'Ings questions the signing of benteke'
So why's he bought Benteke... ?
- Thread starter Ryan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
How else am I supposed to take 'best 11' than literally? Are you saying 11 is really just an approximate? And is this 'A' Squad this weeks attempt at reversing the 'best 7' you threw up last week.
You effectively go on to support my argument anyway, you need a squad of 15 very good players who can rotate. I wish you'd just acknowledged that to begin with.
And as you've seen, it's impossible to select our best 11; does Sturridge play in a month's time when he's fit? Without dragging the arse out of this even further, I bet you between them Lucas and Allen play 40 games for us this season, and they're not even in your 'A' squad.
Oh, and Dzeko will be on the bench. 4-5-1 with Nasri taking his place is my guess.
QED.
I didn't bring it up, and I've spent the entire thread answering fucking moronic questions about it.
You know the people who clap in the audience at the Jeremy Kyle show? That post right there is the equivalent of those mouth-breathers.
I don't disagree with much of that.
Heh, perhaps I didn't even get to addressing those points in my first point, that's fair, but largely because I agree - they're unanswered questions, and because Rodgers doesn't even fucking know.
Here's my take:
- He buys the likes of Markovic, Manquillo, Ilori, with no "development" plan, and with no clear idea of how they'll fit into "the system". Based on the evidence we've seen from him, he moves players around until something works, and then goes with it. He happened upon the diamond midfield only because he had to get Suarez and Sturridge in a front 2. He went with 3-5-2 last year cos we had no full-backs and he hadn’t time (or the capacity) to educate Moreno and Manquillo. He didn’t play Markovic on the wing in a 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 cos he wasn’t enough of a goal threat. Anyway, you know the point. So those things happen, players don’t do what you might expect or hope, but the worrying thing about Brodge for me is that he doesn’ seem to have any sort of plan to address them. As you’ve alluded to; what’s the plan for Markovic? A 20M winger bought with all the fanfare in the world, and if wide in a front 3 is supposedly his best position then my guess is he’s 6th or 7th in line to get a spot there. Why? Beause Brodge just moved on.
Same for Can. What’s the plan for him? Everyone assumes he can play the defensive midfielder role. Based on what? He played as a right-sided centre back all last year?
Can’s development, just like the future of Markovic, and how Sturridge & Benteke play togethor, and whether Moreno can develop as a full back. Eery one of those and more Rodgers is putting down to hope, cos there seemingly is no plan as far as I can say.
So of course I’ve no idea how Sturridge and Benteke are going to play togethor. Cos Rodgers fucking doesn’t.
Anyway, I don’t even know if I’ve answered your question, or my own for that matter. He’s bought a wide and varied squad, which is all well and good if some of them click and we happen upon a shape and a team out of it, but Brodge is pretty much flicking coins into a fountain and hoping for salvation right now.
My first point was in jest, I know your take on a best 11.
As I said above I was joking. I'm well aware of your take on the best 11 scenario.
Nowadays it's more akin to your best 11 week to week, dependant on all the things you have mentioned.
One of the problems with the philosophy is though that it can lead to too much tinkering and a loss of fluidity.
Sometimes the same 11 players playing together week in week out can be more effective that sweeping changes because certain players may adapt to a different formation a little better.
I always think of an interview I read with Rafa after he left Liverpool.
He stated that he always tried to pick the worst possible team that would win him the game in question. He wanted to keep his squad fresh and his best players fit for the whole season and not suffer burn out. Hence he would often rest better players and take squad rotation to a whole new level. The major flaw with this was that he often was left with a team that lacked cohesion and invariable lost to a lesser side.
How many times did we see us lose on the back of a big win against a weaker side.
I'm happy to acknowledge that a strict best XI rarely (not never) exists and yet you won't admit that something close to it does, and where it doesn't is highly desirable? That's how it works, is it?!
Look at the Man City example you cited, and the most germane point I made about it. It's only really due to fuck ups with defensive recruitment that there's much contention what their best XI would be. Surely you'd accept it'd be better for them not to have a rotation policy for their back 4?? In which case they'd actually have 10 out of 11 players instantly selectable as their best.
And that's the point. Often when you chide people for questioning where this or that player fits into a best XI, it's downplaying a relevant complaint. Will that player be used as much as his fee demands he should be? Does that make him a bad signing? That he might still play plenty doesn't mean that's as good as him playing almost all the time. It's a sound basis for questioning team planning. That's all I'm really saying, in essence.
Heh, sadly I agree with most of that. I was hoping someone had some answers where I couldn't see any!
I suspect the train of thought (I use the word loosely) on Can runs like this: did all right at CB + actually a MF by trade = DM of the future. Apart from the fact that that involves rather more assumption than actual analysis, it ignores the accompanying fact that Rodgers prefers not to set up with a DM anyway - more's the pity, IMO of course.
If Lucas stays fit for an entire season there is a chance we might be OK. He never seems to make an entire season though. Can isn't ready for a center DM role. We really need someone to build around. Allen is a disaster off the ball. Lucas is the only one who really makes the life for the back 4 easier.
We need to sign proven quality to be in contention for the 4th spot.
We need to sign proven quality to be in contention for the 4th spot.
If you rearrange the letters Christian Benteke, minus a few, then add a few it spells the word "Ballon D'or"
Coincidence?
I think not.
Coincidence?
I think not.
'Stenchier beatnik' is a real anagram of his name.
Nah. Your wrong. As usual... I am not at Twitter. To fancy for me. I got it on a textmessage. Sms. From Jonathan Hansen.... And him being my son mean I made him.... hence he is my own! Having said that- How can you steel from Twitter? I thought retweeting was their only objektive? But as I said, thats too fancy fot old farts like me....
- Status
