Jürgen Klopp: 2017 - 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
20,404
Likes
34,006
all i ll say is that i am glad Klopp is now in charge of transfers rather than the fucked up transfer committee idea that predated Rodgers
Not sure what you mean mate. Klopp is in charge in the sense that he has the final say on transfers, but the committee is very heavily involved in the identification and signing of those players. In fact when he arrived, Klopp made is fairly clear he has no interest in getting involved in that sort of process, and that's borne out in his comments about both Salah and Robertson since they came in.

The main issue previously was Rodgers' refusal to work properly in tandem with the committee, and we ended up with a dysfunctional halfway house of them signing a player, him signing a player, then them signing another player, then him ad infinitum.

The system is now working as it was originally envisaged, and is a lot better for it. Having a summer where every signing is a hit is basically unprecedented - certainly for us and for a good many other clubs as well.
 

K

Klopptinho

Guest
Not sure what you mean mate. Klopp is in charge in the sense that he has the final say on transfers, but the committee is very heavily involved in the identification and signing of those players. In fact when he arrived, Klopp made is fairly clear he has no interest in getting involved in that sort of process, and that's borne out in his comments about both Salah and Robertson since they came in.

The main issue previously was Rodgers' refusal to work properly in tandem with the committee, and we ended up with a dysfunctional halfway house of them signing a player, him signing a player, then them signing another player, then him ad infinitum.

The system is now working as it was originally envisaged, and is a lot better for it. Having a summer where every signing is a hit is basically unprecedented - certainly for us and for a good many other clubs as well.
the fact he has the final say means it's not really a committee .. they are more like a scouting department that bring him reports.. he'll take a look and talk through it with his coaching team and make a decision. that's how being a football manager used to work . doing it the other way when you can't land the managers target and just signing someone else for them .. is fucked up lol


edit: that's not just about Brendan Rodgers/Kenny Dalglish but any manager . it's not something that is right with my view on football or management in general . managers get sacked because players under perform or turn out to be shit .. at least let them sign their own players. Imagine the manager saying he wanted VVD and the committee couldn't get him.. he says sign no one then (like klopp) and they go and buy callum chambers .. he scores an own goal and you get sacked lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:

redfanman

TIA Regular
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
11,259
Likes
10,686
the fact he has the final say means it's not really a committee .. they are more like a scouting department that bring him reports.. he'll take a look and talk through it with his coaching team and make a decision. that's how being a football manager used to work . doing it the other way when you can't land the managers target and just signing someone else for them .. is fucked up lol
It is a committee in the sense they are all brought together to provide input. It's no different to how most clubs work.
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
20,404
Likes
34,006
the fact he has the final say means it's not really a committee .. they are more like a scouting department that bring him reports.. he'll take a look and talk through it with his coaching team and make a decision. that's how being a football manager used to work . doing it the other way when you can't land the managers target and just signing someone else for them .. is fucked up lol


edit: that's not just about Brendan Rodgers/Kenny Dalglish but any manager . it's not something that is right with my view on football or management in general . managers get sacked because players under perform or turn out to be shit .. at least let them sign their own players. Imagine the manager saying he wanted VVD and the committee couldn't get him.. he says sign no one then (like klopp) and they go and buy callum chambers .. he scores an own goal and you get sacked lol
The committee doesn't work any differently now to what it did under Rodgers (there wasn't one under Kenny as far as I can recall, it was set up specifically because BR refused to work under a DoF, which the owners at that time decided they needed), the only difference is the manager isn't having a tantrum about it.
 

lfc.eddie

"¿Plata... O Plomo?"
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
Messages
48,954
Likes
35,482
Not sure what you mean mate. Klopp is in charge in the sense that he has the final say on transfers, but the committee is very heavily involved in the identification and signing of those players. In fact when he arrived, Klopp made is fairly clear he has no interest in getting involved in that sort of process, and that's borne out in his comments about both Salah and Robertson since they came in.

The main issue previously was Rodgers' refusal to work properly in tandem with the committee, and we ended up with a dysfunctional halfway house of them signing a player, him signing a player, then them signing another player, then him ad infinitum.

The system is now working as it was originally envisaged, and is a lot better for it. Having a summer where every signing is a hit is basically unprecedented - certainly for us and for a good many other clubs as well.
I don't know mate, I don't think the original plan is to have one man having the final say though. Here's what I think what is going on now in the club is not as different as what it used to be, and nothing of what the owners wanted in the first place. Here are the examples...

1. Manager has a recruitment team supporting him. He send them out to seek for players he wanted in specific positions with specific attributes or needed, and received a few reports of the scouts he deployed about players that are being monitored. He then take his time to choose who he wanted from the list with primary and secondary targets. He then let the CEO/MD knows, who is supposed to secure the funds through budget meeting and off they go talk to the players. Failing to get primary target, the secondary target will be proposed and if the player is not on the shortlisted names, will then be proposed to the manager. The manager will be the decision maker of this process. That is how England football manager works. At times they will be asked to go check out a player or two by themselves if they are not too convinced.

2. Manager handed a list of positions needed to be filled. Director of football dispatched scouts out with a list of requirements in mind. Scouts come back with a list of players, and reviewed by everyone involved. Once agree on the names of the targets, the director will set out to get the players needed. If primary target not available due to whatever reason (usually money), the director will go for the secondary and so on. The manager will not be needed to decide who the club buys.

Number 2 are more likely something the owners were looking for, like the GM in baseball who calls the shot on the players to buy after knowing which part needed strengthening. So we are not working on what the owners initially were hoping to implement. We are still reliant on the manager. This is less of a risk when you have managers like Guardiola and Klopp, since they pretty much able to motivate and train players as long as they have the right attitude. Can be messy when you have the likes of Mourinho where all he wants are the best of the best in each position, or someone like Hodgson or Rodgers who only knows what they can see not who they can train (Benteke, Borini, Konchesky, Poulsen....).
 
K

Klopptinho

Guest
The committee doesn't work any differently now to what it did under Rodgers (there wasn't one under Kenny as far as I can recall, it was set up specifically because BR refused to work under a DoF, which the owners at that time decided they needed), the only difference is the manager isn't having a tantrum about it.
It is a committee in the sense they are all brought together to provide input. It's no different to how most clubs work.
they provide input but they don't make decisions . under Rodgers they made decisions. it's not the same style of transfer dealings under 2 different managers . What didn't work when Rodgers was manager will not be allowed under Klopp and that is the players being signed that he does not want .

“I said on the first day when I came here it’s like I used to work," he said.

“Sometimes my staff or myself have an idea about a player we know or we heard about and then we collect some information together and it’s not my job then to cut videos or things like this.

“Then there are players our scouts bring in and say we have seen this player, we have heard about him, we have watched him for a long time. We speak about this.

“But in the end it’s like I said at the first meeting and the first press conference, if I don’t want the player to come in here in he will not come.

“And if the player I want doesn’t fit our budget then he will not come too."
 

redfanman

TIA Regular
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
11,259
Likes
10,686
they provide input but they don't make decisions . under Rodgers they made decisions. it's not the same style of transfer dealings under 2 different managers . What didn't work when Rodgers was manager will not be allowed under Klopp and that is the players being signed that he does not want .

“I said on the first day when I came here it’s like I used to work," he said.

“Sometimes my staff or myself have an idea about a player we know or we heard about and then we collect some information together and it’s not my job then to cut videos or things like this.

“Then there are players our scouts bring in and say we have seen this player, we have heard about him, we have watched him for a long time. We speak about this.

“But in the end it’s like I said at the first meeting and the first press conference, if I don’t want the player to come in here in he will not come.

“And if the player I want doesn’t fit our budget then he will not come too."
No, the 'committee' made decisions. Brendan was a part of that committee. Scouts and analysts each made recommendations, Ayre on whether we could afford it. To get agreement across the board on signings he wanted, Brendan horse traded names on his wishlist for favours instead of working with the othrr members of the committee to better define what was needed.
 
K

Klopptinho

Guest
No, the 'committee' made decisions. Brendan was a part of that committee. Scouts and analysts each made recommendations, Ayre on whether we could afford it. To get agreement across the board on signings he wanted, Brendan horse traded names on his wishlist for favours instead of working with the committee to better define what was needed.
but it doesn't work in the same way because klopp from day one has had the final say . Rodgers was supposed to have the final say on transfers but he didn't . Klopp could walk out and walk into another massive job . Rodgers didn't have that option so he was browbeaten into signings he didn't want . that's no way to run a football club and Ayre, Fallows, Hunter, Edwards and Gordon were on that transfer committee but no longer.

Klopp is dealing with a totally different garden and can plant his flowers where he likes . i'm happy about that but not willing to batter a manager or two because decisions were made that weren't 100% theirs . Less said about comolli the fuckwit the better lol the owners have learnt and that's good.
 
Joined
Jan 6, 2018
Messages
98
Likes
52
I have no clue what thread this goes under so I’ll just say it here.should we go to a 3-4-3,cause if we are interested in lenglet then we can move to a back three of Virgil,lenglet,lovren or Gomez,then Robertson and Trent keeping the width and putting crosses in(would help against Park the bus teams) and then we let Firmino drop when he wants and salah go sorta in the middle as a stringer come winger and mane as an inverted winger.If we are getting out numbered in the midfield we get a wingbacks to drop into the midfield(like city do with there fullbacks) and our front three can drop to help them as well,and our midfield of keita and Jorginho,what do you guys think?
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
17,497
Likes
28,700
The committee doesn't work any differently now to what it did under Rodgers (there wasn't one under Kenny as far as I can recall, it was set up specifically because BR refused to work under a DoF, which the owners at that time decided they needed), the only difference is the manager isn't having a tantrum about it.
To be fair to Rodgers, with the caveat that he was abysmal in the transfer market, he turned down FSG initially over the DOF thing, and only eventually accepted the job on the understanding there would not be one.

I can fully understand his annoyance at taking the job and finding a committee working as a de facto DOF had been placed above him.

The problem was that if he didn't want to work under a DOF he should never have been offered the job. FSG should have had their DOF in place long before they appointed a manager. Kenny should have been left in post until a DOF was appointed, and then when a manager if needed the DOF can find them.
 
K

Klopptinho

Guest
To be fair to Rodgers, with the caveat that he was abysmal in the transfer market, he turned down FSG initially over the DOF thing, and only eventually accepted the job on the understanding there would not be one.

I can fully understand his annoyance at taking the job and finding a committee working as a de facto DOF had been placed above him.

The problem was that if he didn't want to work under a DOF he should never have been offered the job. FSG should have had their DOF in place long before they appointed a manager. Kenny should have been left in post until a DOF was appointed, and then when a manager if needed the DOF can find them.
find it very hard to judge the transfer dealings during his 'spell in charge' . i mean if you look at summer 2015 it was quite obvious he was on borrowed time yet the club still invested in new signings . For me the club would not be giving him a free rein in the market (or anyone not just rodgers) if as it appeared he was in the last chance saloon with confidence in him ebbed towards zero . After finishing 2nd the window of summer 2014 was quite woeful. we had a co owner and ceo involved with the 'committee' that appeared to be squabbling over how deals were to be structured for incoming players . it was all a bit of a mess. A lot of people have either left the club or been assigned different roles and a different structure is in place now regards transfers . IF all the transfer issues were solely down to the previous two managers in terms of signing some dross then the owners wouldn't have tried two different methods (d.o.f and committee) before deciding actually we should just settle on the guy in charge of getting us results on the pitch being the one with the final say.
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
20,404
Likes
34,006
To be fair to Rodgers, with the caveat that he was abysmal in the transfer market, he turned down FSG initially over the DOF thing, and only eventually accepted the job on the understanding there would not be one.

I can fully understand his annoyance at taking the job and finding a committee working as a de facto DOF had been placed above him.

The problem was that if he didn't want to work under a DOF he should never have been offered the job. FSG should have had their DOF in place long before they appointed a manager. Kenny should have been left in post until a DOF was appointed, and then when a manager if needed the DOF can find them.
It wasn't as advertised, no, but not sure the owners had much of a choice as the alternative was giving the keys to the kingdom to a relative unknown and hoping he wouldn't burn it to the ground. And any sympathy I might have for Rodgers ends when I think that but for the committee he'd have signed even more Swansea players, like Williams and Vorm, which kind of vindicates FGS's decision.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
10,487
Likes
6,833
It wasn't as advertised, no, but not sure the owners had much of a choice as the alternative was giving the keys to the kingdom to a relative unknown and hoping he wouldn't burn it to the ground. And any sympathy I might have for Rodgers ends when I think that but for the committee he'd have signed even more Swansea players, like Williams and Vorm, which kind of vindicates FGS's decision.
Vorm has been a better back up at Spurs than our back ups till Mignolet got demoted for an improved Karius this season. I'd have also chosen to swap Skrtel for Williams back then too. Although if we'd signed Williams I think we'd have signed a right sided CB instead of Sakho. But still, with Toure and Agger around Williams and Sakho/alternative would have been fine with me.
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
20,404
Likes
34,006
Vorm has been a better back up at Spurs than our back ups till Mignolet got demoted for an improved Karius this season. I'd have also chosen to swap Skrtel for Williams back then too. Although if we'd signed Williams I think we'd have signed a right sided CB instead of Sakho. But still, with Toure and Agger around Williams and Sakho/alternative would have been fine with me.
Not with me, I heard the argument in favour back then but I've always thought Williams was a lumbering cart-horse. And Vorm gets a bit fat meh also. Thing is, as Allen and Borini showed, you can't simply transplant a player from a lower-level club and assume they'll do for you what they were doing for them, let alone improve or flourish in an environment of greater pressure and expectations. Rodgers never really understood that.
 
Last edited:

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
17,497
Likes
28,700
It wasn't as advertised, no, but not sure the owners had much of a choice as the alternative was giving the keys to the kingdom to a relative unknown and hoping he wouldn't burn it to the ground. And any sympathy I might have for Rodgers ends when I think that but for the committee he'd have signed even more Swansea players, like Williams and Vorm, which kind of vindicates FGS's decision.
I'm not saying that Rodgers was great in the market, or that FSG weren't right to not want to hand him the full control he wanted, but appointing him on the understanding there wouldn't be a director of football, and then installing a committee to perform the function of one, is still a shitty thing to do, and Rodgers - from his perspective - is justified to be annoyed about it.

The correct thing to do would have been to appoint the DOF first. If that meant leaving Kenny in post a while longer, then so be it. I don't know why they were so hasty to sack Kenny. They fired him, then got the cold shoulder from their first round of candidates (including Klopp) before having to move on the second tier, which included their eventual appointee - who was in such a position of strength he could dictate terms about the structure he'd be working in. Then their clever fudge solution bit them on the arse.

Indirectly, that whole shambles probably cost us about £100m as Rodgers refused to work with players the committee had identified.

After Rodgers stock was sky high after the 13/14 season, he negotiated himself the right to sign his own players, and FSG ended up in the crazy position of there being two parallel processes, which was always going to be a disaster.
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
20,404
Likes
34,006
I'm not saying that Rodgers was great in the market, or that FSG weren't right to not want to hand him the full control he wanted, but appointing him on the understanding there wouldn't be a director of football, and then installing a committee to perform the function of one, is still a shitty thing to do, and Rodgers - from his perspective - is justified to be annoyed about it.

The correct thing to do would have been to appoint the DOF first. If that meant leaving Kenny in post a while longer, then so be it. I don't know why they were so hasty to sack Kenny. They fired him, then got the cold shoulder from their first round of candidates (including Klopp) before having to move on the second tier, which included their eventual appointee - who was in such a position of strength he could dictate terms about the structure he'd be working in. Then their clever fudge solution bit them on the arse.

Indirectly, that whole shambles probably cost us about £100m as Rodgers refused to work with players the committee had identified.

After Rodgers stock was sky high after the 13/14 season, he negotiated himself the right to sign his own players, and FSG ended up in the crazy position of there being two parallel processes, which was always going to be a disaster.
I agree with the fact it was handled badly, needlessly and mystifyingly so in many respects. All I can think is that FSG was caught completely flat-footed by being turned down by all their leading candidates (Klopp, Ancelotti et al) and ended up making it up pretty much as they went along. That's pretty much all on them.

But I also think the perceived failure of the committee as it was then was largely down to Rodgers and his refusal to work in harmony with it, which is on him.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
10,487
Likes
6,833
Not with me, I heard the argument in favour back then but I've always thought Williams was a lumbering cart-horse. And Vorm gets a bit fat meh also. Thing is, as Allen and Borini showed, you can't simply transplant a player from a lower-level club and assume they'll do for you what they were doing for them, let alone improve or flourish in an environment of greater pressure and expectations. Rodgers never really understood that.
In all fairness the summer he came in and signed Allen and Borini there was no committee, head scouts, director of football, anything. The reason our summer seemed quite Swansea esque was because we took the Swansea manager, who had long term building plans and targets at Swansea and asked him who he wanted. That summer should never have happened the way it did.
 

[email protected]t

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
2,514
Likes
6,088
Not with me, I heard the argument in favour back then but I've always thought Williams was a lumbering cart-horse. And Vorm gets a bit fat meh also. Thing is, as Allen and Borini showed, you can't simply transplant a player from a lower-level club and assume they'll do for you what they were doing for them, let alone improve or flourish in an environment of greater pressure and expectations. Rodgers never really understood that.
Spot on. We got Allen and Borini that season. We could very well, and we were in for these players, ended up getting Williams, Siggurdson and Dempsey as well. By divine intervention we didn't and got Coutinho and Sturridge in the next window courtesy of the committee although Tom Ince appeared to be the preferred target wanted by Rodgers (I was on the Tomkins Times at the time and the natives were a little restless if I recall rightly).

Let that digest in for a wee while. We pursued Borini, Allen, Siggurdson, Williams, Dempsey and Tom Ince in the same season... We all hated the setup, myself as much as most, but with hindsight we really could have been fucked over more than we were.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
17,497
Likes
28,700
But I also think the perceived failure of the committee as it was then was largely down to Rodgers and his refusal to work in harmony with it, which is on him.
But I think his refusal to work in harmony with it is largely because it was installed to do the job that he had been assured wouldn't be pushed on him.

Yes, it's childish and petulant. It's extremely short sighted*, but it stems from a failure at the top of the structure.

* I often think of what could have been in the 13/14 season had Rodgers been willing to integrate committee signings a bit more - namely Alberto and Aspas. Rodgers settled on 14 lads he wanted to use, and ignored the rest. But while we were smashing the living shit out of teams left right and centre, couldn't we have got these lads time on the pitch? By the end of the season, with the team running on fumes and injuries and suspensions throwing a spanner in works of the title push, it could have been useful to have these lads able to contribute.
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
20,404
Likes
34,006
But I think his refusal to work in harmony with it is largely because it was installed to do the job that he had been assured wouldn't be pushed on him.

Yes, it's childish and petulant. It's extremely short sighted*, but it stems from a failure at the top of the structure.

* I often think of what could have been in the 13/14 season had Rodgers been willing to integrate committee signings a bit more - namely Alberto and Aspas. Rodgers settled on 14 lads he wanted to use, and ignored the rest. But while we were smashing the living shit out of teams left right and centre, couldn't we have got these lads time on the pitch? By the end of the season, with the team running on fumes and injuries and suspensions throwing a spanner in works of the title push, it could have been useful to have these lads able to contribute.
If he had no intention of working under that structure and felt it had been forced on him, he should have quit. By staying on and operating in the way he did, all he did was harm us. A classic case of cutting off his nose to spite his face.

Fortunately as an organisation I think our decision-making has been a lot more coherent since those days, in fact possibly since that very episode.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
17,497
Likes
28,700
Spot on. We got Allen and Borini that season. We could very well, and we were in for these players, ended up getting Williams, Siggurdson and Dempsey as well. By divine intervention we didn't and got Coutinho and Sturridge in the next window courtesy of the committee although Tom Ince appeared to be the preferred target wanted by Rodgers (I was on the Tomkins Times at the time and the natives were a little restless if I recall rightly).

Let that digest in for a wee while. We pursued Borini, Allen, Siggurdson, Williams, Dempsey and Tom Ince in the same season... We all hated the setup, myself as much as most, but with hindsight we really could have been fucked over more than we were.
Rodgers is Rodgers. He was here long enough for us to get a measure of him, and while he was undeniably shit in the transfer market (Tom Ince!) that is Brendan Rodgers.

It's like Everton fans criticising Sam Allerdyce for his dour, negative football. That's who he his, and it's the fault of whoever appointed him.

When Rodgers turned down the job, not wanting to work with a DOF, that should have been the end of the conversation. It shows a remarkable lack of leadership, and no little desperation, that FSG were willing to tear up their plan for a candidate who was about fifth or sixth on their list.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
17,497
Likes
28,700
If he had no intention of working under that structure and felt it had been forced on him, he should have quit. By staying on and operating in the way he did, all he did was harm us. A classic case of cutting off his nose to spite his face.

Fortunately as an organisation I think our decision-making has been a lot more coherent since those days, in fact possibly since that very episode.
To be fair to him, he was clear enough that he had no intention of working in that structure when he turned down the job.

When in post for six months, he finds that the new set-up is working broadly as a DOF would, it's hard to just jack in his notice. It's probably professionally damaging to walk out after just six months in charge, and he is probably already settled in the area.
 

mattyhurst

TIA Regular
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
12,845
Likes
8,627
Summed up for me when we overspent on Beneteke and thus instead of buying a proper back up keeper, got Bogdan for free.

That international break when Rodgers went was enjoyable with Klopp arriving.
 



[email protected]

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2014
Messages
2,514
Likes
6,088
To be fair to him, he was clear enough that he had no intention of working in that structure when he turned down the job.

When in post for six months, he finds that the new set-up is working broadly as a DOF would, it's hard to just jack in his notice. It's probably professionally damaging to walk out after just six months in charge, and he is probably already settled in the area.
I don't quite think he was that clear in the hiring process. He categorically stated it in the unveiling interview with Ayre and there was some debate at the time as to whether our favourite Harley riding CEO was actually aware that Rodgers would blurt it out to the world media just off the cuff.
 

Noo Noo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2014
Messages
1,842
Likes
1,484
find it very hard to judge the transfer dealings during his 'spell in charge' . i mean if you look at summer 2015 it was quite obvious he was on borrowed time yet the club still invested in new signings . For me the club would not be giving him a free rein in the market (or anyone not just rodgers) if as it appeared he was in the last chance saloon with confidence in him ebbed towards zero . After finishing 2nd the window of summer 2014 was quite woeful. we had a co owner and ceo involved with the 'committee' that appeared to be squabbling over how deals were to be structured for incoming players . it was all a bit of a mess. A lot of people have either left the club or been assigned different roles and a different structure is in place now regards transfers . IF all the transfer issues were solely down to the previous two managers in terms of signing some dross then the owners wouldn't have tried two different methods (d.o.f and committee) before deciding actually we should just settle on the guy in charge of getting us results on the pitch being the one with the final say.
For me the problems started when Suarez left. We all knew he was going long long before it actually happened and the succession plan as far as signings were going was woeful and I put a large part of that problem at Rodgers feet.

He had got the squad playing in a certain way, a way that got us 2nd and back into the CL, he deserves credit for that but rather than building on that it was almost like he scrapped the whole idea, had a look at what Chelsea were doing and decided that was the way to go. Enter Benteke who was for me a complete opposite to how the squad had been playing. All of a sudden we ended up in this mess of a tactical game plan where we wre doing half of one hing and half of another. From that moment his days were sadly numbered I think.

We must also remember he was given a blueprint at Swansea and did well with it. Worth noting that Barca were the flavour of the month back then he built his ideas round that and he was a perfect fit for Swansea at the time. Same with us. He was appointed with a decent squad in place and was able to blend his current thinking and the squad together. Same now at Celtic.

However, when that cycle ended and he needed to rebuild he clearly struggled.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
17,497
Likes
28,700
Summed up for me when we overspent on Beneteke and thus instead of buying a proper back up keeper, got Bogdan for free.

That international break when Rodgers went was enjoyable with Klopp arriving.
I think you can go further back than this even.

I still remember the game in 2012, reasonable early in Rodgers tenure when Arsenal absolutely played us off the park. This was when Rodgers was still trying to do his Swansea 'death by football' thing, and suffocate games with possession football.

In the midst of this was Suarez and Gerrard - the two best players at the club - looking absolutely lost, and struggling badly through playing a completely different game to everyone else.

As soon as either of them got the ball, which given their status was a lot, everything broke down. Rodgers style demanded that they held the ball, look for a simple pass, keep the ball moving and wait for the 9/10 chance rather than force the 5/10 chance. Which is certainly not Suarez and Gerrard.

After that game (2-0 I think, but it could have been six) it seems like a light goes on for Brendan, and he realises that his possession game is not going to work with his two best players, and he has to adapt.

There is a draw with Sunderland next, and then Utd at home, which we lose but with signs that there is a team coming together. After this we knock West Ham out of the cup, and then thrash Norwich 5-2, with Suarez by now operating much more freely and with some licence to do what he wants. I think he gets a hat-trick.

But while the team improves, and the second half of 12/13 lays the foundation for the title charge in 13/14, Rodgers, from that point on, is a man without a vision. His philosophy has gone from possession based domination to 'let's get it to them two boss lads and they'll sort it'. Of course, that's brilliant while you have the two boss lads.

Everything that follows his decision to abandon his philosophy makes things worse. Even as we're going on a run to the title in 13/14, none of the signings of that summer really contribute much (you can make a case for Sakho, but Rodgers clearly didn't rate him) and the following season - by which time we'd lost Suarez and, for all intents and purposes, Gerrard - the summer recruitment is an unmitigated disaster.

Rodger never gets a vision back. The recruitment is scattershot and unfocused, and there is no underlying strategy to back it up. By the time he spends £30m on Benteke no-one, including Rodgers, has a clue why, other than He's really good. Let's hope he can be really good for us.

At the beginning of 15/16 - Rodgers last few months in charge, I wondered if - with Gerrard and Suarez gone, and with nothing to lose - we might see Rodgers try and return to his original vision. Benteke might make some sense in that context, but it was quickly clear it was still a mess, and we navigated the first few fixtures by leaning on Coutinho. Waiting for him to do something amazing.

So you can argue that a more football literate appointment in 2012 would have been to swerve Rodgers and look for someone who's instincts are more naturally attuned to the clubs best players. But we ended up stuck with no vision or philosophy, under the direction of a man (and I have some sympathy) who had dropped his natural style and had no clue his to get it back.
 

Zinedine Biscan

Never go full Lovren
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
20,404
Likes
34,006
I think you can go further back than this even.

I still remember the game in 2012, reasonable early in Rodgers tenure when Arsenal absolutely played us off the park. This was when Rodgers was still trying to do his Swansea 'death by football' thing, and suffocate games with possession football.

In the midst of this was Suarez and Gerrard - the two best players at the club - looking absolutely lost, and struggling badly through playing a completely different game to everyone else.

As soon as either of them got the ball, which given their status was a lot, everything broke down. Rodgers style demanded that they held the ball, look for a simple pass, keep the ball moving and wait for the 9/10 chance rather than force the 5/10 chance. Which is certainly not Suarez and Gerrard.

After that game (2-0 I think, but it could have been six) it seems like a light goes on for Brendan, and he realises that his possession game is not going to work with his two best players, and he has to adapt.

There is a draw with Sunderland next, and then Utd at home, which we lose but with signs that there is a team coming together. After this we knock West Ham out of the cup, and then thrash Norwich 5-2, with Suarez by now operating much more freely and with some licence to do what he wants. I think he gets a hat-trick.

But while the team improves, and the second half of 12/13 lays the foundation for the title charge in 13/14, Rodgers, from that point on, is a man without a vision. His philosophy has gone from possession based domination to 'let's get it to them two boss lads and they'll sort it'. Of course, that's brilliant while you have the two boss lads.

Everything that follows his decision to abandon his philosophy makes things worse. Even as we're going on a run to the title in 13/14, none of the signings of that summer really contribute much (you can make a case for Sakho, but Rodgers clearly didn't rate him) and the following season - by which time we'd lost Suarez and, for all intents and purposes, Gerrard - the summer recruitment is an unmitigated disaster.

Rodger never gets a vision back. The recruitment is scattershot and unfocused, and there is no underlying strategy to back it up. By the time he spends £30m on Benteke no-one, including Rodgers, has a clue why, other than He's really good. Let's hope he can be really good for us.

At the beginning of 15/16 - Rodgers last few months in charge, I wondered if - with Gerrard and Suarez gone, and with nothing to lose - we might see Rodgers try and return to his original vision. Benteke might make some sense in that context, but it was quickly clear it was still a mess, and we navigated the first few fixtures by leaning on Coutinho. Waiting for him to do something amazing.

So you can argue that a more football literate appointment in 2012 would have been to swerve Rodgers and look for someone who's instincts are more naturally attuned to the clubs best players. But we ended up stuck with no vision or philosophy, under the direction of a man (and I have some sympathy) who had dropped his natural style and had no clue his to get it back.
Honestly think the club was in an odd position back then. We had been in the relative doldrums for a few years but with genuine ambitions to claw our way back into the top 4, and so went looking for top-bracket managers who could as near as guarantee it. But through a combination of being a level below being able to attract managers of that status, and the ones (like Klopp) more willing to take on a proper challenge like that being unavailable, a rethink in strategy was needed.

I think that's why we looked instead to younger up-and-comers with big ideas (or 'philosophies', blech) who'd see us as a step up but in theory be able to grow as we did and in time become the sort of top-bracket manager we'd failed to attract previously. It sounds great on paper, but in reality things rarely work out that way. You can also put United turning to Moyes as Ferguson's successor in this same category.

In the modern world managing a big club with the weight and expectations that carries is very different to over-performing with a smaller club, you really do need to turn to someone who's been there and done it before, otherwise you get what we and United got, someone with (for the sake of argument) the best intentions but lacking the necessary skills, experience and sheer brass balls to make the big calls and back your own judgement.

I think the first half-dozen years or so was a very steep learning curve for FSG, but hopefully they and we have come out the other side in a much better position. I really do think it feels as if that's the case, and the questionable decisions we saw in that early period have been consigned to history.

And certainly I hope that in the far distant future does leave, our choice or replacement won't be limited to either the Swansea or the Wigan manager!
 
Last edited:

Noo Noo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2014
Messages
1,842
Likes
1,484
In the modern world managing a big club with the weight and expectations that carries is very different to over-performing with a smaller club, you really do need to turn to someone who's been there and done it before, otherwise you get what we and United got, someone with (for the sake of argument) the best intentions but lacking the necessary skills, experience and sheer brass balls to make the big calls and back your own judgement.
Agree but I would even say that the margins are so fine that you need a footballing philosophy that is instilled into every corner of a club and the whole thing built on that. That is what Rodgers promised and did not deliver while Klopp is actually doing this and the results are clear to see. The foundations appear solid, every step, no matter how small is a forward one.

It is what Guardiola is doing at City and why Arsenal are now faltering. It is also why I'm quite comfortable in saying that I doubt United will win another league title while Mourinho is there. They can bank roll it all they want but there's not 100% buy in by the players throughout the club or their supporters for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.