The Brendan Rodgers / Replacement thread

[Peej]

Seems MITO has answered for me. We're talking appointed managers, not temporary caretakers.

And the stat was not since Taylor in the 50's has a Liverpool manager not managed to win a trophy after 3 seasons. Not sure if I posted it or someone else. But a quick look on wiki backs it up. So that takes out Roy as he had less than three years. And Moran. And the sniffer

But it's not through lack of backing or cash.

He has just purchased players like Borini, Aspas, Lovren, Mario, The Welsh Xavi..........

Martinez is not immune from buying muck by any stretch. But Rodgers payed big money and set the tone with Borini

 

[jenners04]

And the stat was not since Taylor in the 50's has a Liverpool manager not managed to win a trophy after 3 seasons. Not sure if I posted it or someone else. But a quick look on wiki backs it up. So that takes out Roy as he had less than three years. And Moran. And the sniffer

But it's not through lack of backing or cash.

He has just purchased players like Borini, Aspas, Lovren, Mario, The Welsh Xavi..........

Martinez is not immune from buying muck by any stretch. But Rodgers payed big money and set the tone with Borini

i thought he set the tone more with the stupidity of buying Allen personally, not needed in my opinion, borini was a gamble on a youngster who could have come good and got us goals just didnt work out that way sadly, what was allen supposed to be? proven lol, and i am still not impressed by marcovic esp for the ridiculous fee we paid.

Aspas bit harsh criticizing him for that, his stats were good abroad, just ****e in this country, gamble that didn't work is all.

i think it was the purchase of allen that i lost my faith in brendan spending wisely, i still think borini will come good just not at our club sadly, shame he didnt go when we got offered silly money for him, he will come good with less pressure on him.

 

[Germlands Nozzer]

And the stat was not since Taylor in the 50's has a Liverpool manager not managed to win a trophy after 3 seasons. Not sure if I posted it or someone else. But a quick look on wiki backs it up. So that takes out Roy as he had less than three years. And Moran. And the sniffer

The phrase quoted here was "Rodgers is the 1st Liverpool manager since 1950s to not win a trophy inside 3 seasons" (Jaffakop, post 6, from BBC; not sure if direct quote or not).

I'm fairly certain Roy didn't win a trophy inside three seasons. Or after three seasons, for that matter.

That doesn't have any bearing on Rodgers' performance though.

 

[Super G Ted'inho]

And the stat was not since Taylor in the 50's has a Liverpool manager not managed to win a trophy after 3 seasons. Not sure if I posted it or someone else. But a quick look on wiki backs it up. So that takes out Roy as he had less than three years. And Moran. And the sniffer

But it's not through lack of backing or cash.

He has just purchased players like Borini, Aspas, Lovren, Mario, The Welsh Xavi..........

Martinez is not immune from buying muck by any stretch. But Rodgers payed big money and set the tone with Borini

Well done on returning to the comment you quoted me for

Here it is again since it answers what you just said...

So a convenient twist to single out Brod and avoid Woy lol

He's the only manager (bar Woy) that's failed to win a trophy as Liverpool manager in last fifty years. Adding the three years merely take Woy it the equation.

It's **** journalism to single out Brod. If they said he's the second manager pinning him alongside Woy, would it sounds any better? No

 

[jaffaSlot]

Do people actually trust Rodgers with more money for the transfer window?
I don't think the owners will give him much at all, which makes me question, will we be any better off in a years time?

Not a ****ing chance.

 

[Peej]

Well done on returning to the comment you quoted me for

Here it is again since it answers what you just said...



It's **** journalism to single out Brod. If they said he's the second manager pinning him alongside Woy, would it sounds any better? No

The best thing is that after being well backed in the transfer market, he took Roy's record of worst ever start by a Liverpool manager

 

[Peej]

The phrase quoted here was "Rodgers is the 1st Liverpool manager since 1950s to not win a trophy inside 3 seasons" (Jaffakop, post 6, from BBC; not sure if direct quote or not).

I'm fairly certain Roy didn't win a trophy inside three seasons. Or after three seasons, for that matter.

That doesn't have any bearing on Rodgers' performance though.

It shows that in a long line of great managers....he just doesn't have it in him

 

[Germlands Nozzer]

It shows that in a long line of great managers....he just doesn't have it in him

Time will tell. But he quite possibly doesn't. We so far lack the killer instinct to get over the line. See the end of last season, the game against Man U, the fact that we reached the semi-finals in both cups, drawing the last CL game when we needed to win, going out the EL on penalties, etc. etc. We can't keep it together when the pressure's really on.

 

[Super G Ted'inho]

Time will tell. But he quite possibly doesn't. We so far lack the killer instinct to get over the line. See the end of last season, the game against Man U, the fact that we reached the semi-finals in both cups, drawing the last CL game when we needed to win, going out the EL on penalties, etc. etc. We can't keep it together when the pressure's really on.

What about the games we did win when under pressure towards the end of last season? Like the win against Man City?

 

[Germlands Nozzer]

What about the games we did win when under pressure towards the end of last season? Like the win against Man City?

[HASHTAG]#luckedout[/HASHTAG]

To be fair, we were still the underdogs at that point; it was only after that game that we really moved into pole position (I think).

Even if not, it's not like winning that game got us a trophy or anything.

And of course the ref

 

[Super G Ted'inho]

[HASHTAG]#luckedout[/HASHTAG]

To be fair, we were still the underdogs at that point; it was only after that game that we really moved into pole position (I think).

Even if not, it's not like winning that game got us a trophy or anything.

And of course the ref

Under dogs or not, we were in the title race and needed to win. We lost the game (Chelsea) that we didn't need to win lol

 

[Germlands Nozzer]

Under dogs or not, we were in the title race and needed to win. We lost the game (Chelsea) that we didn't need to win lol

And we couldn't even manage that.

 

[Jimmy Squarefoot]

What about the games we did win when under pressure towards the end of last season? Like the win against Man City?

The Man City game is probably the one game that we didn't bottle it under pressure - but even then, would we have been surprised had we dropped points? No.

I'm talking about games where the pressure was on AND we were favourites.

And you rightly bring up the Chelsea game - although we weren't exactly favourites, we didn;t need to win. That;s the annoying thing - and to me, that was reacting to pressure.

 

[Peej]

The Man City game is probably the one game that we didn't bottle it under pressure - but even then, would we have been surprised had we dropped points? No.

I'm talking about games where the pressure was on AND we were favourites.

And you rightly bring up the Chelsea game - although we weren't exactly favourites, we didn;t need to win. That;s the annoying thing - and to me, that was reacting to pressure.

I wonder what difference a Reina or Carragher type of experience player would have made in those games along with Gerrard?

 

[Jimmy Squarefoot]

I wonder what difference a Reina or Carragher type of experience player would have made in those games along with Gerrard?

Probably not that much.

Because Rodgers wanted the win. He wasn't settling for a draw and he wanted to gung ho again - that's how he set the team up.

 

[Germlands Nozzer]

Probably not that much.

Because Rodgers wanted the win. He wasn't settling for a draw and he wanted to gung ho again - that's how he set the team up.

To be fair, I'm not sure if we were able to play another way last season. Although again, that would at least partly be down to Rodgers.

The fact that we've actually managed to do that a couple of times this season represents progress of sorts, I guess.

 

[Jimmy Squarefoot]

To be fair, I'm not sure if we were able to play another way last season. Although again, that would at least partly be down to Rodgers.

The fact that we've actually managed to do that a couple of times this season represents progress of sorts, I guess.

The phrase 'never play for a draw' certainly springs to mind. But Mourinho practically gifted us a draw - to have Gerrard as the last man on the half way line at half time is just tactical naivety IMO.

Your last statement is a little misleading IMO - we have been able to do it, but at the expense of the attack. Rodgers cannot seem to find the balance. Simply sticking another defender at the back is not good defensive tactical coaching.

 

[moreinjuredthanowen]

The phrase 'never play for a draw' certainly springs to mind. But Mourinho practically gifted us a draw - to have Gerrard as the last man on the half way line at half time is just tactical naivety IMO.

Your last statement is a little misleading IMO - we have been able to do it, but at the expense of the attack. Rodgers cannot seem to find the balance. Simply sticking another defender at the back is not good defensive tactical coaching.

I don't really agree where we were at on the day on 46mins was tactically naive. It was gerrard at 33 looking up towards glen johnson looking for the hollywood ball in injury time in the first half. he looked up, let the ball under his foot... that was the disaster, then he slipped trying to recover.

IT was moronic and the approach to fixing it was similarly moronic... shooting for all sort of areas, playing in fornt of an 8 man back line and never turning them

We did the same v chelsea in these last two semis as well.

We chased a game we didn't need to chase but at 0-0 all was needed was individual brains to knwo when it was and where it was and just play simple.


my view of 3-4-3 is that rather than sticking an extra defender is last december rodgers had a disaster on his hands. Johnson played injured and came off we sent toure on.

the 3 at back was keeping johnson in but playing jhim rcb to protect n injury that occured anyway

He played henderson RWB and moerno left... moreno fouled up badly and rodgers lost all faith in him.. he stuck on markoivc for him in that utd game.

We lost 0-3.

We then hosted arseneal and turned up wuth toure skertl and sahko as lovern also got injured... we were told at least.

Markovic left wing back... both enrique and morneo were o nthe bloody bench for that game... talk about disaster.

Then what happens? yes we go to burnley and toure pulls up at half time and can gets pitched in. mingolet is on for jones ealry as well.... and so we find how the can skertl sahko line up comes about... injuries.

in the next game 4-1 v swansea 3 days later gerrard is rested and henderson comes alive at CM with manquillo in.



It's amazing rodgers sold this as being worked on for a while o nthe training pitch.. I have my doubts as less injuries and i could see us never finding form.

 

[Peej]

having sme more experienced/senior players to help Gerrard would have done it IMO. Game craft/game management is not something the younger players know about in comparison to experienced players.

Slowing it down, keeping the ball and knowing when best to risk losing possession. Also the belief they would have given the younger lads

 

[Jimmy Squarefoot]

I don't really agree where we were at on the day on 46mins was tactically naive. It was gerrard at 33 looking up towards glen johnson looking for the hollywood ball in injury time in the first half. he looked up, let the ball under his foot... that was the disaster, then he slipped trying to recover.

IT was moronic and the approach to fixing it was similarly moronic... shooting for all sort of areas, playing in fornt of an 8 man back line and never turning them

We did the same v chelsea in these last two semis as well.

We chased a game we didn't need to chase but at 0-0 all was needed was individual brains to knwo when it was and where it was and just play simple.


my view of 3-4-3 is that rather than sticking an extra defender is last december rodgers had a disaster on his hands. Johnson played injured and came off we sent toure on.

the 3 at back was keeping johnson in but playing jhim rcb to protect n injury that occured anyway

He played henderson RWB and moerno left... moreno fouled up badly and rodgers lost all faith in him.. he stuck on markoivc for him in that utd game.

We lost 0-3.

We then hosted arseneal and turned up wuth toure skertl and sahko as lovern also got injured... we were told at least.

Markovic left wing back... both enrique and morneo were o nthe bloody bench for that game... talk about disaster.

Then what happens? yes we go to burnley and toure pulls up at half time and can gets pitched in. mingolet is on for jones ealry as well.... and so we find how the can skertl sahko line up comes about... injuries.

in the next game 4-1 v swansea 3 days later gerrard is rested and henderson comes alive at CM with manquillo in.



It's amazing rodgers sold this as being worked on for a while o nthe training pitch.. I have my doubts as less injuries and i could see us never finding form.

I agree 100% that injuries played their part in Rodgers finding his best players. I think he is a really poor judge of player and I believe it stems from a point made earlier about Rodgers having trust and faith in certain players who follow his every word. If you dare question him, then you're marginalised.