Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Fox92

Brendan Rodgers

By Fox92, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

FoxyLeon

FoxyLeon

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, adam95581 said:


In hindsight, I think we were guilty of not proactively monitoring players of the right profile. Fofana was injured right before the season had started and after we had done our main transfer business which meant we had to

dip back in. Not having your first choice CB pairing for the majority of the season is a bit of a crisis. 

 

As for having a £15m defender on the bench, Vestegaard wasn’t bought through choice but rather through necessity. We would have been better off buying a younger player in the mould of Fofana / Soyuncu (eg. Mobile, athletic) as he just doesn’t fit our style at all. 

 

That's not true at all.

 

£15 million can buy you the majority of centre halves in World football, so to say it wasn't through choice is just wrong.

 

Why can't people admit it was a terrible buy from Rodgers?

 

He could have even paid £15 million for a defensive mid, and pushed Ndidi back there, he had many different options, but like he has shown at Liverpool, Celtic and now here, he's incapable of recruiting well. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
filbertway

filbertway

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, FoxyLeon said:

 

That's not true at all.

 

£15 million can buy you the majority of centre halves in World football, so to say it wasn't through choice is just wrong.

 

Why can't people admit it was a terrible buy from Rodgers?

 

He could have even paid £15 million for a defensive mid, and pushed Ndidi back there, he had many different options, but like he has shown at Liverpool, Celtic and now here, he's incapable of recruiting well. 

It was shocking and actually unnecessary considering he barely played anyway.

Everyone going "we had to sign someone" are proper gumps.

 

Ben Nelson could have come in and done just as well if not better than Vesty and it would have cost nothing 

 

Rodgers is amazing at developing youtha apparently, yet barely used an academy player during the worst injury crisis a premier league team has ever seen (according to foxestalk) 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FoxyLeon

FoxyLeon

Posted
Posted
Just now, filbertway said:

It was shocking and actually unnecessary considering he barely played anyway.

Everyone going "we had to sign someone" are proper gumps.

 

Ben Nelson could have come in and done just as well if not better than Vesty and it would have cost nothing 

 

Rodgers is amazing at developing youtha apparently, yet barely used an academy player during the worst injury crisis a premier league team has ever seen (according to foxestalk) 

 

Exactly.

 

He should have used the £15 million on the targets we obviously had before Fofana got injured.

 

He's just so short sighted, Klopp wouldn't have done that for three reasons.....

 

1. He's a complete contrast to the player who got injured.

2. He doesn't fit the style you want to play.

3. He's not going to actually progress and potentially be a regular, he's just going to be deadwood.

 

We should have bought Brennan Johnson or a forward he wanted, instead we've now still got to buy both a centre half and a right winger anyway, and we're £15 million + wages + a squad place down.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
volpeazzurro

volpeazzurro

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

It's in the article: He signed to be a #2 pushing for #1. Shakespeare lied to him. He tried to get out under Puel, but the club refused. The last two one-year deals were heavily influenced by Covid.

Didn't have to sign those one year deals though did he  could have taken his chances. Oops sorry, he opted for security from a generous club.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
volpeazzurro

volpeazzurro

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, FoxyLeon said:

 

Exactly.

 

He should have used the £15 million on the targets we obviously had before Fofana got injured.

 

He's just so short sighted, Klopp wouldn't have done that for three reasons.....

 

1. He's a complete contrast to the player who got injured.

2. He doesn't fit the style you want to play.

3. He's not going to actually progress and potentially be a regular, he's just going to be deadwood.

 

We should have bought Brennan Johnson or a forward he wanted, instead we've now still got to buy both a centre half and a right winger anyway, and we're £15 million + wages + a squad place down.

All hail 'Brendan the Shortsighted' 🤣🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guy

Guy

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

It's in the article: He signed to be a #2 pushing for #1. Shakespeare lied to him. He tried to get out under Puel, but the club refused. The last two one-year deals were heavily influenced by Covid.

I only read the part provided on here by yourself so didn't know the fully fledged reason for his signing (to supposedly be Schmeichel's understudy with the vague hope of superseding him one day at best maybe).....but whatever the case no surely no goalkeeper stays for the best part of 5 years at a club in the way he did, regardless of the mixture of reasons for doing so, Covid and dubious accusations levelled at management included! I also agree that the club were over generous towards him given the net contribution he made here in all that time! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guy

Guy

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

It's in the article: He signed to be a #2 pushing for #1. Shakespeare lied to him. He tried to get out under Puel, but the club refused. The last two one-year deals were heavily influenced by Covid.

Duplicate post :-(

Edited by Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosbehFox

CosbehFox

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Guy said:

I only read the part provided on here by yourself so didn't know the fully fledged reason for his signing (to supposedly be Schmeichel's understudy with the vague hope of superseding him one day at best maybe).....but whatever the case no surely no goalkeeper stays for the best part of 5 years at a club in the way he did, regardless of the mixture of reasons for doing so, Covid and dubious accusations levelled at management included! I also agree that the club were over generous towards him given the net contribution he made here in all that time! 

There are countless examples of back up goalkeepers have long periods at clubs without game time. It’s the nature of the job. Really bizarre criticism of the club.
 

Just looking at released players for example this summer John Ruddy left Wolves after five years, 50 league games and 45 of those were in the Championship in his first season 
 

https://thesetpieces.com/latest-posts/investigating-unique-psychology-no-2-goalkeeper/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
adam95581

adam95581

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, FoxyLeon said:

 

That's not true at all.

 

£15 million can buy you the majority of centre halves in World football, so to say it wasn't through choice is just wrong.

 

Why can't people admit it was a terrible buy from Rodgers?

 

He could have even paid £15 million for a defensive mid, and pushed Ndidi back there, he had many different options, but like he has shown at Liverpool, Celtic and now here, he's incapable of recruiting well. 

Well it is true. If Fofana doesn’t get injured at the end of pre-season then we 100% do not buy Vestegaard. 
 

As for it being a terrible buy, I have pretty much said that. We should have bought someone with a profile that is more aligned to our usual targets and certainly one that was a better fit with our style of play. It was a panic buy as we were not prepared and had to react to the Fofana injury. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
Posted

I think whether you’re pro or anti Rodgers  - or even somewhere in between - you can’t say that Vestergaard was anything other than a dreadful signing. You can’t apply any logic to it being worthwhile as we’d have been better off not signing anyone. For me it goes down as one of our worst ever signings and I don’t think that’s over stating it. 
 

Whether it was down to Rodgers or somebody else in the recruitment team I don’t know, but collective responsibility should be taken for it and we move on. Not quickly, however, as we even managed to give him a 3 year contract. 
 

We will have to wait and see whether we perform better in this year’s window. I’ve always favoured signing fewer players who genuinely improve the first team. Signing squad players is rarely a good strategy unless they are young with a high potential for development. But there are exceptions to any rule 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dan LCFC

Dan LCFC

Posted
Posted

The Fofana injury is what made us do it but he's so different a defender to Fofana it's unreal. You couldn't find two more different centre halves in the league. It was a terrible fit. As was Ryan Bennett.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest nathan.

Guest nathan.

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Jobyfox said:

I think whether you’re pro or anti Rodgers  - or even somewhere in between - you can’t say that Vestergaard was anything other than a dreadful signing. You can’t apply any logic to it being worthwhile as we’d have been better off not signing anyone. For me it goes down as one of our worst ever signings and I don’t think that’s over stating it. 
 

Whether it was down to Rodgers or somebody else in the recruitment team I don’t know, but collective responsibility should be taken for it and we move on. Not quickly, however, as we even managed to give him a 3 year contract. 
 

We will have to wait and see whether we perform better in this year’s window. I’ve always favoured signing fewer players who genuinely improve the first team. Signing squad players is rarely a good strategy unless they are young with a high potential for development. But there are exceptions to any rule 

Is his defense he was good for Denmark during the Euros 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, nathan. said:

Is his defense he was good for Denmark during the Euros 

Yes it’s easy to look in retrospect and say it was a very poor signing, but that’s what the recruitment team are accountable for and we learn our lessons for next time. We move on 

 

The fact that he is an experienced international and regular PL player actually makes the signing less defensible to me. Some have argued that he was a last ditch signing to cover injury, but that is completely the wrong profile of player for that sort of signing. Somebody young with potential or a loan makes much more sense. The counter is that he was signed to push for 1st choice, which was never likely with everyone fit. 

Edited by Jobyfox
Link to comment
Share on other sites
filbertway

filbertway

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Dan LCFC said:

The Fofana injury is what made us do it but he's so different a defender to Fofana it's unreal. You couldn't find two more different centre halves in the league. It was a terrible fit. As was Ryan Bennett.

Why would you sign any defender on a 3 year contract whos coming in to cover a leg break though?

 

Loan or youth system and take the hit surely?

 

Not many clubs have an "injury crisis" where they still name an XI full of international players lol

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dan LCFC

Dan LCFC

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, filbertway said:

Why would you sign any defender on a 3 year contract whos coming in to cover a leg break though?

 

Loan or youth system and take the hit surely?

 

Not many clubs have an "injury crisis" where they still name an XI full of international players lol

That is also true. I don't think we'd have been any weaker in defence for the lack of signing him given he was virtually cast aside within months anyway, and we'd have a bit more wiggle room this month. Just a really brainless signing. But we were warned of things like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, filbertway said:

Why would you sign any defender on a 3 year contract whos coming in to cover a leg break though?

 

Loan or youth system and take the hit surely?

 

Not many clubs have an "injury crisis" where they still name an XI full of international players lol

 

I think you’ve hit the nail there on why it was such a poor piece of business. He’s one of our worst ever signings, not because he’s our most expensive or worst player, but simply because the signing makes no sense no matter how you try and rationalise it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxes_rule1978

foxes_rule1978

Posted
Posted (edited)

No doubt I was on edge with Rodgers last season; you read stuff on here and get more negative towards him. Need to take a step back and see the achievements and you can’t deny they are on the upper end of the scale. FA Cup win and consistent top 10 finishes. With the last three being 5,5,8 but like southgate you have to question the football and decisions at times. I believe Rodgers to be much better than Southgate though, even with some of our European results, why; Rodgers wins trophies and gets you over the line and despite his interviews I feel does learn from his mistakes. I might be contradicting myself here, but then I look at the squad and feel he has been lucky again like Southgate. So next season just with the World Cup both will get a chance to truly believe they can take their respective teams to the next level 

Edited by foxes_rule1978
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...