Liverpool Discussion

[Spike]

Ya know, I thought Liverpool would eventually capitulate and fall down the table. But I suppose since Gerrard isn't around to fuck everything up, that isn't going to happen. Congratulations all of our Liverpool supporters on the league title.

[Burning Gold]

18 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I also think we would have won the league with any halfway decent manager with Suarez and Sturridge in the year he almost took us to the title

No doubt the man's a bellend, but I can't agree with this. Sturridge and Suarez were brilliant (worth noting he rescued Sturridge from the scrap heap at Chelsea) but just look at the rest of the squad. Mignolet: Shite. Johnson: Shite. Flanagan: Shite. Cissokho: Absolute fucking dogshit. The centre halves (Agger, Sakho, Skrtel, Toure) were decent but no more, and only when they were fit. In the midfield you had Gerrard, who everyone said was finished and had been for a few years, Henderson, about whom big questions were being asked, and Joe Allen, who was the very essence of mediocrity. Going forward apart from the aforementioned, there was Coutinho at 21 and the teenage Sterling. Both very raw. Then Aspas and Luis Alberto. Both very shite. That squad had absolutely no business being anywhere near the top of the league, and Rodgers deserves a lot of credit for getting them as close as he did. Would a more pragmatic manager have just taken the draw we needed at home to Chelsea? Probably, but a more pragmatic manager wouldn't have had us in a position where that was good enough.

I think he's a limited manager, but clearly good at what he does. I'd like to see him back in the Premier League. He's good something to prove and I'm intrigued to see what he'd do with this Leicester squad. At the very least he wouldn't just park the bus and be happy with a 1 or 2 goal loss against the top sides.

[RandoEFC+]

Seeing Rodgers back in the Premier League would be interesting. He did well at Swansea though his detractors argued that he merely applied the finishing touches to the good work of Roberto Martinez, though I'd argue that's unlikely because Martinez is a clown. Liverpool was a very mixed bag, he ended up like a very flawed and incomplete Klopp. Maybe he's learned a few things up in Scotland, I doubt it. My gut says that if he returned to England he'd be up and down and pretty much another name on the managerial merry go round but a bit better and more respected than most.

[Dan+]

I do think our squad with a couple of changes could be quite a decent fit for him. The thing we've got on our side (and Puel does deserve credit here) is that the average age has come down quite a bit.

[The Artful Dodger]

Rodgers is breathtakingly arrogant, that's his main problem. Maybe bexauee he as such a young manager of a huge clube he got delusions of grandeur, Celtic are a huge club too, no matter the league they are in so wouldnt be surprised if he is still the same. 

[Harry]

On 21/01/2019 at 12:40, Dan said:

It's probably not the best time for this but... what did you lot actually think of Brendan Rodgers? He's favourite to be our next manager and reading between the lines I can see it happening too.

Seems to divide opinion from what I read.

Honestly I both liked him and thought he was a pretty good manager. 

He embraced a "Brendan the Believer" managerial persona as a tactic he could use to control the stories in a similar way to Mourinho. It made him appear a likeable narcissistic douche to most. 

Whilst with us he was trying to emulate or at least draw heavy inspiration from Guardiolas Barca team in style which was the flavor of the month at the time. But it proved to be difficult in the EPL against teams that parked the bus and fouled you. But I think he'll have learned from that experience. Id be interested to see his defensive record at Celtic as that did appear a major failing of his playing style with us. 

This may be a huge call but I think ultimately with a better signing than Balotelli or with Sturridges fitness not collapsing after Suarez left there's a decent chance he could still be our manager. 

I'd be a bit disappointed if he jumped ship on Celtic mid season. 

Edited January 22, 2019 by Harry

[Guest]

Brendan Rodgers is a good manager. Suarez making him look good was a myth, as he was winning games at the start of the season when he was still suspended. They only really took over as a top class side once Suarez joined.

His transfer judgement is awful but as a tactician I don't think he's that bad.

[LFCMadLad]

Apparently Ox is only weeks away from a return. 

If we could get him back fully fit for the run in, that would be great. 

[Harry]

Would be a very welcome return. The sooner the better really as it'll take quite some time to re-embed him. 

[UNORTHODOX]

Gomez is back soon as well, Great news to have them both back because they will be needed for the run in, Ox could be a useful and important replacement for Wijnaldum when he needs a rest.

Edited January 23, 2019 by UNORTHODOX

[Mel81x+]

Whittling injury list and at the right time as well, congested fixture list in the middle of February and onwards so having more players back is always good even if they aren't 100% match fit. 

[LFCMadLad]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1088524737901486080

 

Bless him. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

On 22/01/2019 at 18:59, Blue said:

Brendan Rodgers is a good manager. Suarez making him look good was a myth, as he was winning games at the start of the season when he was still suspended. They only really took over as a top class side once Suarez joined.

His transfer judgement is awful but as a tactician I don't think he's that bad.

It’s impossible to say how good he is at transfers. He wanted credit for all of the good signings, but wanted to blame players that didn’t perform on the transfer committee (that he was a part of).

Many players that were signed under him that didn’t look so great initially ended up looking much better under Klopp. Firmino, Lovren, and Lallana in particular.

Tactically though he only had one year where he looked like a great tactician. And he was pretty much forced into using those tactics - switching from his preferred 4-3-3 to the 4-4-2 diamond, so Suarez and Sturridge both played up top (rather than him forcing Sturridge out wide). It was never his preferred formation - he just used it because playing those two up top with Gerard as a deep lying playmaker turned out to be devestating. And even then, he still could never learn how to defend. And then once Sturridge was constantly injured and Suarez was sold, he couldn’t figure out why the side couldn’t score, or why Gerrard as a deep lying playmaker with literally no movement ahead of him didn’t work. Meanwhile he still had no clue on how to organise a defense.

So as someone who watched him every match of his career as our manager, I think it’s safe to say that as a tactician.... yes he is that bad.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Dr. Gonzo

[Dr. Gonzo]

On 22/01/2019 at 07:42, Dan said:

I do think our squad with a couple of changes could be quite a decent fit for him. The thing we've got on our side (and Puel does deserve credit here) is that the average age has come down quite a bit.

Unless one of those changes is signing a prime Luis Suarez, or uprooting the club to Scotland where you’ll be the best side in the league, I wouldn’t have high expectations.

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It’s impossible to say how good he is at transfers. He wanted credit for all of the good signings, but wanted to blame players that didn’t perform on the transfer committee (that he was a part of).

Many players that were signed under him that didn’t look so great initially ended up looking much better under Klopp. Firmino, Lovren, and Lallana in particular.

Tactically though he only had one year where he looked like a great tactician. And he was pretty much forced into using those tactics - switching from his preferred 4-3-3 to the 4-4-2 diamond, so Suarez and Sturridge both played up top (rather than him forcing Sturridge out wide). It was never his preferred formation - he just used it because playing those two up top with Gerard as a deep lying playmaker turned out to be devestating. And even then, he still could never learn how to defend. And then once Sturridge was constantly injured and Suarez was sold, he couldn’t figure out why the side couldn’t score, or why Gerrard as a deep lying playmaker with literally no movement ahead of him didn’t work. Meanwhile he still had no clue on how to organise a defense.

So as someone who watched him every match of his career as our manager, I think it’s safe to say that as a tactician.... yes he is that bad.

I've seen most of his games too. With those players, not even Guardiola could make them perform.

[Burning Gold]

20 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It’s impossible to say how good he is at transfers. He wanted credit for all of the good signings, but wanted to blame players that didn’t perform on the transfer committee (that he was a part of).

Many players that were signed under him that didn’t look so great initially ended up looking much better under Klopp. Firmino, Lovren, and Lallana in particular.

Tactically though he only had one year where he looked like a great tactician. And he was pretty much forced into using those tactics - switching from his preferred 4-3-3 to the 4-4-2 diamond, so Suarez and Sturridge both played up top (rather than him forcing Sturridge out wide). It was never his preferred formation - he just used it because playing those two up top with Gerard as a deep lying playmaker turned out to be devestating. And even then, he still could never learn how to defend. And then once Sturridge was constantly injured and Suarez was sold, he couldn’t figure out why the side couldn’t score, or why Gerrard as a deep lying playmaker with literally no movement ahead of him didn’t work. Meanwhile he still had no clue on how to organise a defense.

So as someone who watched him every match of his career as our manager, I think it’s safe to say that as a tactician.... yes he is that bad.

Not sure why you're framing it as a criticism that he found great success using a formation that wasn't his preferred one? Harsh to say he was forced into it, as well. Suarez was talked about as a wide forward or second striker just as much as he was as a 'genuine' striker back then, and Sturridge often played out wide for Chelsea (relative to how often he played at all, that is). No one would've batted an eye if he'd gone 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1. People did bat an eye, however, to see Gerrard back in a deep role for the first time in, what, at least 10 years? I really don't think many managers would've even tried that formation, let alone made it work as well as it did with the players we had.

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 hours ago, Burning Gold said:

Not sure why you're framing it as a criticism that he found great success using a formation that wasn't his preferred one? Harsh to say he was forced into it, as well. Suarez was talked about as a wide forward or second striker just as much as he was as a 'genuine' striker back then, and Sturridge often played out wide for Chelsea (relative to how often he played at all, that is). No one would've batted an eye if he'd gone 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1. People did bat an eye, however, to see Gerrard back in a deep role for the first time in, what, at least 10 years? I really don't think many managers would've even tried that formation, let alone made it work as well as it did with the players we had.

It’s literally the only time he’d ever shown any tactical flexibility and he only did it, as proven by his lack of tactical flexibility in his tenure with us, because he would have been so stupid not to use two players who were scoring for fun in a way that kept them scoring for fun. And that’s why I think he was forced into it.

I’ll give him credit for showing that tactical flexibility that one solitary time... but I do think any other decent manager could have done the same and probably given our side a shitload more balance at the back. And his inability to find any balance is what ultimately cost us in his one good season with us.

To highlight his infuriating stubbornness with tactics, just look at his time as manager without Suarez. He didn’t want to deviate from his original setup until he was forced to with a Sturridge starting the season on fire and Suarez being an incredible striker.

I might be harsh for criticising the one thing he ever did well as our manager, but he was also a manager that routinely pissed me the fuck off and I genuinely dislike him for how he was so stubborn tactically that he essentially wasted our last season with Gerrard. And one good year with major flaws doesn’t paper over the cracks. And the fact that he’s got the personality of David Brent with the ego of Mourinho makes me feel much more justified in being harsh with him. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Dr. Gonzo

[Harry]

6 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It’s impossible to say how good he is at transfers. He wanted credit for all of the good signings, but wanted to blame players that didn’t perform on the transfer committee (that he was a part of).

Many players that were signed under him that didn’t look so great initially ended up looking much better under Klopp. Firmino, Lovren, and Lallana in particular.

Tactically though he only had one year where he looked like a great tactician. And he was pretty much forced into using those tactics - switching from his preferred 4-3-3 to the 4-4-2 diamond, so Suarez and Sturridge both played up top (rather than him forcing Sturridge out wide). It was never his preferred formation - he just used it because playing those two up top with Gerard as a deep lying playmaker turned out to be devestating. And even then, he still could never learn how to defend. And then once Sturridge was constantly injured and Suarez was sold, he couldn’t figure out why the side couldn’t score, or why Gerrard as a deep lying playmaker with literally no movement ahead of him didn’t work. Meanwhile he still had no clue on how to organise a defense.

So as someone who watched him every match of his career as our manager, I think it’s safe to say that as a tactician.... yes he is that bad.

I really think you're viewing BR through a very negative lens there mate. If I were to apply you're approach to klopp...

Klopp didn't organize a defense. He did nothing for 2 years until fsg caved in a d let him sign the world's most expensive defender and goalkeeper.

Klopp only switched his formation recently because he had no other way of getting shaqiri on the pitch more often. This was not because he wanted to play that way. 

Klopp just got lucky that Salah turned out to be the best player in the league as otherwise we'd have only gone backwards.    

I'm not suggesting BR was on the klopp level but there was such a negative narrative forged through the media back then that by the end of his tenure most liverpool fans were completely poisoned from seeing anything he did as deserving of more than mild reluctant credit. 

 

 

[Guest]

@Dr. Gonzo you know I like you but you're talking shite mate.

To begin with, nobody said he was a world class tactician. All I said was he wasn't bad. He's certainly better than a lot other british managers these days. First off, I wanted to say that there was a time I followed the PL closely, not like now where I'm only a casual viewer. This was the Rodgers and Suarez era.

It's a myth that Suarez made Rodgers look good. It's true that Suarez pushed the team to a much better level, but Rodgers played his cards very well that season. Playing 2 quality strikers up top, using a formation to pander to the attacking players and had a good role for Coutinho who I remember was a lot less developed than he is today. He also brought in Sterling into the first team (I may be wrong on that)

Once Suarez left, he was replaced poorly. Balotelli has always been overrated for me but he was never as bad as what he showed at Liverpool. That was always a coin toss and it landed on tails. If it's true that he didn't do the transfers, then that gives me more of a defence on him. With those players, very few managers could've gotten them to work. Again, he's not a great tactician. He is good, nothing outstanding. He is more smart if anything and not that stubborn. 

The point is though, any team of Liverpool's stature and power would have struggled following the sale of a world class player like that. Look at Spurs when Bale left. They tried to replace him and it didn't work out so well. Rodgers was unlucky and he is by no means a world class manager, but I'm not buying that Suarez made him look good. Complete lie.

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 hours ago, Harry said:

I really think you're viewing BR through a very negative lens there mate. If I were to apply you're approach to klopp...

Klopp didn't organize a defense. He did nothing for 2 years until fsg caved in a d let him sign the world's most expensive defender and goalkeeper.

Klopp only switched his formation recently because he had no other way of getting shaqiri on the pitch more often. This was not because he wanted to play that way. 

Klopp just got lucky that Salah turned out to be the best player in the league as otherwise we'd have only gone backwards.    

I'm not suggesting BR was on the klopp level but there was such a negative narrative forged through the media back then that by the end of his tenure most liverpool fans were completely poisoned from seeing anything he did as deserving of more than mild reluctant credit. 

 

 

Each year under Klopp we made steady progress.

Can’t say the same about Rodgers.

[LFCMike]

I'm indifferent to Rodgers to be honest. Loved that season where we fell just short and we should have kicked on from there but didn't. The signings, whoever was responsible for them, were way short of the quality required when it came to replacing Suarez. The 14/15 season was awful barring a two month spell in the middle.

He probably should have gone after the 6-1 at Stoke but then you have to think who was available at the time. I don't think Klopp wanted to jump straight back into another job after leaving Dortmund. It's not worked out too badly for us anyway

[Harry]

Once thing I do think Rodgers really disappointed was driving Gerrard and Carra to retire earlier than in my view was necessary. 

Both players were still exceptional depth options and I believe a different manager could have done more to transition them from 38 game players into later stage Ryan Giggs players in a way they would accept. I think this was down to inexperience and those two senior players not seeing BR as an equal and having full respect for him to a level it didnt sting like buggery to accept being told of not being a first choice player anymore. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Harry

[IgnisExcubitor]

9 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Each year under Klopp we made steady progress.

Can’t say the same about Rodgers.

This, I strongly agree. 

Also, the mark of a good manager is the creation of a spine. Even though it took Klopp few seasons to sort out the defence, he had already created the attack. 

Also, this piece from Goal is good explanation of how things work at the club now. Was nice to read about Henderson's role in signing Van Dijk. 

https://www.joe.co.uk/sport/from-tears-in-kiev-to-title-challengers-how-liverpool-turned-their-champions-league-misfortune-into-motivation-216742 

[Mel81x+]

2 hours ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

This, I strongly agree. 

Also, the mark of a good manager is the creation of a spine. Even though it took Klopp few seasons to sort out the defence, he had already created the attack. 

Also, this piece from Goal is good explanation of how things work at the club now. Was nice to read about Henderson's role in signing Van Dijk. 

https://www.joe.co.uk/sport/from-tears-in-kiev-to-title-challengers-how-liverpool-turned-their-champions-league-misfortune-into-motivation-216742 

Good read that. Thanks for sharing it.

[Dr. Gonzo]

16 hours ago, Blue said:

@Dr. Gonzo you know I like you but you're talking shite mate.

To begin with, nobody said he was a world class tactician. All I said was he wasn't bad. He's certainly better than a lot other british managers these days. First off, I wanted to say that there was a time I followed the PL closely, not like now where I'm only a casual viewer. This was the Rodgers and Suarez era.

It's a myth that Suarez made Rodgers look good. It's true that Suarez pushed the team to a much better level, but Rodgers played his cards very well that season. Playing 2 quality strikers up top, using a formation to pander to the attacking players and had a good role for Coutinho who I remember was a lot less developed than he is today. He also brought in Sterling into the first team (I may be wrong on that)

Once Suarez left, he was replaced poorly. Balotelli has always been overrated for me but he was never as bad as what he showed at Liverpool. That was always a coin toss and it landed on tails. If it's true that he didn't do the transfers, then that gives me more of a defence on him. With those players, very few managers could've gotten them to work. Again, he's not a great tactician. He is good, nothing outstanding. He is more smart if anything and not that stubborn. 

The point is though, any team of Liverpool's stature and power would have struggled following the sale of a world class player like that. Look at Spurs when Bale left. They tried to replace him and it didn't work out so well. Rodgers was unlucky and he is by no means a world class manager, but I'm not buying that Suarez made him look good. Complete lie.

How many of our matches have you even watched in your life?

I mean no offense from this at all, but I read the first sentence of this and I thought “oh look it’s a long post and it’s all going to be fucking bullshit.” The only thing that wasn’t bullshit in that post is that Balotelli has always been overrated and that lazy turd should have never been brought to our clubs

The fact of the matter is we only ever had one good season with Rodgers. He wasn’t cut out to be our manager despite that one season.

The best thing about Rodgers is he signed Firmino (had no clue how to use him, mind you) and we got Klopp after Rodgers was binned. Not even that good but very flawed season comes close to what he did for the club by bringing in Bobby and staying on despite being out of his depth until Klopp was ready to join us.

I still think he should never have been our manager. And I’m going to trust my opinion on my club more than I trust some outsiders opinion.

But you’re gonna see things differently so let’s just agree to disagree