Rodgers
- Thread starter Dirty Sanchez
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Don't forget that this is the 3rd straight season this has happened. In Rodgers' first season our options on the last day of the transfer window were Dempsey or nothing. We ended up with nothing, Borini got crocked right away and until January we had no recognized striker in the squad besides Suarez – fortunately that was the season when Luis found his new level as a finisher and he carried the team. Otherwise Rodgers' already difficult first season in charge would have been much, much tougher and he might not have survived.
Last season we spent all summer looking for a top-level attacking talent in the £20M+ range, but ended up with only Moses on loan, having failed to sign Mkhitaryan, Willian, Diego Costa and Salah and Konoplyanka in the winter. Again, we were fortunate – Sterling has found his new level as a player that year and his rapid development mostly made up for that transfer fiasco.
This summer we needed to replace Suarez and by the end of the transfer season Rodgers' options were apparently Balotelli, Eto'o or nothing. Not wishing to repeat the mistakes of the previous seasons, he agreed to sign Balotelli, despite his obvious reservations. In hindsight, nothing would have been the better option – we wasted first half of the season adjusting the team's style to suit Balotelli, then dropping him and adjusting back. Again, Sterling came to the rescue and while being shuffled between 3 different positions as AM, RWB and now ST and playing almost without rest pretty much carried the team's attacking production on his 20-year-old shoulders. Still, Rodgers at one point came close to losing his job and if he did the whole project would have been back at square one.
How long will it take Rodgers to understand that this amateurish and inefficient set-up of the "transfer committee" is the biggest threat and impediment to his own job? How much stronger would his position be if in the first 6 months of his first season Suarez had a genuine strike partner? If last season we did sign a better AM then Moses and thus gained ourselves a couple of extra points needed to win the title? If this season we didn't somehow manage to start the campaign with Balotelli, Borini and Lambert – 3 strikers none of whom can lead the line effectively in Rodgers' own tactical system (and can't play with each other as an effective partnership either)? If we were better negotiators in regards to the players we sell?
Ditch your ego and your insecurity, Brendan, and let yourself be persuaded to work in partnership with someone who knows what he's doing in the transfer market, respects you and shares your general philosophy of football and, most importantly, has the right level of authority and power within the club (as all top professionals in this field will require to have) to make the kind of creative, gutsy, and intelligent decisions that will allow this club to hold its own in this market against its mega-rich and aggressive competitors. We have beginnings of a good young core of players and one of the most tactically astute and progressive football managers in the world, but right now we don't have an excellent scouting and transfer set up and we won't reach and sustain the top level until we do.
Another thumbs-up from me for Rurik's post. The only thing I would add is that I suspect Rodgers knows very well what effect the misfiring current arrangement could have on his own prospects. I'd bet that, if he had his own way over it, the committee would be history tomorrow.
The difficulty is that that would leave Rodgers in sole charge of transfer policy, which the owners clearly don't want and IMO are right not to want. If you decide as they have (wouldn't have been my choice, but it is what it is) that you want a young manager in charge, it's a big risk to leave everything in his hands like that. He on the other hand is highly unlikely to be happy about an alternative power centre within the club in the shape of a DOF, not least because most viable candidates would probably also be viable replacements for him if he were not to succeed.
If - and it may be a big "if" - there's even an outside chance of persuading Rodgers to go with the DOF model, it may hang on the particular individual chosen. Rodgers was widely reported to have turned down the idea of working under van Gaal in that capacity and someone like, for instance, Frank de Boer would most probably provoke the same reaction. For that reason Monchi would be ideal if he's OK with moving to this country, as he doesn't appear to have any designs on the team management side of things. No idea whether there are other similar candidates out there though.
The difficulty is that that would leave Rodgers in sole charge of transfer policy, which the owners clearly don't want and IMO are right not to want. If you decide as they have (wouldn't have been my choice, but it is what it is) that you want a young manager in charge, it's a big risk to leave everything in his hands like that. He on the other hand is highly unlikely to be happy about an alternative power centre within the club in the shape of a DOF, not least because most viable candidates would probably also be viable replacements for him if he were not to succeed.
If - and it may be a big "if" - there's even an outside chance of persuading Rodgers to go with the DOF model, it may hang on the particular individual chosen. Rodgers was widely reported to have turned down the idea of working under van Gaal in that capacity and someone like, for instance, Frank de Boer would most probably provoke the same reaction. For that reason Monchi would be ideal if he's OK with moving to this country, as he doesn't appear to have any designs on the team management side of things. No idea whether there are other similar candidates out there though.
It is indeed a very good post rurik.
I would add that a big 'name' may persuade some of the stars who have turned us down in recent windows to come, as I think that is part of the problem.
I think often Rodgers suggests a name of a player he really wants , the committee agree & we just miss out, usually through money issues or choosing a 'bigger' club, more often, a more well known manager.
A high profile respected dof may well circumvent that issue & help Rodgers get the players who seem to be his first choices.
I would add that a big 'name' may persuade some of the stars who have turned us down in recent windows to come, as I think that is part of the problem.
I think often Rodgers suggests a name of a player he really wants , the committee agree & we just miss out, usually through money issues or choosing a 'bigger' club, more often, a more well known manager.
A high profile respected dof may well circumvent that issue & help Rodgers get the players who seem to be his first choices.
The difficulty with that though, Foxy, is that a big name may be exactly the kind of appointment which Rodgers would see as a threat. I reckon we need someone who's very much a "backroom boy" and will do his stuff in that way. Top players will be attracted if that leads to success.
I agree that Rodgers won't want a big name, I just think that's what he needs. A name who isn't interested in proving anything cos he's already proved it & that players already respect.
The problem with a backroom boy is that they won't have been away from the 'coal face' for long & as such there's likely to be issues regards meddling in team tactics etc.
I can see there's a logical argument why a successful ex manager may have the same issues though, using the 'I know how to do this cos I've done it successfully for X years' argument though.
These issues are the reason we won't see it happening, sadly.
Yep, spot on as per. I think the committee at the minute is a help and hindrance to Rodgers. It's the scapegoat for poor signings, but it's also muddying the waters over who signs who - there's only one man who will publicly carry the can should we continue to falter with signings.
The frustrating thing is that you can see we've added some good, young quality players who we will benefit from over the coming years. On the other side of the coin, we could have reaped the benefit of their talents much, much sooner, had we added the firepower. Instead, the lack of an outlet has put serious pressure on the shoulders of players who were finding their rhythm.
The frustrating thing is that you can see we've added some good, young quality players who we will benefit from over the coming years. On the other side of the coin, we could have reaped the benefit of their talents much, much sooner, had we added the firepower. Instead, the lack of an outlet has put serious pressure on the shoulders of players who were finding their rhythm.
bit selective that. There's enough info in the public domain to confirm Rodgers wanted Sturridge. So suddenly the good signings aren't his but the shit ones are?
Sorry, but that's way too simplistic a view. Rodgers may have wanted Ashley Williams and Vorm, but even though on paper their abilities are not as good as, say, Sakho and Ming, they may well have integrated much easier into the way we play football. I don't think his record in the transfer market is great (when did we last have a manager who had a great transfer record?) but it's too simplistic to just think 'well that player is better than that player'. You have to consider whether there would have been a period of transition for the players, whether we would have had as big a period of transition as a team. I'm not saying they would have worked out better, but the point is you can't automatically know - otherwise identifying the right players would be a piece of piss - and given how many managers sign players that don't work out, it clearly isn't.
Plus the transfer committee didn't sign Suarez, who was here before Rodgers was here.
@FoxForceFive makes a good point about a big name DOF possibly being a little more likely to attract big name players – although surely money is a far bigger factor. But I'm not so sure we need "big names" all that much to be honest. I think so far the highest profile player we have signed under Rodgers has been Balotelli, who has been disastrous so far, while our best signings – Coutinho, Sturridge, and (provisionally) Can – have been known only to the fans of their respective clubs and a handful of football experts. Players who want good life and media attention will not come here anyway and if a "star" DOF makes attracting such players easier, that might not be actually better for us as a club. Last thing we want is to become an attractive destination for the "early retirement seekers," your wesley sneijders and joe coles.
Like somebody else said earlier, we should simply focus on signing the best available talent 23 and under. I don't care how well-known they are at the time they sign; the less known the better (and cheaper). In other words we need a DOF with a strong analytical mind and great instinct for identifying talent early – a football geek rather than a media star. I would like to know who on the committee pushed for signing Coutinho and Can. I have a feeling it's the same person, because these deals have similar profile – players with clear top-level potential, but under-appreciated by the clubs that owned them. If I'm right in that assumption, I wouldn't mind this person to be given extra power and responsibility as DOF, with Rodgers keeping the veto power. This is the profile of players we should be going for as much as possible, this is where the best value lies.
Like somebody else said earlier, we should simply focus on signing the best available talent 23 and under. I don't care how well-known they are at the time they sign; the less known the better (and cheaper). In other words we need a DOF with a strong analytical mind and great instinct for identifying talent early – a football geek rather than a media star. I would like to know who on the committee pushed for signing Coutinho and Can. I have a feeling it's the same person, because these deals have similar profile – players with clear top-level potential, but under-appreciated by the clubs that owned them. If I'm right in that assumption, I wouldn't mind this person to be given extra power and responsibility as DOF, with Rodgers keeping the veto power. This is the profile of players we should be going for as much as possible, this is where the best value lies.
Think the committee have done well overall, our squad has some younger players with good technique who can improve over the coming years. At least it looks like there is a plan in place.
That said they massively fcuked up by not signing a top class striker this summer.
The players we missed out on is probably not wanting to pay the big wages and think this is going to be the test over the coming years, as to whether committee//fsg are willing to push the boat on genuinely quality that will improve the first team, like a Cavani type striker.
@rurikbird I was in a rush & didn't have time to clarify my 'big names' 'stars' comment, which I was thinking I should, I meant more the up & coming stars. Take the example of Sanchez, not necessarily a star per se, but I doubt he'd have been as easily swayed by his missus if it were a more famous name trying to recruit him.
The mad guessing of which signing's are Mr Rodgers & which are the committee's annoys me.
We don't really know, we just have guesswork, but I think it's fair to say if either would have been left to their own devices there would have definitely been a mixed bag!
The mad guessing of which signing's are Mr Rodgers & which are the committee's annoys me.
We don't really know, we just have guesswork, but I think it's fair to say if either would have been left to their own devices there would have definitely been a mixed bag!
In the end I think most are Rodgers signings, bar Assaidi maybe which is just a strange one. No doubt about that. He has the final say imho.The interesting part is what he has to choose from.
If its Balotelli, Eto'o or nothing. You can see why he went for Balotelli.
But the two names in that list are nothing like, say Remy. Who would fit into our system easily, and that's were the big problem starts for me.
Same with buying a goalkeeper in 2013. He identifies the need for a goalkeeper that can effectively take the role as a sweeper and is comfortable in possession. We sign Mignolet, who is an excellent shot stopper but one of the worst goalkeepers in the league in possession.
The whole basis of how the committee work is what FSG need to address and clarify, or at least change if we're going to move forward. Leaving Rodgers in sole charge of the transfers is not a good idea but having someone who can identify the right players from Rodgers shortlist is a must.
That person also needs to have enough experience and knowledge of the market that he can sway maybe those who need a bit of persuading. We're in a position financially that we need to find those gems out there and make the right signings. We've pissed away so much money that it hurts.
The committee isn't all bad as we've made a lot of very good signings. But with the key positions we need to strengthen next summer, I don't really trust those involved enough.
Lovren was expensive and haven't delivered. Could come good but for 20 mill we could have gotten someone better from another league imho. The whole two left sided defenders at a cost of 36 mill is also headschratchingely strange.
Next summer is critical in building a new midfield, signing a new goalkeeper and probably adding a quality striker. Making more expensive failures cant happen.
I'm not convinced the committee is failing.
It looks much more likely to me that we are not signing their first choices because the money is not there - especially the wages. As has been pointed out, we did go for top talents like Mikhitaryan, Willian, Costa, Konoplyanka, Sanchez but failed to sign any of them. Is that the fault of the Committee or the people who set the wages limits and are responsible for negotiating the deals?
We ended up with Balotelli because the Committee successfully targeted Loic Remy but then somehow the deal was not clinched.
I read somewhere that since Rodgers arrived, 9 out of the top 10 wage-earners in the squad have gone. What does that tell you?
It looks much more likely to me that we are not signing their first choices because the money is not there - especially the wages. As has been pointed out, we did go for top talents like Mikhitaryan, Willian, Costa, Konoplyanka, Sanchez but failed to sign any of them. Is that the fault of the Committee or the people who set the wages limits and are responsible for negotiating the deals?
We ended up with Balotelli because the Committee successfully targeted Loic Remy but then somehow the deal was not clinched.
I read somewhere that since Rodgers arrived, 9 out of the top 10 wage-earners in the squad have gone. What does that tell you?
Maybe the likes of Mkhitaryan, Willian or Costa were simply the wrong profile of players for us to target – we are unlikely to win the battle with 4-5 other clubs for the latest hot commodity. And that's OK. We should do more of what has worked best for us: target players with world-class potential BEFORE their break-out season, not after.
Even if we do get what we want with this profile of player, it's hardly the best value for money. Let's do some analysis in hindsight: out of those 3 we missed last summer Mkhitaryan has generally failed to deliver as promised in Dortmund, his general play has been OK, but he has been incredibly wasteful/unlucky with putting away goal-scoring chances created by teammates and that had contributed to their current dire form and last season's CL exit. Willian has become a starting 11 player for a very strong Chelsea team – but mostly for his industry and defensive work which is so valued by Mourinho. 1 goal and 1 assist in 21 EPL games this season are not the kind of numbers you'd expect from a £32M attacking midfielder.
Costa, who I didn't rate initially, did become a clear success and a good value for money. Even so my point stands: out of 3 players we were outbid for, only one so far has provided a good return on investment – and it's a substantial investment and a big risk. Whereas if you focus on players like Coutinho, Sturridge or Can – underused, under-appreciated, but supremely talented players – the odds of success are at least as good, but the price of the lottery ticket is 3 times as cheap.
All 3 of those players would have instantly improved our starting 11 and suited our style of play.
Possibly, but so did Sturridge, Can and Coutinho and they cost a lot less.
Yes, that's how money works, if you spend it, you don't have it.
What I meant to say is to compare the players we were (heavily) linked with in the window and the ones we signed
Had that transpired, we wouldn't have had that lovely Henderson stare down vine though.
Sadly, we are in for Costa etc and we sometimes get them if the only other people after them are Spurs or Newcastle or Southampton. If the gangster's codpiece, the oil lottery winners or those fuckwits down the East Lancs Road get involved we are fucked. Even Arsehole FC can nick players off us and they are utterly pointless. The best we can hope for is getting a Torres or a Suarez before anyone else really notices and then helping them become world class.
I wonder who the last player we got was that had a straight choice between us and one of those three that genuinely chose us. I can't think of one.
Hopefully, once the new stand is built we'll have more financial clout and can start offering deals the Costa's of this world actually think about.
- Status
Similar threads
