Recruitment Strategy

[CrispinLA in Texas]

Last summers transfers shown that we need to recruit players that want to play for Leicester.

We signed Soumare who doesn't look happy here, Vestargaard who was getting a lot of stick by the Saints fans and wanted out...anywhere will do, Bertrand who couldn't be bothered where he went and is happy picking up a great wage and furthering his business interests.

The only player who seems happy here is Daka even through he's not getting the game time.

I've read about AC Milan's recruitment strategy and they're changed from recruiting expensive superstars to finding young talents who are hungry and motivated to play for them. They don't just use Data but look at them playing to see what type of attitude they have. They build relationships with the players and their families. When they see play they don't mind if a young players makes a mistake  but look at how talented he is and if can improve.

We should look at young South Americans who have been playing in Europe for a few years. These players have already moved away for their families and friends and have coped well living abroad thus will find it much easier settling in the UK.

South American players have a great work ethic, come from poorer families and want improve the conditions for their families back home and tend to work harder when abroad.

Under Pearson and his team they kind of followed this strategy to an extent but now we seem to sign players who just seem available or their clubs don't want them etc.

Any Suggestions that are policy of recruiting has changed?

 

[Sankey93]

We never seem to target any players from that continent for some reason. Arsenal have picked up that Marquinhos for around 3m and he looks a player. 

[Fox92]

No clue about change of policy but Rodgers has said before, not sure if he or in his previous jobs, that he likes to get players who have something to prove. 

Signings like Lookman only back this up.

[foxfanazer]

5 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

No clue about change of policy but Rodgers has said before, not sure if he or in his previous jobs, that he likes to get players who have something to prove. 

Signings like Lookman only back this up.

Players like Bertrand don't. All seems like a scattergun approach nowadays. Not saying every single player will fit the same criteria but I don't see an obvious strategy

[Babylon]

28 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

Players like Bertrand don't. All seems like a scattergun approach nowadays. Not saying every single player will fit the same criteria but I don't see an obvious strategy

You can't have one strategy. The overall emphasis might be on younger players, but that doesn't mean you only ever buy young players. Signing Bertrand or Vertergaard doesn't mean that strategy has changed, it just meant the makeup of our team at the time, meant an older head made more sense for the manager. Personally I can't disagree with that. The issue is them being shit or entirely not suited to how we play, not their ages. 

 

There was zero point in buying a young left back, when we already had Thomas and Justin. So we got a stop gap to cover a few games until people were back from injury, essentially just replacing Fuchs. 

[The whole world smiles]

Kante famously didn't want to sign for us. 

 

I think it's too soon to draw any recruitment conclusions from the soumare situation. Something clearly has gone on behind the scenes and we aren't privvy to what that is yet. Every signing is a gamble. 

 

For 100 million pounds I expected grealish to deliver more than 3 goals and 3 assists. Yet coufal who was unknown and playing in the Czech league has turned out to mustard for 4 million. 

[Scotch]

A lot has bee said about the signings of Vestergaard and Bertrand and it's easy to be negative because they've been terrible and it hasn't worked out but I still maintain that on paper, they should have been good signings. 

 

Bertrand - We had just lost an experienced squad player in Fuchs who didn't play an awful lot but didn't expect to but provided back up and off the pitch experience. Replacing that with a similar player who knows the league made sense. 

 

Vesty - Again, we had just lost a massive wealth of knowledge and experience in Morgan and I think it was clear to see that we needed that older head at the back. Whenever Evans was missing last year, you noticed and Cags/Fofana needed that alongside them. Vestergaard was a cheapish option who had shown himself to be a good player at points, added height and was a good age. There was also an element of needing something done quick when Wes got injured. 

 

Look, they ibviously didn't work out but I don't think the recruitment team are to blame for that. 

[Jobyfox]

You have to say that our summer 2021 transfer window was poor and probably our worst since summer 2016. Only Lookman has made a significant contribution and he was a last gasp loan. Of course, Daka might come good in time, but I really don’t see Soumare getting there - although naturally I hope I’m wrong. 
 

I guess it’s easy to criticise the signings of Bertrand and Vestergaard in retrospect, but they did seem reasonably sensible at the time. With all our injuries it looked like Thomas was going to have to hold down the LB position and having an experienced head like Bertrand - signed on a free - seemed like a no brainer. Vestergaard was an emergency signing in response to the Fofana injury, but we have to put our hands up and admit that was an awful signing. A player totally unsuited to our style of play and that was good money wasted. 
 

There is a real fear that we simply have to  do better in summer 2022. If we don’t reinvest the Tielemans money well and find some solutions in midfield our season could be defined before it starts 

[Bakey]

2 hours ago, Jobyfox said:

You have to say that our summer 2021 transfer window was poor and probably our worst since summer 2016. Only Lookman has made a significant contribution and he was a last gasp loan. Of course, Daka might come good in time, but I really don’t see Soumare getting there - although naturally I hope I’m wrong. 
 

I guess it’s easy to criticise the signings of Bertrand and Vestergaard in retrospect, but they did seem reasonably sensible at the time. With all our injuries it looked like Thomas was going to have to hold down the LB position and having an experienced head like Bertrand - signed on a free - seemed like a no brainer. Vestergaard was an emergency signing in response to the Fofana injury, but we have to put our hands up and admit that was an awful signing. A player totally unsuited to our style of play and that was good money wasted. 
 

There is a real fear that we simply have to  do better in summer 2022. If we don’t reinvest the Tielemans money well and find some solutions in midfield our season could be defined before it starts 

The similarity between the 2016 summer and this one is that we signed back up or squad players rather than buying players that are better than the current starting 11

 

The squad will always need strengthening but a policy that I would prefer would be to look to strengthen our weakest position in the starting 11 as a priority which this summer is a RW, youri replacement if needs be and a CB to hopefully improve on Evans or be better than Evans next season 

 

[volpeazzurro]

4 hours ago, Scotch said:

A lot has bee said about the signings of Vestergaard and Bertrand and it's easy to be negative because they've been terrible and it hasn't worked out but I still maintain that on paper, they should have been good signings. 

 

Bertrand - We had just lost an experienced squad player in Fuchs who didn't play an awful lot but didn't expect to but provided back up and off the pitch experience. Replacing that with a similar player who knows the league made sense. 

 

Vesty - Again, we had just lost a massive wealth of knowledge and experience in Morgan and I think it was clear to see that we needed that older head at the back. Whenever Evans was missing last year, you noticed and Cags/Fofana needed that alongside them. Vestergaard was a cheapish option who had shown himself to be a good player at points, added height and was a good age. There was also an element of needing something done quick when Wes got injured. 

 

Look, they ibviously didn't work out but I don't think the recruitment team are to blame for that. 

Really? Rodgers players a high line, Vestergaard can't, not difficult to spot that one. Or,  Rodgers could have considered changing tactics to something appropriate for the players he had available to him heaven forbid.

[Ric Flair]

7 hours ago, Babylon said:

You can't have one strategy. The overall emphasis might be on younger players, but that doesn't mean you only ever buy young players. Signing Bertrand or Vertergaard doesn't mean that strategy has changed, it just meant the makeup of our team at the time, meant an older head made more sense for the manager. Personally I can't disagree with that. The issue is them being shit or entirely not suited to how we play, not their ages. 

 

There was zero point in buying a young left back, when we already had Thomas and Justin. So we got a stop gap to cover a few games until people were back from injury, essentially just replacing Fuchs. 

The Vestergaard signing made no sense given he came in because our youngest defender got injured  if it was Evans out for 9 months I could understand but Rodgers said they went from considering another young defender if they had the funds before Fofana got injured, to scrapping that and going for experience. It was a panic buy and poor strategy. The most unsuitable signing I've seen us make since the Sven era.

[JimJams]

I’d say the worrying thing about that (aside from us being lumped with.. well, a lump) is that although it’s a panic signing it’s also a player we were following for a number of years. Throw in that we were apparently willing to offer £40mill for Trincao 2 seasons ago, and were thankfully knocked back, and now we’re seeing that the winger is perhaps not all that suited to the premier league (you could argue that’s Lage’s fault) and then the fact we came close to signing Edouard last summer, but moved onto Daka. French Ed hasn’t nailed down a starting position for Palace and they were crying out for a striker to step up, and it’s Mateta, a player whose career in this league was seemingly over, who has cemented himself into Vieras plans. So again, not a great reflection of who we are targeting, with the only argument being that Rodgers might have done more with them. But the Vestegaard signing gives that argument less credence.

[murphy]

I think that you could see the Southampton flops coming a mile off.  For a start, what possessed us to sign one half of the second worst defence in the league? 

 

Saints fans knew that Bertrand's legs had gone, they even told us and Vestergaard has always been a lump with all the mobility and pace of a wardrobe.  I did however expect a bit an element of aerial prowess from him, but no, 7 foot three and can't win a header. 

 

I had hoped we'd dodged that particular bullet the previous season when we were linked which seemed inexplicable to me then, but sadly he returned to haunt us.  Brian Carey on stilts.

[Babylon]

7 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

The Vestergaard signing made no sense given he came in because our youngest defender got injured  if it was Evans out for 9 months I could understand but Rodgers said they went from considering another young defender if they had the funds before Fofana got injured, to scrapping that and going for experience. It was a panic buy and poor strategy. The most unsuitable signing I've seen us make since the Sven era.

Evans was injured.

[Ric Flair]

3 hours ago, Babylon said:

Evans was injured.

He was but as I said, the club were trying to recruit a young defender if funds allowed until Fofana got injured and then we had to get a new player in and they opted to go for experience. Couple that with how unsuited Vestergaard is to the way we play, it just didn't make a great deal of sense.

[Stadt]

 

Prior to Rodgers' and Congerton's arrival the only players we'd signed permanently from within the Premier League were cheap or free.

 

14/15

Albrighton, 24, free

Schwarzer, 40, free

 

15/16

Huth, 30, £3m

 

16/17

-

 

17/18

Iheanacho, 19, £25m

Maguire, 24, £14m

Jakupovic, 32, £2m

 

18/19

Ward, 25, £12m

Evans, 30, £3m

 

19/20 

Perez, 26, £30m

 

20/21

Vestergaard, 29, £16m

Bertrand, 31, free

 

Adding wages into the equation the recent "PL proven" players have been terrible mistakes. Prior to Wrong-a-tons arrivals the other PL sighings were high upside (Iheanacho, Maguire) or cheap & experienced (Evans, Huth). We've still bought well from Europe over this length of time but the more involved BR has been in the recruitment the worse it's been.

 

 

 

[Ric Flair]

7 minutes ago, Stadt said:

 

Prior to Rodgers' and Congerton's arrival the only players we'd signed permanently from within the Premier League were cheap or free.

 

14/15

Albrighton, 24, free

Schwarzer, 40, free

 

15/16

Huth, 30, £3m

 

16/17

-

 

17/18

Iheanacho, 19, £25m

Maguire, 24, £14m

Jakupovic, 32, £2m

 

18/19

Ward, 25, £12m

Evans, 30, £3m

 

19/20 

Perez, 26, £30m

 

20/21

Vestergaard, 29, £16m

Bertrand, 31, free

 

Adding wages into the equation the recent "PL proven" players have been terrible mistakes. Prior to Wrong-a-tons arrivals the other PL sighings were high upside (Iheanacho, Maguire) or cheap & experienced (Evans, Huth). We've still bought well from Europe over this length of time but the more involved BR has been in the recruitment the worse it's been.

 

 

 

Yeah, we are absolutely hideous at recruiting PL players. 

[Stadt]

Just now, pmcla26 said:

Nothing really changed there, to be honest. Iheanacho at £25m was not cheap, and neither really was Maguire at the time (obviously his Man U move means it doesn't matter), considering Hull had just been relegated. 

They were much higher upside players though. Maguire (alongside Robertson) were stand outs at Hull and at 24 had scope to be sold on, which we obviously did. Iheanacho was 19 and one of the hottest prospects in world football at that time, he had resale potential in a way a £30m Perez and a £16m Vestergaard just didn't.

[Collymore]

We were 

19 minutes ago, Stadt said:

 

Prior to Rodgers' and Congerton's arrival the only players we'd signed permanently from within the Premier League were cheap or free.

 

14/15

Albrighton, 24, free

Schwarzer, 40, free

 

15/16

Huth, 30, £3m

 

16/17

-

 

17/18

Iheanacho, 19, £25m

Maguire, 24, £14m

Jakupovic, 32, £2m

 

18/19

Ward, 25, £12m

Evans, 30, £3m

 

19/20 

Perez, 26, £30m

 

20/21

Vestergaard, 29, £16m

Bertrand, 31, free

 

Adding wages into the equation the recent "PL proven" players have been terrible mistakes. Prior to Wrong-a-tons arrivals the other PL sighings were high upside (Iheanacho, Maguire) or cheap & experienced (Evans, Huth). We've still bought well from Europe over this length of time but the more involved BR has been in the recruitment the worse it's been.

 

 

 

We also missed out on other domestic players such as Bowen and Callum Wilson who would have been great signings I think. 

[Babylon]

5 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

He was but as I said, the club were trying to recruit a young defender if funds allowed until Fofana got injured and then we had to get a new player in and they opted to go for experience. Couple that with how unsuited Vestergaard is to the way we play, it just didn't make a great deal of sense.

You’d have to point me in the direction of what he said as I don’t remember us even being in the market for one at the time particularly. 

[Bevan]

I don’t understand why we never look to South America for players. There are good players there and are much better value for money compared to the prem and even the championship. We just don’t seem to have any scouts for South America

[Ric Flair]

50 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You’d have to point me in the direction of what he said as I don’t remember us even being in the market for one at the time particularly. 

https://theathletic.com/2768692/2021/08/13/why-leicester-wanted-vestergaard-and-what-he-will-add-to-rodgers-team?source=user-shared-article

 

Then several weeks later Rodgers defends Vestergaard by saying he didn't expect him to have had to play much which goes against the need for a supposed experienced defender they weren't in the market for and one who they said would be a " starter ".

[Ric Flair]

16 minutes ago, Bevan said:

I don’t understand why we never look to South America for players. There are good players there and are much better value for money compared to the prem and even the championship. We just don’t seem to have any scouts for South America

So much value to be had there, you look at teams like Leverkusen and Frankfurt who mix up spending the sorts of money we spend on players with modest fees for players from South America and they seem to do so well in that regard.

[Pliskin]

4 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

https://theathletic.com/2768692/2021/08/13/why-leicester-wanted-vestergaard-and-what-he-will-add-to-rodgers-team?source=user-shared-article

 

Then several weeks later Rodgers defends Vestergaard by saying he didn't expect him to have had to play much which goes against the need for a supposed experienced defender they weren't in the market for and one who they said would be a " starter ".

It’s pretty ridiculous when you think about it. Why would you sign a player you don’t intend to play much? Because surely that then raises question marks if they’re even good enough? You sign a player who’s old perhaps with experience that you could use sporadically, but the reason they don’t play much is probably due to age and not ability…. So why sign a player who you’re already admitting is a bit shit? 
 

Brendan is incredible sometimes….

“John, I want to sign someone who I don’t intend on playing”….. righto……..

 

 

 

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

25 minutes ago, Bevan said:

I don’t understand why we never look to South America for players. There are good players there and are much better value for money compared to the prem and even the championship. We just don’t seem to have any scouts for South America

 

8 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

So much value to be had there, you look at teams like Leverkusen and Frankfurt who mix up spending the sorts of money we spend on players with modest fees for players from South America and they seem to do so well in that regard.

The main reason is that pre-Brexit, getting players from non-EU nations was difficult due to FA rules. It was easier for South American and African players to play in other European leagues. 

 

Our scouting network isn't oriented to South America. Hopefully, we are rectifying that.