Brendan Rodgers

[The Year Of The Fox]

32 minutes ago, Dusty said:

Did you have an issue when we were defensive against Liverpool after taking the lead? Those substitutions seemed to work quite well too. 
 

You can spin it whatever way you want really. We’ve been poor this season, for me that is down to more than Rodgers although he has played his part. 
 

Offensively I think we’re playing brilliantly atm, we’re scoring lots of goals and lots of players have been playing well over the last few months. We’re going to be a completely different side once we have our back 4 again.

No I didn’t. But even a broken clock is right twice a day. 
 

We were brilliant that day though 

 

There’s also a huge difference in being defensive at home to Liverpool than at home to Brighton. Ones sensible. The other is just negative. 
 

Lots of people are hedging their bets on us having our players coming back from injury and hitting the ground running. And not getting another injury again.

 

If Fofana does slot straight back in, and is his ‘old’ excellent self, he could be gone in the summer in any case. Then we’re relying on what we currently have, or relying on finding a better defender than we currently have (mentioning no names 🇩🇰) 

Edited 2 February 2022 by The Year Of The Fox

[Daggers]

On 01/02/2022 at 07:50, Babylon said:

Let’s be honest here, what people mean by stubbornness is him not doing things the way they want him to.

If he’s not going to take on board someone’s informed, lived experience, gained from taking Northampton Town to three back-2-back Champions League, four FA and two League cups, then it is going to reflect very poorly on him. Honestly, I expected better from a fellow manager.

[sacreblueits442]

14 hours ago, BKLFox said:

Cags doesn't want to engage out wide? yet he is very comfortable in tackling (& often losing) on the halfway line with no support behind him, at least if he engaged out wide in a 3 then a CM will slot in behind him or CCB will file over.
What is it about lack of defenders forcing him to play Vestergaard that you don't quite get? When all fit & healthy the default setting will be a back 4 & it won't have Vestergaard anywhere near it. In the meantime he has to play & he has to fit the highline otherwise you are changing 9 players within a system rather than 1.

...not sure why you would have to change 9 players, you drop deeper and play on the counter!!!

  You look back at the semi final first leg against Villa and the problem we had was Soyuncu not coming across to engage with their left wing attacker. With our Wingbacks pushed up to the halfway line, the space that they left behind glaringly exposed us. Soyuncu ended up in no man's land, he could not cut the cross out nor was he in a position to adequately defend.

  All errors that could be seen but not fixed by Rodgers. We later played them and won comfortably with a back four but also lost in the second leg with a back three.

 

[Dames]

Seen a stat doing the rounds today that in the first 15 minutes in games in the League we are by far and away the team that is most likely to concede and not score based on xG for and against.

 

This was an issue under Puel and has persisted under Rodgers. Slow timid starts often leave us on the back foot. Why hasn’t it been fixed yet?

[deep blue]

18 hours ago, BKLFox said:

....

1

The assumption that we lose games due to changes in formation is mooted without much thought but simply "we were winning/drawing he changed formation we lost/drew, Rodgers out" & thats as far as it goes.
...

2
 It's individual drops in performance - take Cags in the 1st half his pass completion rate was 92% in the 2nd this dropped to 62% what has that got to do with changing from a 4 to a 3 or as we didn't win a 5, it should have gone up further as he had more players around him but instead he lacked concentration & was just hacking at the ball which leads to confusion & giving the ball straight back which leads to another attack.

He's not faultless but seems players are if we lose after being in a winning position, Wilders last passage there 'you're only as good as your players' & if there not 100% switched on you can lose games of football regardless what formation you play.

1. That's untrue and arrogant.  Many posters on here, who disagree with your view, have given very lucid arguments to illuminate Brendan's shortcomings.

 

2.  You don't appear to have considered the possibility that Cag's reduction in pass completion might have simply been the consequence of formation & personnel changes that substantially reduced his outlet options.

[honeybradger]

So in 17/18 and 18/19 most people thought we should be finishing 7th in the league over Burnley and newly promoted wolves, who got 54 points and 57 points respectively, and most people on here blamed Puel for this, so surely a quality manager should at least get what was perceived to be the 7th best squad in the league 58 points and above? On top of this we added Tielemans halfway through 18/19 so we're probably expecting around 60-64 points next season if our squad performs to the level it was perceived it should. We end up getting 62 points and 66 points, which would usually get us 7th and 6th but we ended up finishing 5th twice. So we havent overperformed in the league under Rodgers apart from the first half of 19/20 (which later returned to our expected level), what happened instead was the teams around us (arsenal, spurs, chelsea, man united, liverpool last year) underperformed massively. So this spin that Rodgers is pushing about overperformance in the league over the last few years in incorrect, he has managed to get our side around the points we were expecting before he came in but the teams around us falling off has made it look like he's brought a midtable side to a top 4 push when really it was a top 6 push and the top 4 sides dropped down to top 6 level. 

[Ric Flair]

14 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

So in 17/18 and 18/19 most people thought we should be finishing 7th in the league over Burnley and newly promoted wolves, who got 54 points and 57 points respectively, and most people on here blamed Puel for this, so surely a quality manager should at least get what was perceived to be the 7th best squad in the league 58 points and above? On top of this we added Tielemans halfway through 18/19 so we're probably expecting around 60-64 points next season if our squad performs to the level it was perceived it should. We end up getting 62 points and 66 points, which would usually get us 7th and 6th but we ended up finishing 5th twice. So we havent overperformed in the league under Rodgers apart from the first half of 19/20 (which later returned to our expected level), what happened instead was the teams around us (arsenal, spurs, chelsea, man united, liverpool last year) underperformed massively. So this spin that Rodgers is pushing about overperformance in the league over the last few years in incorrect, he has managed to get our side around the points we were expecting before he came in but the teams around us falling off has made it look like he's brought a midtable side to a top 4 push when really it was a top 6 push and the top 4 sides dropped down to top 6 level. 

Yes all things being equal we should be at the very least around 7th / 8th in recent years but I actually think that's now at risk given what other teams are trying to do and we are running in to problems.

[honeybradger]

2 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Yes all things being equal we should be at the very least around 7th / 8th in recent years but I actually think that's now at risk given what other teams are trying to do and we are running in to problems.

That's my point that we should be getting around 60-64 points every season, we achieved that 2 seasons in a row and are now underperforming, the FA cup was the second biggest acheivement in our history but Rodgers's performance in the league has been overblown by our fans.

[Ric Flair]

1 minute ago, honeybradger said:

That's my point that we should be getting around 60-64 points every season, we achieved that 2 seasons in a row and are now underperforming, the FA cup was the second biggest acheivement in our history but Rodgers's performance in the league has been overblown by our fans.

I think par for the course is around 60 points for our team, anything less is under performance 100% which is what we are doing this season and have been for nearly a full calendar year, the FA Cup aside.

 

If it barely improves for the rest of the season then he's on borrowed time.

[BKLFox]

2 hours ago, deep blue said:

1. That's untrue and arrogant.  Many posters on here, who disagree with your view, have given very lucid arguments to illuminate Brendan's shortcomings.

 

2.  You don't appear to have considered the possibility that Cag's reduction in pass completion might have simply been the consequence of formation & personnel changes that substantially reduced his outlet options.

 The point being all anger is pointed towards Rodgers when ever we lose when in reality its a team game, he can't make the block, tackle or pass.

 I actually said in the comment about Cags that you'd think the change in formation would allow for more outlets because whole team dropping deeper there will be more players to pass to, I do look at the collective & i would also know tiredness will be a major factor in the drop, sticking Cags in a 3 was not the sole reason we drew.
I'm saying Rodgers changing the formation to match up was not the sole reason we drew & also not the reason we lost at Spurs yet the lucid arguments to illuminate Brendan's shortcomings as you put it would suggest otherwise, i'm not sure what's untrue or arrogant because all blame is laid on him in those illuminations...ie he changed a formation from a winning position

[BKLFox]

3 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...not sure why you would have to change 9 players, you drop deeper and play on the counter!!!

  You look back at the semi final first leg against Villa and the problem we had was Soyuncu not coming across to engage with their left wing attacker. With our Wingbacks pushed up to the halfway line, the space that they left behind glaringly exposed us. Soyuncu ended up in no man's land, he could not cut the cross out nor was he in a position to adequately defend.

  All errors that could be seen but not fixed by Rodgers. We later played them and won comfortably with a back four but also lost in the second leg with a back three.

 

Well your changing 9 players from being on the front foot & aggressive in a highline to sit deep, soak up pressure & try & bounce an attack to manage 1 players short comings.

In general the masses complain that Rodgers has the best squad we ever had & should be doing more with them yet are still so stuck in playing the old 'Leicester way' because it worked when we didn't have the talent we have currently & will also whinge if a pundit or the media say Leicester are just a counter attacking side, it just blows my mind.

[sacreblueits442]

3 hours ago, Dames said:

Seen a stat doing the rounds today that in the first 15 minutes in games in the League we are by far and away the team that is most likely to concede and not score based on xG for and against.

 

This was an issue under Puel and has persisted under Rodgers. Slow timid starts often leave us on the back foot. Why hasn’t it been fixed yet?

....if you sit back trying to protect a lead or a point, you are inviting pressure!!!

The human response to unrelenting pressure turns to panic, and you end up doing something that you would not usually do, as all around you are doing the same. The difference between sitting back and countering is, one is a positive outlook as we seek to set traps for the opposition, and the other becomes a trap we have made for ourselves.

Edited 2 February 2022 by sacreblueits442

[coolhandfox]

 

45 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

That's my point that we should be getting around 60-64 points every season, we achieved that 2 seasons in a row and are now underperforming, the FA cup was the second biggest acheivement in our history but Rodgers's performance in the league has been overblown by our fans.

The guy has achieve 2 of our best 4 league finishes since World War 2, I think he deserves some credit. 

 

I'm convinced without injuries to key players he would have got 70+ point in 19/20, 20/21 and would get your magic number this season. 

 

43 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I think par for the course is around 60 points for our team, anything less is under performance 100% which is what we are doing this season and have been for nearly a full calendar year, the FA Cup aside.

For the 2021 calendar year we took 62 points 8th overall (But we played 40 games in 2021) 10 points clear of the 9th place team Brighton (52 points, 40 games) 

 

Arsenal 4th (76 points, 41 games)

Man U 5th  (75 points, 41 games) 

West Ham 6th (73 points, 41 games)

Spurs 7th (66 points, 40 games)

 

I don't think that to bad considering our injury problems 

43 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

 

If it barely improves for the rest of the season then he's on borrowed time.

I think the owner is a lot more understanding then most of the fans, Puel had to go on a run of 1 win 8 including 6 loses to get sacked, Shakespeare 1 win in 8  and Ranieri 1 win in 10.

 

 

[Dan LCFC]

7 hours ago, Dames said:

Seen a stat doing the rounds today that in the first 15 minutes in games in the League we are by far and away the team that is most likely to concede and not score based on xG for and against.

 

This was an issue under Puel and has persisted under Rodgers. Slow timid starts often leave us on the back foot. Why hasn’t it been fixed yet?

This is a long standing problem now. I'm particularly surprised it's continued under Rodgers as I remember how well his Liverpool side used to start games.

[The_77]

16 hours ago, Dan LCFC said:

He overcomplicates things a bit I think. No coincidence that our best run under him came with a consistent XI, now I know injuries play a big part but we seem to change system every game, he's gone too far the other way.

I’m too lazy to pull up old posts of mine on the topic but you’ve nailed it, Dan. The common refrain on here is that Rodgers is too tactically inflexible, I’d argue that it’s the exact opposite. Rodgers prides himself into building sides with that can play in all setups and multiple formations but that only works when you have a full squad to chose from that’s running on all cylinders. 
 

When you’re in a bad run of form and/or missing players, you need to go back to basics and simplify the game (especially when forced to play players out of position). 
 

We can’t always react to what our opponents do, we have to have an approach that we can fall back on that everyone, no matter their place in the squad, knows front to back. 

[Molson Canadian]

[Guest SO1]

18 minutes ago, Molson Canadian said:

 Demonic possession ! Knew it all along.

[Steve Earle]

6 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

I think par for the course is around 60 points for our team, anything less is under performance 100% which is what we are doing this season and have been for nearly a full calendar year, the FA Cup aside.

 

If it barely improves for the rest of the season then he's on borrowed time.

Being the operative word. We will improve. Will we get 60+ points? Who knows

[Ric Flair]

58 minutes ago, Steve Earle said:

Being the operative word. We will improve. Will we get 60+ points? Who knows

Highly doubt we're getting 60 points, I'd be relatively happy with 56-58

[deep blue]

6 hours ago, BKLFox said:

 The point being all anger is pointed towards Rodgers when ever we lose when in reality its a team game, he can't make the block, tackle or pass.

 I actually said in the comment about Cags that you'd think the change in formation would allow for more outlets because whole team dropping deeper there will be more players to pass to, I do look at the collective & i would also know tiredness will be a major factor in the drop, sticking Cags in a 3 was not the sole reason we drew.
I'm saying Rodgers changing the formation to match up was not the sole reason we drew & also not the reason we lost at Spurs yet the lucid arguments to illuminate Brendan's shortcomings as you put it would suggest otherwise, i'm not sure what's untrue or arrogant because all blame is laid on him in those illuminations...ie he changed a formation from a winning position

Fair enough points, and I apologise for accusing you of arrogance.

 

It's fair for me to pont out, though, that Rodgers himself actually admitted after the Brighton match that his tactical change from a back 4 to a back 3 made it difficult for us to retain possession and was a mistake on his part (as reported by Leicestershire Live and repeated by Caughtoffsude).

 

It's all about opinions, though,  and this forum is good for the variety displayed and the discussions.  And at the end of the day we shouldn't forget that we all have one thing in common  ...    

[Freeman's Wharfer]

10 hours ago, honeybradger said:

So in 17/18 and 18/19 most people thought we should be finishing 7th in the league over Burnley and newly promoted wolves, who got 54 points and 57 points respectively, and most people on here blamed Puel for this, so surely a quality manager should at least get what was perceived to be the 7th best squad in the league 58 points and above? On top of this we added Tielemans halfway through 18/19 so we're probably expecting around 60-64 points next season if our squad performs to the level it was perceived it should. We end up getting 62 points and 66 points, which would usually get us 7th and 6th but we ended up finishing 5th twice. So we havent overperformed in the league under Rodgers apart from the first half of 19/20 (which later returned to our expected level), what happened instead was the teams around us (arsenal, spurs, chelsea, man united, liverpool last year) underperformed massively. So this spin that Rodgers is pushing about overperformance in the league over the last few years in incorrect, he has managed to get our side around the points we were expecting before he came in but the teams around us falling off has made it look like he's brought a midtable side to a top 4 push when really it was a top 6 push and the top 4 sides dropped down to top 6 level. 

Excellent post.

Those champions league near-misses were sliding doors moments simply because we played at the level we should and a handful of other big teams were having a nightmare couple of years.

 

The status quo was always going to be restored and we’d end up thinking ‘what it’.

[fuchsntf]

9 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

I think par for the course is around 60 points for our team, anything less is under performance 100% which is what we are doing this season and have been for nearly a full calendar year, the FA Cup aside.

 

If it barely improves for the rest of the season then he's on borrowed time.

Over 5-6yrs periods, Not from fans expectations, But League end positions Show actually  how good/avg/poor any teams era has been...

besides the manager, I still say its the Quality of the Squad of players actually are/were...75-80% lay on the Shoulders of those players.

a Team are not Robots, they get payed at our present level, to make onfield decisions & tweek their game & set up during play...

We Dont have many players it seems who have the mental strength to Stamp their playing & Organisation skills on the game.

Difference between Top 4, Top 10, Bottom group...I wont criticise any manager, when you see your own players ,even ballsing-up their

Basic skills , over 3-4 game periods or too regular over the season....

 

[CosbehFox]

9 hours ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

Excellent post.

Those champions league near-misses were sliding doors moments simply because we played at the level we should and a handful of other big teams were having a nightmare couple of years.

 

The status quo was always going to be restored and we’d end up thinking ‘what it’.

Don’t disagree they are sliding doors moment but under what notion did we know that ‘we played at the level we should’

 

Before the 19/20 season, we’d shown little potential in being capable of challenging the top four. Top six maybe but no one going into Rodgers first full season thought we could qualify for the CL

[daddylonglegs]

21 hours ago, honeybradger said:

So in 17/18 and 18/19 most people thought we should be finishing 7th in the league over Burnley and newly promoted wolves, who got 54 points and 57 points respectively, and most people on here blamed Puel for this, so surely a quality manager should at least get what was perceived to be the 7th best squad in the league 58 points and above? On top of this we added Tielemans halfway through 18/19 so we're probably expecting around 60-64 points next season if our squad performs to the level it was perceived it should. We end up getting 62 points and 66 points, which would usually get us 7th and 6th but we ended up finishing 5th twice. So we havent overperformed in the league under Rodgers apart from the first half of 19/20 (which later returned to our expected level), what happened instead was the teams around us (arsenal, spurs, chelsea, man united, liverpool last year) underperformed massively. So this spin that Rodgers is pushing about overperformance in the league over the last few years in incorrect, he has managed to get our side around the points we were expecting before he came in but the teams around us falling off has made it look like he's brought a midtable side to a top 4 push when really it was a top 6 push and the top 4 sides dropped down to top 6 level. 

Absolutely bang on. 

 

People seem to think because we finished 5th, that's the end of it, we can't possibly analyse the wider circumstances around our league position and we should just be grateful we finished above mid table. 
 

Surprised you haven't recieved any 'remember when we were in league one/stop being so entitled/some of our fans are the worst' etc etc etc yet. 

[daddylonglegs]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Don’t disagree they are sliding doors moment but under what notion did we know that ‘we played at the level we should’

 

Before the 19/20 season, we’d shown little potential in being capable of challenging the top four. Top six maybe but no one going into Rodgers first full season thought we could qualify for the CL

That's a fair point. I'd also say that no one going into Rodgers' first full season saw United, Chelsea, Arsenal AND Spurs (4 of the 7/8 teams better than us on paper in the league) being as dreadful as they were.