Brendan Rodgers

[deep blue]

53 minutes ago, Bluetintedspecs said:

This thread is reminiscent of a pro and anti vax debate.

Positions are very entrenched, and I'm as bad as anyone  

[The Doctor]

On 14/02/2022 at 21:54, bfox said:

Get rid. Not watched a city game in about 3 months for first time in about 10 years due to this fella. 

 I don't think you can blame him for there being no football between March and June 2020. Probably the one crisis his questionable management of injuries no involvement with.

[Ginger_Filbert]

I wish @The Year Of The Fox would get off the fence so we could fully understand if he was Rodgers in or out 

[Bluetintedspecs]

10 hours ago, Verumex said:

In the interest of stirring the pot, which side of the debate are you comparing to anti-vaxxers? 

It was an analogy covering the whole argument, your question sums it up I feel. Unless any on here are Top or members of the board do their opinions really matter 🤷‍♂️

[Muzzy_Larsson]

18 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

I wouldn't that Rodgers has been the catalyst for his teams scoring goals, it's more the luck he's has in the players he inherited each time.

 

Suarez and Sturridge at Liverpool would score regardless of his intervention. Life wasn't quite that rosy when he hadn't got them anymore. 

 

Edouard at Celtic in a one team league until Rangers returned and he quickly jumped ship.

 

Vardy,  Iheanacho, Maddison and Barnes et al were already here so he didn't have any influence there. In fact last seasons top scorer would never have happened if the manager had any influence because he only played him because he absolutely had to. He has got his own back on Iheanacho this season though by not playing him. That'll teach him 🤣🤣

I think in terms of his time at Celtic your being a bit OTT. For one Rodgers took the job the year Rangers returned to the top flight so Rangers were in the league the whole time he was here. When he left the league was in the bag by the time he left in February, we were 8 points clear iirc and the lead was growing every week at that point. Had Rodgers stayed Rangers wouldn't have won a trophy while he was still in Scotland, I'm pretty much certain of that. The biggest shot in the arm for Rangers and Steven Gerrard's managerial career was the fact we replaced Rodgers with Lennon.

 

Although his team were largely the same players as when he arrived, he transformed them completely, most of the players in his team most Celtic fans wanted out the door the year before he arrived. It cannot be discounted that he turned what were prior to him arriving a mediocre bunch of players who were beaten off a tier 2 Rangers side into treble, treble winners and successive Champions League campaigns. Furthermore, the Edouard we initially signed to the one that left us was again transformed as a player which you have to give Rodgers a lot of credit for. Even at that, for the majority of Rodgers time at the club Edouard was a work in progress anyway and largely came off the bench, Dembele, Sinclair and Forrest were the mainstays of our front three for most of his time here. 

[LC1884FC]

14 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

....if I recall, Rodgers emphasised that 9 of the players on the park were not his players!!!

After 3 years, only 2 of his players were in the first team starting eleven.

The players that he has brought in have generally been worse than the ones we had when he got here other than Fofana.

[Muzzy_Larsson]

8 minutes ago, LC1884FC said:

The players that he has brought in have generally been worse than the ones we had when he got here other than Fofana.

Parallels with his time at Celtic in that sense in terms of recruitment.

 

Also similar language he's now using as in his latter time at Celtic in trying to shift the responsibility and deflect in that sense.

[teblin]

11 hours ago, Strokes said:

How many points did we get for that?

My point is that’s why we are so frustrating we can cause problems to the best but still lose and conceded stupid goals.

[Strokes]

5 minutes ago, teblin said:

My point is that’s why we are so frustrating we can cause problems to the best but still lose and conceded stupid goals.

Because we have a defence that is about as durable as wet tissue paper.

[mozartfox]

Where is the frigging Poll?

[Chelmofox]

So presume he's in charge for tomorrow then. Taking whole family tomorrow so hope the atmosphere doesn't get toxic.

[Guest SO1]

33 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

Where is the frigging Poll?

As if it mattered.

[Ric Flair]

12 hours ago, lcfceaves said:

Ok so other than playing against the ‘top 4’ I don’t see a change in approach against the rest. You don’t play the same way against Brighton as you do Burnley for example… or perhaps you think we should but maybe 30 mins in you think ‘this isn’t working’ … so at half time let’s change it up. I just don’t ever feel like I’m watching anything different, and in the match analysis by the experts, they say the same thing each week (especially on set pieces…)

It doesn’t have to be a big change, it can be subtle. 
I think an interview with Rodgers has deep rooted itself in my brain and made me ‘spikey’ towards him ever since… it was along the lines of “we will look at the opposition, but always play our own game and work on our style each week on the training pitch”. Ok get that, but the way it came across was “I don’t care about the opposition, we will persist in doing the same thing each week”

I just didn’t like it and can’t say I’ve loved the ‘Rodgers way’ ever since. 

Funny you should mention Brighton, up until this season they had never beaten us and still have only beaten us once. Last season alone our two league games saw an in game shift from Rodgers that meant we won them both. We opted for a back 3 in the home game and were garbage for the 1st 15-20 mins and he flicked it to a back 4 (can't remember if we made a sub) and by half time we were 3-0 up.

 

Likewise in the away game, we were dog mess 1st half and then 2nd half he made some changes to the system and we won. 

 

 

[Ric Flair]

I don't know what on earth has gotten over me but why am I sticking up for Rodgers these past 24 hours? I still see a lot of good in what he has and does do but that's why it's so frustrating how badly he is handling all of this. I think a shake hands and we both go our seperate ways is the most sensible outcome and maybe that will happen this summer regardless.

[filbertway]

5 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Funny you should mention Brighton, up until this season they had never beaten us and still have only beaten us once. Last season alone our two league games saw an in game shift from Rodgers that meant we won them both. We opted for a back 3 in the home game and were garbage for the 1st 15-20 mins and he flicked it to a back 4 (can't remember if we made a sub) and by half time we were 3-0 up.

 

Likewise in the away game, we were dog mess 1st half and then 2nd half he made some changes to the system and we won. 

 

 

Is that during the long period where he insisted on a back 3 and then kept changing it to a 4 when he realised it was rubbish. For some reason that realisation kept disappearing out his mind at the full time whistle.

[Nalis]

24 minutes ago, jamesp26 said:

So presume he's in charge for tomorrow then. Taking whole family tomorrow so hope the atmosphere doesn't get toxic.

I for one will be serving up some blood thirsty booing for 80 minutes towards the dugout. I say 80 as I'm leaving early to miss the traffic.

[Ric Flair]

Just now, filbertway said:

Is that during the long period where he insisted on a back 3 and then kept changing it to a 4 when he realised it was rubbish. For some reason that realisation kept disappearing out his mind at the full time whistle.

That was the home game, we'd played a back 3 whilst Ndidi and Soyuncu were out and then the success of it started to wear off and as you say he still persisted with it in late Nov/early Dec but quickly changed it in game as we were muck. Thankfully then as soon as Ndidi was back I think we went back to a back 4 for the Spurs game onwards and between then and mid February we were pretty relentless as a team once again. 

[foxinsocks]

Just now, Nalis said:

I for one will be serving up some blood thirsty booing for 80 minutes towards the dugout. I say 80 as I'm leaving early to miss the traffic.

For 20 quid you're entitled to do as you please 

[dannythefox]

I see king Rodgers is still here. 

[Dames]

12 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I don't know what on earth has gotten over me but why am I sticking up for Rodgers these past 24 hours? I still see a lot of good in what he has and does do but that's why it's so frustrating how badly he is handling all of this. I think a shake hands and we both go our seperate ways is the most sensible outcome and maybe that will happen this summer regardless.

For all the good he’s done its all unravelling because of his innate lack of pragmatism.

 

He has a very purist view and whilst he does make some changes they all adhere to that view. Its always about keeping the ball and waiting to exploit rather than taking too many risks.

 

 

[Chrysalis]

48 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I don't know what on earth has gotten over me but why am I sticking up for Rodgers these past 24 hours? I still see a lot of good in what he has and does do but that's why it's so frustrating how badly he is handling all of this. I think a shake hands and we both go our seperate ways is the most sensible outcome and maybe that will happen this summer regardless.

Its understandable, I have looked back at posts I made and considered editing as it seems I hate the guy and just want to attack him, but I do recognise the good he has done here, I just get a bit OTT when i am trying to say its best if we move on.

[volpeazzurro]

2 hours ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

I think in terms of his time at Celtic your being a bit OTT. For one Rodgers took the job the year Rangers returned to the top flight so Rangers were in the league the whole time he was here. When he left the league was in the bag by the time he left in February, we were 8 points clear iirc and the lead was growing every week at that point. Had Rodgers stayed Rangers wouldn't have won a trophy while he was still in Scotland, I'm pretty much certain of that. The biggest shot in the arm for Rangers and Steven Gerrard's managerial career was the fact we replaced Rodgers with Lennon.

 

Although his team were largely the same players as when he arrived, he transformed them completely, most of the players in his team most Celtic fans wanted out the door the year before he arrived. It cannot be discounted that he turned what were prior to him arriving a mediocre bunch of players who were beaten off a tier 2 Rangers side into treble, treble winners and successive Champions League campaigns. Furthermore, the Edouard we initially signed to the one that left us was again transformed as a player which you have to give Rodgers a lot of credit for. Even at that, for the majority of Rodgers time at the club Edouard was a work in progress anyway and largely came off the bench, Dembele, Sinclair and Forrest were the mainstays of our front three for most of his time here. 

I readily bow to your greater knowledge as you are after all our resident Celtic fan and know far more about them than me. I did base some of my opinion on some of what I 'thought' you'd commented on before. In particular what Rodgers inherited player wise when he arrived, the previous scouting performance, to that which took place when Rodgers and Congerton got in the mix.

 

Again, Rangers may well have just arrived back in the division when Rodgers arrived but they were hardly the foe of old and started to make ground very quick under Gerrard. I remember comparing for example one summer, the players Gerrard had bought in compared to Rodgers who'd spent considerably more. With Gerrard's incomings there seemed a recognisable logic, in Rodger's, not so much. 

 

I'm sure you're right regarding Lennon, but I also think Rodgers timed his departure just right as the writing was on the wall. If someone was to offer Rodgers or Gerrard as manager of Leicester City at this moment in time, I'd snap their hand off for Gerrard who I believe will go onto good things, I think Rodgers however is extremely limited and has been found out. Time will tell I suppose. 

[messerschmitt]

48 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Is that during the long period where he insisted on a back 3 and then kept changing it to a 4 when he realised it was rubbish. For some reason that realisation kept disappearing out his mind at the full time whistle.

I think going to a back 3 has what has done our defence, it put us under more pressure and we weren't any better at the back for it, we lost attacking momentum because of it and control. The damage was done and going to a back 4 hasn't helped as we've lost the confidence we had

i don't know any statistics but i think we had one of the best goals conceded records in Brendan's first full season.

[Muzzy_Larsson]

1 hour ago, volpeazzurro said:

I readily bow to your greater knowledge as you are after all our resident Celtic fan and know far more about them than me. I did base some of my opinion on some of what I 'thought' you'd commented on before. In particular what Rodgers inherited player wise when he arrived, the previous scouting performance, to that which took place when Rodgers and Congerton got in the mix.

 

Again, Rangers may well have just arrived back in the division when Rodgers arrived but they were hardly the foe of old and started to make ground very quick under Gerrard. I remember comparing for example one summer, the players Gerrard had bought in compared to Rodgers who'd spent considerably more. With Gerrard's incomings there seemed a recognisable logic, in Rodger's, not so much. 

 

I'm sure you're right regarding Lennon, but I also think Rodgers timed his departure just right as the writing was on the wall. If someone was to offer Rodgers or Gerrard as manager of Leicester City at this moment in time, I'd snap their hand off for Gerrard who I believe will go onto good things, I think Rodgers however is extremely limited and has been found out. Time will tell I suppose. 

Yeah there's a lot of truth in that in terms of the players Rodgers inherited. That was his biggest achievement, turning a bunch of rudderless, mediocre players into world beaters, in a scottish domestic sense anyway. The bad part of his tenure, as has been the case at all of his clubs, was ripping apart our previously successful transfer model and demanding total control of transfers and bloating our squad with players who never threatened to displace guys who had carried the first team for years. Proof was in the pudding on that one as we never sold a single player on for profit that Rodgers and Congerton were responsible for signing in their time at the club. It's all eerily similar to now at Leicester in that he's relying on largely the same core players as when he arrived.

 

I'm not being pedantic but I don't agree with they had started to make ground quick under Gerrard. If it weren't for covid stopping the season early when we won 9IAR there was a real possibility that Gerrard would have been sacked or have been mutually consented at the end of that season, Rangers fans had started to get on his back in a big way. Rangers absolutely folded that season and the last game before covid hit they lost 1-0 to Hamilton at Ibrox and there was serious pressure on him.

 

He was up here three years and won one trophy, any other Rangers manager who wasn't called Steven Gerrard wouldn't have gotten away with one trophy in three years. He had an asbolute open goal at a treble last season and made a mess of it and didn't even get to Hampden in any of the cup competitions. I get the one trophy he did win was a big one to stop us getting 10 in a row so kudos to him for that and if you take a step back you can say he met the one big objective set for him when he became Rangers manage. I don't buy the whole argument that Rangers were in this great mess and Celtic were this juggernaut as 6 weeks before Rodgers arrived Rangers defeated us in the Scottish cup semi final. If you actually look at both managers net spend throughout their time in Glasgow Gerrard has actually spent more on transfer fees than Rodgers.

 

It's down to personal opinion but Steven Gerrard doesn't come close to being as good a manager as Rodgers for me and had he remained in Glasgow I doubt Gerrard would even have won that single trophy. Also if you watch Gerrard's teams then you'll quickly realise they are pretty turgid to watch, he's by and large a pragmatist in his approach, even Rangers fans would say this a lot. I know Rodgers football has died a death at the moment at Leicester but the first year or so at both Celtic and Leicester his sides played some great football which was a joy to watch.

Edited 16 February 2022 by Muzzy_Larsson

[FoxinNotts]

Brendan in! Long live the king