Brendan Rodgers

[shade]

8 minutes ago, ttfn said:

Saturday’s heat map.

who you gonna call?

[foxfanazer]

2 minutes ago, shade said:

who you gonna call?

Graham Potter?

[FoxesWalk]

this account is just trolling us now 

[Stadt]

He’s had lots of time to turn it around, not just this season but our general trajectory gets worse by the month - given the talent we have (for now) it’s inexcusable.

 

Seeing as our we’ll have to adequately replace a lot of players (good and bad) it’s imperative we have a positive and committed manager in charge. No matter how successful a manager Brendan has been for the club, he hasn’t been the man to take us forward for a long time now.

 

A rational, forward thinking board would have sacked him ages ago. 

Edited 27 February 2023 by Stadt

[tsintskaro]

Owner is shitting in it's bed but nobody is mentioning him 

weakest fanbase sadly

[Dan LCFC]

8 hours ago, RoboFox said:

Just listened to his post-match. Same thing every week, bemoans a "lack of aggression".

 

If you're saying the same thing about the players under your management week in, week out, surely you have to recognise there's a problem? 

It's all the result of a culture of unaccountability and a successful brainwashing exercise. These are the knock-on effects of what he says - he sets a narrative and successfully absolves himself of blame while things gradually get worse.

 

I'm not saying he actively wants to harm the club but I'm saying he's willing to to save his own reputation, and really, given how uncritical the media in this country are, why wouldn't he? It's too easy for him.

[sacreblueits442]

9 hours ago, Chelmofox said:

Why, he's shown the complete opposite? I fear there is just an elevated reputation thingy going on with Potter, much the same as with Brendan. If a foreign manager had Potters record at Chelsea, the press would be having a field day and there would be little regard for their mental health. Really don't see the appeal and why people think it would work out here. 

...I  suspect he would have the opportunity to rebuild and create a foundation!!!

 He just cannot get that breathing space at Chelsea. 

[Dan LCFC]

8 hours ago, ParkerPen said:

if i remember rightly, Mickey Adams was our last manager to walk. I cant think of anyone at prem clubs recentlty off hand.

Can't blame him for not walking. Same with Vestergaard and not leaving. We were the ones silly enough to sanction those contracts.

 

You can though blame the ownership's for their massive blind spot on Rodgers. Now Top in the last month or so took some action that many of us were hoping to see but he's still very much bought into Rodgers unfortunately.

[surrifox]

20 minutes ago, FoxesWalk said:

this account is just trolling us now 

As a latecomer to this metric and someone naturally predisposed to cynicism I’ve concluded that it’s all bo****ks and no-one should pay it any attention . You’re welcome 

[sacreblueits442]

4 hours ago, Wymsey said:

You do wonder, after hearing his comments in the recent past, whether Rodgers wants to stay here in the longer-term.

...worrying that he seemed excited again recently and making noises about taking us forward!!!

[Dan LCFC]

5 hours ago, ttfn said:

Saturday’s heat map.

The heat 

 

 

[Gamble92]

The thing i hate about xG is it obviously doesn't take into account that if you take the lead you are less likely to have more attacks because you don't need to. So maddison can score a couple of shots outside the box when we are on top, like the forest 4-0 demolition, with a low xG and then your team naturally defends a bit more later on. 

 

Then morons come out after and say oh but our xGs were similar. It's a pointless and tedious comparison. 

 

Having said that there is no excusing 0.01

[Tom12345]

With the game against Arsenal, Maddison was out, fair enough, but Rodgers straight away went back to his conservatism and the reason why he can never be an elite manager (or still). I have said it numerous times that I hope he changed, but he hasn’t. At the first opportunity, he dropped Mendy and brought Ndidi back in, and made him captain. Mendy is clearly a better baller for us and is so much better in making us a better team in terms of beating the press and being able to string a few passes together. I said it before, if Rodgers fails to see this and brings Ndidi back in for Mendy, it clearly means that he fails to see what everyone else sees. The result is a stark contrast against what we have enjoyed the past few games (even against Man U, we were great first half - Rodgers just could not react to the changes made by Man U at half time).

 

He should have kept Mendy. With Maddison out, we clearly needed someone who is close to playing like him. He should have dropped Nacho down to that role and started Vardy. I don’t mind Praet, but he is not a no.10 like what Maddison or Nacho can offer. Praet could have started alongside Mendy or come in place of Tete. But it was obvious that we had no outlet from the middle because (1) we missed Maddison; (2) we had a handicap in Ndidi.

 

Tactically Rodgers has proven again he is inept.

 

He only fell into what we had last few games because of injuries and really poor performance of some players. Now his real self seems to be back.  We shall see, but if Ndidi is in the starting lineup next game, we are done. Even without seeing the rest of the lineup or tactic, it shows Rodgers has not learnt and I can reasonably predict that: (1) we will see more of the backwards/sideways football we are now very used to seeing; (2) we will have less than 5 shots on target or otherwise struggle to create decent chances; (3) even with Maddison back in, it will just be paper over fire.

Edited 28 February 2023 by Tom12345

[Viktor-LCFC]

He's a shocking coach, this team after 4 seasons together still struggle to beat any half arsed press, most of City good stuff is off the cuff by the players or in transition.

[Tom12345]

3 minutes ago, Viktor-LCFC said:

He's a shocking coach, this team after 4 seasons together still struggle to beat any half arsed press, most of City good stuff is off the cuff by the players or in transition.

He is definitely stuck in the past, even though he talks about the “modern” game a lot as if he knows a lot about it.

[The Doctor]

4 hours ago, Gamble92 said:

The thing i hate about xG is it obviously doesn't take into account that if you take the lead you are less likely to have more attacks because you don't need to. So maddison can score a couple of shots outside the box when we are on top, like the forest 4-0 demolition, with a low xG and then your team naturally defends a bit more later on. 

 

Then morons come out after and say oh but our xGs were similar. It's a pointless and tedious comparison. 

 

Having said that there is no excusing 0.01

a) that's exactly what xG timing charts show

b) it's a measure of chance quality, not likelihood of winning. the point of it is to give analysts a baseline to look at. it's there so we can say "ok, are we just running hot in front of goal and masking a lack of creativity to make those chances?"; "managers asked us to look at set pieces, what sort of quality of chance are we creating and giving up from set pieces, what's that look like Vs the league average, are we making sufficient use of our dead balls and are we defending them properly"

 

average Joe on the street misusing the metric doesn't mean the metric doesn't actually account for things

[ParkerPen]

3 hours ago, The Doctor said:

a) that's exactly what xG timing charts show

b) it's a measure of chance quality, not likelihood of winning. the point of it is to give analysts a baseline to look at. it's there so we can say "ok, are we just running hot in front of goal and masking a lack of creativity to make those chances?"; "managers asked us to look at set pieces, what sort of quality of chance are we creating and giving up from set pieces, what's that look like Vs the league average, are we making sufficient use of our dead balls and are we defending them properly"

 

average Joe on the street misusing the metric doesn't mean the metric doesn't actually account for things

Good Post, 

 

it is A metric people

[Gamble92]

4 hours ago, The Doctor said:

a) that's exactly what xG timing charts show

b) it's a measure of chance quality, not likelihood of winning. the point of it is to give analysts a baseline to look at. it's there so we can say "ok, are we just running hot in front of goal and masking a lack of creativity to make those chances?"; "managers asked us to look at set pieces, what sort of quality of chance are we creating and giving up from set pieces, what's that look like Vs the league average, are we making sufficient use of our dead balls and are we defending them properly"

 

average Joe on the street misusing the metric doesn't mean the metric doesn't actually account for things

I'm saying that it's used as the main stat by anyone now to prove who should have won when there is the obvious things like that it doesn't take into account. 

[Foxxed]

On 27/02/2023 at 11:28, Ric Flair said:

We just bid £20m for bloody Jack Harrison, sacking Rodgers is a years wages and the replacement who'd cost way less than that so from an accounting perspective over the next 12 months is essentially the cost of the new manager.

 

This isn't the reason, we have to acknowledge that Top absolutely loves Brendan, we are powerless in the current numbers on doing anything. The overwhelming majority of our match going fans don't share the view you would assume from social media and platforms like this. That's what baffles me.

 

The best hope is there's a frank and honest conversation in the summer and Brendan fancies a new challenge but accepts he's not earning £10m a year anywhere else again and that he knows he can't just dig in and keep picking up that money until 2025. He needs to go and prosper again elsewhere and I'm sure he will do.

 

This won't be the last successful period for Brendan at a club, but I'm as sure as I have been on anything that the next success that comes his way is far more likely at another club than here, he has now contributed to the situation where we are worse than when he found us 4 years ago.

 

He isn't fixing us any time soon, just like our injuries aren't going to stop any time soon or that we are going to stop being horribly passive in long stretches of games, usually at the start of games. Momentum and lasting change don't work like that from environments and regimes that have caused it. Once the dynamic shifts, getting back to how he worked 4 years ago is utter fallacy and a pipe dream.

The Top loves Bren idea is insane though. It might be true but there are other seemingly less insane reasons. Top loves Bren so much he doesn't mind a relegation scrap, players running down contracts thereby losing us money? Weird. Money is still my best guess. If it's true that we will have the money once our wages decrease in the summer then I'll start believing the True Love theory if we keep him.

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

The Top loves Bren idea is insane though. It might be true but there are other seemingly less insane reasons. Top loves Bren so much he doesn't mind a relegation scrap, players running down contracts thereby losing us money? Weird. Money is still my best guess. If it's true that we will have the money once our wages decrease in the summer then I'll start believing the True Love theory if we keep him.

I don't see how it's any more weird or insane than the idea we're so poor we can't afford to sack the manager who's got us in a relegation battle, but at the same time we could afford to make three (nearly four) January signings while knocking back bids in the summer for players like Soumare. It seems far more likely that either Top still believes Rodgers is the right man for the job, or Top has too much going on elsewhere to worry about how shit we are and it's his underlings who are still somehow keeping the faith.

[Foxxed]

2 minutes ago, Guest said:

I don't see how it's any more weird or insane than the idea we're so poor we can't afford to sack the manager who's got us in a relegation battle, but at the same time we could afford to make three (nearly four) January signings while knocking back bids in the summer for players like Soumare. It seems far more likely that either Top still believes Rodgers is the right man for the job, or Top has too much going on elsewhere to worry about how shit we are and it's his underlings who are still somehow keeping the faith.

It's a fair point but financing could not be as simple as we think it is.

 

Those transfers could well be spread over a fair bit of time whereas Brendan would need a lump sum immediately.

 

And in as far as relegation goes it's riskier to try a new manager than to try a new left back.

[fuchsntf]

17 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

Can't blame him for not walking. Same with Vestergaard and not leaving. We were the ones silly enough to sanction those contracts.

 

You can though blame the ownership's for their massive blind spot on Rodgers. Now Top in the last month or so took some action that many of us were hoping to see but he's still very much bought into Rodgers unfortunately.

Or like always…We don’t know the whole story..,.!

[ARTY_FOX]

17 hours ago, FoxesWalk said:

this account is just trolling us now 

We deserve it. It was the most pathetic display I've ever seen. Southampton lost 9-0 to us and were more of acompetition than we gave arsenal. 

Edited 28 February 2023 by ARTY_FOX

[Le Renard]

6 minutes ago, Guest said:

I don't see how it's any more weird or insane than the idea we're so poor we can't afford to sack the manager who's got us in a relegation battle, but at the same time we could afford to make three (nearly four) January signings while knocking back bids in the summer for players like Soumare. It seems far more likely that either Top still believes Rodgers is the right man for the job, or Top has too much going on elsewhere to worry about how shit we are and it's his underlings who are still somehow keeping the faith.

I just think it is a case of "benefit of the doubt".  Rodgers said we needed a rebuild and the team had gone stale, so Top obviously believes/hopes this is the reason we are pretty shite at the moment.  If we survive relegation, and Rodgers gets his rebuild completed in the summer, this will show if Rodgers was correct.

If he doesn't start getting the results he will be on thin ice, and we will see the emperor's new clothes, god forbid!  Don't forget Rodgers is a savvy media operator, and as I've said before somewhere on this thread his glaring 'Brentisms' don't necessarily translate to other cultures. 

[Nod.E]

11 hours ago, Gamble92 said:

The thing i hate about xG is it obviously doesn't take into account that if you take the lead you are less likely to have more attacks because you don't need to. So maddison can score a couple of shots outside the box when we are on top, like the forest 4-0 demolition, with a low xG and then your team naturally defends a bit more later on. 

 

Then morons come out after and say oh but our xGs were similar. It's a pointless and tedious comparison. 

 

Having said that there is no excusing 0.01

Absolutely. It's a handy metric but only when taken with this context. 

 

In a game that is tight with teams going blow for blow, you can use it to understand who was edging it. 

 

Or, like at the weekend, you can use it to illustrate how little threat teams offer at times!