Brendan Rodgers

[Muzzy_Larsson]

1 hour ago, Guest454545 said:

To be fair though, you and I both know that it was a meds if epic proportions not getting McGinn. I also question whether Rodgers was behind the driving of Johnny Hayes. On top of that, there was not making Patrick Roberts permanent (although that was mostly on Roberts, I think). Lawell - as I don't need to tell you - had a clear pattern of signing managers targets in their first season, and then tightening the purse strings in subsequent seasons. That, more than anything in my opinion, is why Rodgers left for Leicester mid season, while on course for a treble treble. Promises not kept, which is probably why he felt he needed an ally on the transfer side, even if he was wojious.

The way it was handled was a mess at the time of course and it was mainly due to Lawell (due to his long standing beef with Petrie). However, when Celtic eventually had a bid accepted at the 11th hour Rodgers never covered himself in glory either telling McGinn he'd have work to do to nail down a regular place ahead of Brown and McGregor. McGinn felt that Celtic weren't all that desperate to sign him as a result while Villa on the other hand went all out for him, matched the asking price and took him out to dinner with Bruce later that same day where he said he'd build his team around him and Grealish. Reason I know that is that an immediate family member of McGinn's, that I've known for a long time told me that a few weeks after he signed for Villa.

 

He was most definitely was the driving force behind Johnny Hayes, he worked with him before at Reading and was very public about and that he considered him the best player in the league outside the Celtic squad. Roberts again you are misinformed, Rodgers never actually wanted Roberts permanently and whenever he was fit Forrest played ahead of Roberts. Rodgers wanted Musonda instead although he ended up having to wait until the January window to get him. Again Rodgers suggested this publicly in saying that he'd been trying for a year to sign Musonda (while Roberts was still at the club).

 

Lawell had many faults and did foist players upon managers but Rodgers even if given everything he wanted would still have left us for Leicester first chance he got, you have your head in the sand if you think otherwise, it was an obvious step up for him in his career and that'll always dictate what Rodgers does.

[Ely fox]

Hope he don’t cock up the rebuild or it will require a further rebuildment 

[smudgerfox]

2 hours ago, BKLFox said:

Daka & Soumare were brought in to blood slowly, Lookman has done a job i'd say leaving Bertrand & Vestergaard.
Much has been been said about these 2 & really its these 2 that pins the "Rodgers has a shocking record in the transfer market" badge which i feel is unjust as for all we know Daka & Soumare could go on to be world beaters like Fofana.
As i say much has been said about the other 2, Bertrand was brought in to cover for Thomas whilst the other 3 fullbacks were on the mend it made sense he'd been around a bit could pass on his experience to the whole squad, he was free & wasn't meant to be there as a starter, he then gets injured himelf.
As for Vestergaard i'm in the he's no good camp also but again i get why he came in, it was a week before the start of the season & we were down to 1x CB + Dan (who has since acquitted himself well).
He spent 15m he didn't plan on spending but needed a premier lge experienced CB maybe Vestergaard was the only 1 available for the money we could spend, bear in mind who ever was coming in knew he was coming in as cover only. Rodgers had also stated he wanted to buy a young up & comer CB to blood but the situation changed for him.

So 5 guys came in only 1 was really intended on being starting 11 material with 2 for the future & 2 as experienced cover but then 8 to12 were then out the squad at some point through injury 4/5 & at 1 point 6 of them were the 1st & 2nd complete back line.
 

So what you’re saying is our squad isn’t deep enough to withstand an injury crisis but we do haVe room for players who aren’t going to play - while they’re being blooded 

[Kilworthfox]

8 hours ago, Babylon said:

Did you expect a great deal else? The season before we'd had one of our best league finishes ever and won an FA Cup for the first time in our history. Many a pundit would probably have pointed out the only way is down, for good season. We simply don't spend that much more than a bunch of other teams to cement us high up constantly, especially when so many players are out injured and with more games due to Europe.

 

I'm no Rodgers apologist, I've been highly critical of him, but if we finish 8th quite frankly that probably sits within the clubs acceptable targets at the start of the season, albeit the lower end. 

Yes. 

 

For 2 season our team has been 3rd to 5th. 

 

We added to the squad. We didn't lose anyone if note from the team, so how have we regressed? 

 

Did the other 8 or so teams below us invest heavily and thus brings us down? No. 

 

So that's 1 point. 

 

More alarming is our inability to defend, and our inability to create any service for our strikers when we have 2/3rds of the ball most games. 

 

It doesn't take Alex Ferguson to explain that it's not working. 

 

All that showing our wage outlay shows is that we have recruited well since we have returned to the Prem in comparison to our rivals, hence finishing so high. 

[Kilworthfox]

7 hours ago, Manwell Pablo said:

How much worse though, Exactly? it’s been a tad disappointing but if we manage 8th or at least 9th, it’s literally 2 or 3 league places where I’d be more than happy, add a European semi final to boot and we did win the Charity Shield as a bonus, it’s not really that bad is it. Given the issues we’ve had with player availability added in is it really enough to pull the trigger on the bloke who has been the best long term Leicester Manager in the premier league Era? I’d say he’s at least earned the right to give it a go next season.

It's a logical opinion my friend.  I'm not arguing that. There is alot to be said for loyalty aswell, I just don't think if I were Mr moneybags at LCFC I would accept the state of affairs on the pitch. 

 

Defensively and in attack, we are easy to play against, as Mourinho showed. 

[Babylon]

25 minutes ago, Kilworthfox said:

Yes. 

 

For 2 season our team has been 3rd to 5th. 

 

We added to the squad. We didn't lose anyone if note from the team, so how have we regressed? 

 

Did the other 8 or so teams below us invest heavily and thus brings us down? No. 

 

So that's 1 point. 

 

More alarming is our inability to defend, and our inability to create any service for our strikers when we have 2/3rds of the ball most games. 

 

It doesn't take Alex Ferguson to explain that it's not working. 

 

All that showing our wage outlay shows is that we have recruited well since we have returned to the Prem in comparison to our rivals, hence finishing so high. 

“Didn’t lose anyone of note”… At the end of March we’d had 43 separate injuries. Only team with worse was Chelsea, and that’s before you even consider players who’ve had injuries the season before and were trying to get back to form and fitness.

 

I’m not going to argue against boring turgid football, the set piece nonsense, Rodgers mistakes, poor signings etc 

 

But, I’m also not going to ignore the constant disruption we’ve faced because of those injuries. 

[Kilworthfox]

15 minutes ago, Babylon said:

“Didn’t lose anyone of note”… At the end of March we’d had 43 separate injuries. Only team with worse was Chelsea, and that’s before you even consider players who’ve had injuries the season before and were trying to get back to form and fitness.

 

I’m not going to argue against boring turgid football, the set piece nonsense, Rodgers mistakes, poor signings etc 

 

But, I’m also not going to ignore the constant disruption we’ve faced because of those injuries. 

I was referring to the end of last season until the start of this season, not during seasons.  Just to clarify. 

[Dames]

2 hours ago, Daggers said:

Levels though innit. Shit performances from shit squads can be suffered with a liberal dose of alcohol. Shit performances from a largely decent squad is an entirely different proposition - especially when you know what they’re capable of. I’ve grown to absolutely hate going to matches this season. 
 

Still, I’m even boring myself with my contributions to this thread now. I think it’s time for me to go watch non-league instead. 

Exactly this. When you’ve got Danny Tiatto turning out for you in centre mid next to Patrick Kisnorbo your expections are very heavily tempered. Expectations will naturally be higher when you’ve got a string of international midfielders from the top ranked teams in the world and one of top 10 greatest strikers in Premier League history. 

[Aus Fox]

1 hour ago, Kilworthfox said:

Yes. 

 

For 2 season our team has been 3rd to 5th. 

 

We added to the squad. We didn't lose anyone if note from the team, so how have we regressed? 

 

Did the other 8 or so teams below us invest heavily and thus brings us down? No. 

 

So that's 1 point. 

 

More alarming is our inability to defend, and our inability to create any service for our strikers when we have 2/3rds of the ball most games. 

 

It doesn't take Alex Ferguson to explain that it's not working. 

 

All that showing our wage outlay shows is that we have recruited well since we have returned to the Prem in comparison to our rivals, hence finishing so high. 

We did though, and this is the point that some seem to miss, although we didn’t sell anyone, we lost our whole first choice back four and much of our second choice back four for well over half a season.

Fofana, is for me, alongside Maddison the best player we have and will go on to be world class, we lost him for most of the season. 
Vardy, Ndidi, Evans, Ricardo all key players and have all missed large chunks of the season.

So no we didn’t lose anyone in terms of selling them, but we did lose all of our key players at one point or another for significant periods of the season and I still don’t think we’ve put out or first choice XI for about 18 months

[foxfanazer]

We're blatantly going into next season with him in charge so we might as well just get on with it. He's not who I want in charge but I reckon he's still got the backing from Top and Co. I don't see a major turnaround in our fortunes but I just pray we're better to watch next season and we at least attempt to address our deficiencies. I'm worried about giving him the transfer budget

[BKLFox]

1 hour ago, smudgerfox said:

So what you’re saying is our squad isn’t deep enough to withstand an injury crisis but we do haVe room for players who aren’t going to play - while they’re being blooded 

Yep not every transfers is for now as we don’t have the funds to buy ready made every window

[inckley fox]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

“Didn’t lose anyone of note”… At the end of March we’d had 43 separate injuries. Only team with worse was Chelsea, and that’s before you even consider players who’ve had injuries the season before and were trying to get back to form and fitness.

 

I’m not going to argue against boring turgid football, the set piece nonsense, Rodgers mistakes, poor signings etc 

 

But, I’m also not going to ignore the constant disruption we’ve faced because of those injuries. 

Can Rodgers be exempted from responsibility for those injuries? I read Rangnick's recent comments about how, if they have so many injury issues, someone in the club's management structure needs to take a look at ways in which they may be contributing to that. So, if managers do impact on these issues, can this be a justification for some of this season's turbulence, or should it serve as a warning of what we should expect from this regime?

 

It's another reason why, personally, I find myself in a sort of middle-ground where I reckon Rodgers has done a fairly impressive job here, but am equally unconvinced that he's the man to successfully restructure, and lead us through another season.

[smudgerfox]

8 hours ago, BKLFox said:

Yep not every transfers is for now as we don’t have the funds to buy ready made every window

So the lack of “right now” depth in the squad is a strategic choice and not the result of misfortune…

[smudgerfox]

It’s hard to know what’s going on but obviously having a lot of players out obviously does put more workload  on those who are fit and can then lead to them becoming injured. I think there is evidence that has happened in Brendan’s time with players rushed back too quickly - there are too many in the wider squad whom he doesn’t trust - Hamza, Amartey, Perez, Soumare, Praet, Mendy (until the Afcon) and Benkovic before him, Soyuncu, Vestergaard, Bertrand, Ihenacho. That’s ten, nearly half  of the 25 man squad plus Praet who isn’t in it. Add in two back up keepers who don’t count in the same way and you’re down to a very small group who are heavily played. 
 

 

[SafewayFox]

37 minutes ago, smudgerfox said:

It’s hard to know what’s going on but obviously having a lot of players out obviously does put more workload  on those who are fit and can then lead to them becoming injured. I think there is evidence that has happened in Brendan’s time with players rushed back too quickly - there are too many in the wider squad whom he doesn’t trust - Hamza, Amartey, Perez, Soumare, Praet, Mendy (until the Afcon) and Benkovic before him, Soyuncu, Vestergaard, Bertrand, Ihenacho. That’s ten, nearly half  of the 25 man squad plus Praet who isn’t in it. Add in two back up keepers who don’t count in the same way and you’re down to a very small group who are heavily played. 
 

 

Hadn’t thought of it like that before and I know it’s not like FIFA or FM and getting rid of players on an inflated wage is troublesome but I think @Ric Flair mentioned on a post about our wage bill/structure - we definitely have a tricky patch on our hands and don’t envy Rodgers/Rudkin on that one.

 

Any idea if we have a lower wage bill after we replaced Slimani/Gray etc for Soumare/Daka and co?

[CloudFox]

24 minutes ago, SafewayFox said:

Hadn’t thought of it like that before and I know it’s not like FIFA or FM and getting rid of players on an inflated wage is troublesome but I think @Ric Flair mentioned on a post about our wage bill/structure - we definitely have a tricky patch on our hands and don’t envy Rodgers/Rudkin on that one.

 

Any idea if we have a lower wage bill after we replaced Slimani/Gray etc for Soumare/Daka and co?

I don't think there's any way of knowing until financial year figures come out, and even then we can only guesstimate.

 

However, Slimani and Gray will have been on much higher wages than those two we brought in. Slimani will certainly have been on high wages, which I imagine is part of why it was hard to shift him.

[Dahnsouff]

10 hours ago, Dames said:

Exactly this. When you’ve got Danny Tiatto turning out for you in centre mid next to Patrick Kisnorbo your expections are very heavily tempered. Expectations will naturally be higher when you’ve got a string of international midfielders from the top ranked teams in the world and one of top 10 greatest strikers in Premier League history. 

Yes but you are comparing the current squad to the Tiatto squad, we don`t play against them, we play against teams who have also evolved massively, so therefore saying we 10x better than we were is madness, if the opposition are 25x better than they were (assuming we were all at a similar level)  

[Dames]

1 hour ago, Dahnsouff said:

Yes but you are comparing the current squad to the Tiatto squad, we don`t play against them, we play against teams who have also evolved massively, so therefore saying we 10x better than we were is madness, if the opposition are 25x better than they were (assuming we were all at a similar level)  

Its more about expectations in terms of results and entertainment. You know when the squad is poor more than likely the football is going to be poor, anything else is a bonus.

 

But we have our best ever squad which has proven capable in the past so naturally expectations are going to be higher for results and the football should also be of a better standard. For large chunks of the season our play has been awful and the defending comical. You expect it from a defence littered with free transfers and rejects but not from a backline made up of multi million pound international defenders. 

[Mickyblueeyes]

I think we start next season with Brendan which for me is very disheartening. Love to proved wrong but it’s going to be very difficult to watch us at the start of next year and I worry for the summer. I would prefer Brendan to bow out end of this season because I don’t think he is the man for us for the next two years. I don’t buy this argument that we should give him a few months next year and get rid if fundamental issues remain issues. It’s such a poor way of looking at things- you don’t waste a season and pre season unless you believe the man is your go to for the long term (in football terms). However, it is what it is and I’d love to post in here come November apologising to the man.

 

One thing I hope we don’t continue to do is let him have his excuses. While he has done exceptional things for Leicester, this club, ownership and his predecessors have also set him up well. Apart from that moron Taylor, no Leicester manager I’ve seen has walked into the job with 3 very very good midfielders ready (albeit the Tielemans deal was still in the pipeline). He has had the ability to add to what was a very good team (squad needed work and still does). So let’s not let him pretend when we continue to have issues with basics that he has done it all himself. 

Edited 17 May 2022 by Mickyblueeyes

[Dahnsouff]

18 minutes ago, Dames said:

Its more about expectations in terms of results and entertainment. You know when the squad is poor more than likely the football is going to be poor, anything else is a bonus.

 

But we have our best ever squad which has proven capable in the past so naturally expectations are going to be higher for results and the football should also be of a better standard. For large chunks of the season our play has been awful and the defending comical. You expect it from a defence littered with free transfers and rejects but not from a backline made up of multi million pound international defenders. 

Quite agree, it is inevitable that with this squad we expect better than Danny Tiatto, etc, but we should also bear in mind that the opposition this squad faces are incomparable to those that Tiatto faced too

[filbertway]

6 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Quite agree, it is inevitable that with this squad we expect better than Danny Tiatto, etc, but we should also bear in mind that the opposition this squad faces are incomparable to those that Tiatto faced too

I'll be shocked if I don't actually hear Brendan reeling this excuse off at some point

 

"Look, Danny Tiatto, remember him? He used to play in the championship for this great club, the players that my boys are facing are incomparable to the likes of which Tiatto faced. So maybe think twice before slagging us off for losing"

[BKLFox]

3 hours ago, smudgerfox said:

So the lack of “right now” depth in the squad is a strategic choice and not the result of misfortune…

the lack of real "right now" depth in certain positions can be strategic yes along with the fact that existing established players not stepping up to the plate.
The lack of depth we have suffered with this season is within the back line with 6 players out so that includes back up players so already down on depth, we couldn't sign 6 defenders to cover as we then end up with more redundant players once those 6 came back hence why Ndidi, Albrighton, Hamza & even KDH have been used in those normal defensive positions.

[Dahnsouff]

8 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I'll be shocked if I don't actually hear Brendan reeling this excuse off at some point

 

"Look, Danny Tiatto, remember him? He used to play in the championship for this great club, the players that my boys are facing are incomparable to the likes of which Tiatto faced. So maybe think twice before slagging us off for losing"

So you feel this isn`t true?  

[smudgerfox]

18 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

the lack of real "right now" depth in certain positions can be strategic yes along with the fact that existing established players not stepping up to the plate.
The lack of depth we have suffered with this season is within the back line with 6 players out so that includes back up players so already down on depth, we couldn't sign 6 defenders to cover as we then end up with more redundant players once those 6 came back hence why Ndidi, Albrighton, Hamza & even KDH have been used in those normal defensive positions.

 

But for instance we signed Vestergaard. He hasn't been injured. And yet throughout the defensive crisis he's barely had a kick. Had we signed an injury free, experienced centre back leader, a sort of younger Jonny Evans, Amartey and/or Soyuncu might have played better, the set piece problem might have been less severe and we might have won more games. You can't complain about lack of squad depth when you have new and expensive signings sitting on the bench and playing once a blue moon. Would Bertrand being fit have made any real difference? The squad is thin because of the poor quality of the signings in summer 2021. That is being skilfully glossed over. 

 

As someone said the other day - 7-8 of Brendan's first choice line up are players he inherited. 

Edited 17 May 2022 by smudgerfox
add a sentence

[Ric Flair]

Please please keep him away from transfers, remind him that cautious and negative football doesn't suit us and that he needs to accept help in resolving the set piece issue and fitness problems (possibly on its way to being rectified) then I'll be content to see if he can rediscover what made us a very very dangerous team in this division next season.