence, however stability is such an important factor in sustainable success and I certainly wouldn’t class our transfer policy as stable. Which ultimately begs the questions – will this lead to a showdown between Rodgers and the committee? And if it does, who will come out on top? Will the committee end up being restructured into the more traditional scouting/transfer system that I mentioned earlier? Will Rodgers gain total control or will he have to continue attempting to fit expensive square pegs into round holes? Let’s hope a compromise can be met sooner rather than later.
if there really is a divide from who brendan wants to said committee (who are they anyway?) then we would need to see a list of which side recommended who, and see which is less **** i don't know what's wrong, but must be some overly keen egos flying around, and its certainly unjustified at the moment. i can see the commitee coming out on top to be honest as it looks like its something the owners want, whether they are the right people who knows.
He's part of the committee though, that piece makes it sound as if it's a seperate entity. Ultimately they wouldn't be signing players he doesn't want, he'll have sanctioned all of them.
Is that through choice or was it imposed up on him? ... Whilst Rodgers is a part of the committee, I get the feeling that he has been given more power this year. The reason I say that is because last year, he wanted the likes Bertrand, Williams, Leon Britton etc, and even Lovren to some extent (the committe turned him down even at £10m). This year, Rodgers is involved in a summer long pursuit of Lovren and Lallana at extortionate prices and he succeeds.
I haven't a clue how much input Rodgers has into the transfer committee. I want Comolli back! He spent too much on dross- but he did locate Suarez and Henderson... and despite his overpaying for a number of crap players- he did unearth a couple of gems (same when he was at Spurs). It's worth a couple of expensive failures to get a couple of great players. Much rather that than nothing but expensive failures like we've done ever since. (besides Studge and maybe Coutinho).
When he took the job, he said he wouldn't work under a DoF but was happy to be part of a recruitment committee, it was something he believed in. He also said he would be working with Ayre and his coaching team to form the committee. Don't ask me to find quotes though
The committee consists of Rodgers, Ayre, Fallows [head of recruitment] and Michael Edwards [head of performance and analysis]. It was created by FSG when they shelved the plan to have a Director of Football. Rodgers has to get the agreement of the committee that a player meets the clubâs requirements and is worth pursuing and he has the final say [according to him] so no players will be signed without his say so.
I can't imagine a manager saying yes to players he doesn't want? He must have been involved and even if he had reservations about some of the signings he must have agreed that they would improve the squad.
This The committee thing is a bit of a cover up when it comes to blaming people for signings. Rodgers and Ayre have both categorically said Brendan gets the final say so any player we do sign he must have wanted. This means no player is forced upon Brod. The only way this committee possibly effects transfer is if BR highlights a player he wants but the committee say no. Maybe the Committee (under FSG's guidance) are the ones stopping us signing the likes of Willian, Henry Ryan, The Plank, etc when it comes to the wages
I think that's spot on. Identifying a player and then setting about the negotiations are 2 separate processes. Ayre and Fallows sort out fees and contracts and they must be working to FSG guidelines otherwise there's a long list [getting longer] of players like the ones you named, who we would now have.
Committee: So Rodgers... we're thinking of signing Balotelli. Either that or we bring back Andy Caroll. Depends on what constraints are given to Rodgers... does he really have free realm- or just final say (yes/no) on people that the committee pick for him. Whatever we're doing... it's not working.
basically the committee is bollox. its rodgers with his head scout, his chief executive who'll do anything he wants and a head of fitness who can use his xray eyes or something to tell who's fit. In other words rodgers picks all the players using a scouting network and unearths a gem like badontelly and a true great like iago aspas. fallows has a title but theres very very very little about him ever said. Hunter is his cheif scout so is this guy picking up a easy cheque or what? I found this crack on my hated tomkinstimes http://tomkinstimes.com/2013/06/do-you-have-confidence-in-the-transfer-committee/ btw edwards is not head of first team perofrmance/fitness but is some more shadowy figure who must sit round looking at running giats and pissing all over players like ferguson or soemthing cos again what role has he.
If I was Brod and given that proposal, I'd say neither. If he has the final say then they can't sign either #savethemoney #sameresults
Thats why Roberto Martinez turned you down after being flown to the owners house in America to discuss taking the job #brendawasyoursecondchoice
Well... none of us were happy to get Balotelli in the first place- but I don't think many people predicted he'd be as bad as he has been. I think in the summer given choice of Balotelli, Carroll- or no backup for Studge besides Lambert we'd have picked Balotelli too! (Not saying my scenario is realistic- I'm sure the committee wouldn't have suggested Carroll).
The problem isn't that Mario is playing poorly - he's not been setting the league alight but he's not playing in a system which is suited to his strengths. His style of play is not suited to how Rodgers wants to play. a) Why was he signed in the first place? b) Why didn't we target players who are better suited to us? c) Why continue playing him as a lone striker?
Sorry Milk but I'm calling horse **** there. Plenty on here wanted him, can't recall too many dead set against it but I know Gonzo and I were firmly in the No camp, we both predicted exactly what as happened too
was this after it was obvious he would be our only option or before? edit, our other option was eto wasn't it, not great choices.
I'll confess I was one who did not mind signing Balotelli. But now I'm eating my words of support. He just doesnt fit in. I did however prefer the idea of signing Bony so Balotelli wasnt my first choice.
