Brentan is not in charge of transfers, they have a committee that decides and Brentan has to work with whoever they buy.
Brentan Rodgers
- Thread starter The Neviller
- Start date
- Status
Brentan is not in charge of transfers, they have a committee that decides and Brentan has to work with whoever they buy.
Apart from with Sturridge and Coutinho, who apparently represented great business by Brendan.
He's also on this transfer committee, so it's hardly like he's just being handed a load of players he doesn't want.
Not this bollocks again.
Rodgers at the Emirates yesterday:
The fact he even sits on such a committee proves the man is the ultimate moron.
I think the committee look for good players for good value like Coutinho and Balotelli but they players aren't forced on Rodgers. I read that he was an option of overruling and rejecting the transfers if he wants.
I'm fairly sure he'll identify his own targets in addition to looking at those suggested by others on the committee. Also, they've done a shite job looking for value if they think £25 million for Lallana, £20 million a piece for Markovic and Lovren, and £18 million for Sakho represents value for money.
They spent £40 million on Balo, Lambert and Lovren and justified it with them being signed to add depth to the squad. Yesterday when they need a striker and defender with Sturridge and Skrtel out they end up having to stick Toure and Sterling in there. Players they already had before the summer.
Transfer policy at Liverpool is a total joke. £40m for players you can't even play.
They punched above their weight last year and were even the other years, so cumulatively yes they were above their weight. I didn't think that was difficult to understand. Balotelli is also not "presumably on [Rodgers] say so". Neither you or I can know for sure but the rumblings from people who do know more than us suggest that Balotelli was not a Rodgers signing. Speaking of disingenuous, talking about the 200 million in transfer funds fits the bill.
Net transfer spend since Rodgers took over:
Liverpool - 100 million
Chelsea - 133 million
Manchester United - 222 million (Man Utd had a higher net spend this season alone than Liverpool since Rodgers took over combined)
Manchester City - 164 million
Arsenal - 107 million
So once again Liverpool are not only behind their competitors for the top 4 spot, but they also started significantly worse in terms of squad and attractiveness to players. The fact that people even expected Liverpool to compete for a top 4 spot this year, is a testament to the job Rodgers has done at Liverpool. That a significant amount of the money he has spent has gone towards young players for the future (Markovic Origi Can Moreno) suggests that Liverpool know they don't have the resources to compete at the top of the market. I would expect that Rodgers will be given a longer leash because of the relatively paucity of resources he has compared to his contenders makes it an uphill battle to begin with. If Liverpool sack him, I would be very surprised. The only way he has done a bad job is in a contextless view in which Liverpool is still a financial juggernaut.
Umm what? The net spent can go take a hike when he has spent 120 mil. He had the audacity to comment about Spurs and look where he is now. After a title challenge, it is fully expected that the team has to vie for the title again. Just because other teams are strengthening, doesn't mean that he shouldn't. Also I feel that he was quite lucky that 3 of the 'top 4' clubs had got in new managers. Had Sir Alex been there, along with Mou at the helm for long (City, I don't care about), no way would he have had such a season.
He spent 120 million? Manchester United spent 145 million and they didn't lose the best player in the league. "After a title challenge, it is fully expected that the team has to vie for the title again" This is what I mean by contextless. You can't just say these things and ignore all of the stuff that happened over the summer.
Surely Rodgers must have said ok to the transfer though? It's hard to believe the board would force the transfer through without either consulting rodgers of their intentions to sign Balo or consult him and then just ignore him saying no thanks. Especially considering Rodgers had just came off the back of a title challenging season and had easily reached his objective of top 4.
I agree that par for Liverpool for 5th place now considering the wages they give out. It's not really Rodgers fault that he can't bring in Sanchez and has to settle for Lallana. I thought they should have went for someone like Griezmann at the time though. He was linked with them for ages and he's really kicked on this season.
Liverpool sacking Rodgers would be madness. A challenge for top 4 is what you would expect of Rodgers right now and that's what he's achieved. Perhaps the board will consider his failure against United and Arsenal in the crunch period as its very similar to the collapse last year at Chelsea and Palace. Rodgers doesn't seem like a pragmatic manager and he's not a tactical genius like Rafa.
We didnt indeed,we lost so much more imo.
To be honest, that's very unfair on Rodgers. He lost the best player in the league who was largely responsible for the success last year and then they also last Sturridge to injury. I look at Liverpool's squad and see average crap like Balo, Allen, Hendo, Lambert, Mignolet and I can't really expect them to be the core of a title challenging team.
Even the good players like Sterling and Coutinho don't really have that much of a great end product right now. Both players are very much in a stage of improving. Not title chasing quality of Sanchez or Ozil for example.
He's not omnipotent but is instrumental.
They only players worth a damn you lost last summer were Welbeck and Kagawa. Liverpool lost the best player in the league. I mean, come on.
I was thinking that as I read that too.
Yeah, I'm definitely not saying Rodgers is totally faultless there. I do think the board might have thought it was a good opportunity to get a talented player for cheap though.
Think he was referring to having lost Ferguson. I would have traded another season with Fergie at the helm over the cash outlay. Considering how shite the league was that year, Fergie could have potentially smashed out 21.
But we are talking about last summer. When you went from Moyes to Van Gaal.
Lot of damage done during that one year under Moyes though, to be fair. More impact than losing a star player IMHO.
I think he's a decent-ish good manager but not very good tactically and has been found out in the big games and in europe.
I see an issue there. Then ideally you shouldn't be bringing up United's spend after Sir Alex left into context because the team needed rebuilding under 2 managers in a very short time. Out of which one was a complete disaster.
And also about Liverpool losing their best player, United also lost Ronaldo in 2009 and just spent about 20 odd mil in the market that season. Oh and United came second in the 09-10 season. By the logic being given by the Poolian fans, United should have had a horror season post that.
Brenden is a half decent manager but not great as being made out to be. He thinks himself to be the best manager around and talks out of his ass. That is what pisses me off the most.
Warning LvG about the Premier League when he was appointed
Stuff like this wants me to see him fail ever so more.
Last summer Kagawa, Welbeck, Rio, Vidic and Evra went... Liverpool only lost 1 player and got 90M pound to buy replacement which they didn't do.. Its not like 3 or 5 of their strongest lineup went from them..
I can't remember that United was a lot worse when the best player in the world went to Real Madrid....
I can't remember that United was a lot worse when the best player in the world went to Real Madrid....
Rodgers is not as good a manager as Maurinho,Van Gaal or Wenger and those 3 and City have better footballers at their disposal. Yet Rodgers has done well enough to be competitive.
He has bought poorly tbh....but he does get them to pick themselves up.....
..and he does come across as a decent fella.
But if they do get rid of him....I for one will be pretty happy....
He has bought poorly tbh....but he does get them to pick themselves up.....
..and he does come across as a decent fella.
But if they do get rid of him....I for one will be pretty happy....
Well for me its not only about players,lets take only last season,squad got drained of energy and confidence,nothing left in them,teams coming at OT felt like they can piss all over us etc.Players wise i would count some other names next your mention as worth in this way or another.
I think he will go abroad if Liverpool do part ways with him.
United lost most of their experienced players like Vidic, Ferdinand, Evra and Giggs and changed managers twice in two seasons. A club in upheaval compared to a relatively steady liverpool squad and management.
I think premier league has ruined the way the fans think about football, surely success in football isn't just based on wage bills and transfer spending.
He's a knob but if you look at their current squad over the last 2 seasons he's got Liverpool punching well above their weight. You look at their starting XI and how many players would make the starting XI in arsenal, united, Chelsea or City?
Sadly it's by far the biggest single factor.
Liverpool' s problem in not Rodgers.hes good enough to lead a decent side to top finish.
What holds them back is crap purchases. Who in their.right minds swaps Reina for Mingolet??
From their squad id take 2,3 players max.
What holds them back is crap purchases. Who in their.right minds swaps Reina for Mingolet??
From their squad id take 2,3 players max.
Liverpool's target is CL football. Rodgers was hired and given a large transfer budget to achieve CL football. They'd finished way off that for three seasons prior to Rodgers' arrival, and finished way off it again in his first season. They punched above their weight last season, but that was never in question. This season, they're pretty much back to square one in terms of their distance from the top 4, and could well finish 7th. Again.
The transfer expenditure of other teams is irrelevant, really, and I only brought it up because Liverpool outspent Arsenal by quite a large amount for a number of years up until Arsenal's recent transfer splurges. Without the Ozil and Sanchez signings (totaling approximately £75 million), Arsenal's net spend would be far lower than Liverpool's, and it's quite interesting that they've only had a net spend of £7 million more since Rodgers' arrival, despite Liverpool receiving £75 million for Suarez. What does their expenditure look like in comparison to Spurs and Southampton, the two clubs that they're pretty much level with in the league?
You've ignored pretty much every point I made about the Balotelli signing. Rodgers' may not have been too keen on him, but it appears Rodgers wasn't too keen on Sturridge either, yet that was apparently a great bit of business by Brendan. Balotelli wasn't sprung on Rodgers, he was signed at the end of the transfer window when Liverpool found themselves with a crisis up front because Rodgers had failed to strengthen the forward line, and after Rodgers had already spent £100 million on new players that summer. It's neither here nor there whether Rodgers identified him as a target or not.
People expected Rodgers to have Liverpool competing for a top 4 spot this season because a) that's what they're aiming for as a club, b) that's what he said they were aiming for, and c) that's what they got last season. Top 4 from a title challenge would be a step down usually, but given that they were punching above their weight with the title challenge, giving 4th a good go wasn't an unfair target.
Yes, a significant portion of their budget has gone on young players, but it's incredibly naive to think that all, or even most, will come good. Borini (£10 million) is already a write off, and Ilori (£7 million), Yesil (£1 million) and Alberto (£7 million) appear to be no where near the first team. Origi (£10 million) hardly appears to be prolific, and I can't see him getting the game time he's been getting at Lille when he moves to Liverpool. Can (£10 million), Moreno (£12 million) and Markovic (£20 million) are still very much works in progress. Some of them may come good, but I'd wager that most don't because that's just how it goes with young players.
4 seasons and over £200 million to spend on new players represents a pretty long leash as it is to make some progress towards top 4. I'd be very surprised if he's still in the job in 2016/17 if Liverpool finish some way off top 4 again next season. He's not done a bad job because they've not gone backwards since he got there, but he's certainly not been as brilliant as some people have made out. All I've said is that he's spent enough for this season to have gone much better than it has, and that he'll be on thin ice next season if they're struggling for top 4 again. I don't think that's particularly outrageous.
We clearly disagree, so unless you manage to pull something other than "but less money!" out of the bag in your next response there's probably not much point in continuing this dialogue.
Finished in the CL places to waste £100m+ on absolute shite.
Giggs.
I see an issue there. Then ideally you shouldn't be bringing up United's spend after Sir Alex left into context because the team needed rebuilding under 2 managers in a very short time. Out of which one was a complete disaster.
And also about Liverpool losing their best player, United also lost Ronaldo in 2009 and just spent about 20 odd mil in the market that season. Oh and United came second in the 09-10 season. By the logic being given by the Poolian fans, United should have had a horror season post that.
Brenden is a half decent manager but not great as being made out to be. He thinks himself to be the best manager around and talks out of his ass. That is what pisses me off the most.
Warning LvG about the Premier League when he was appointed
Stuff like this wants me to see him fail ever so more.
So what is your point? That Rodgers is not as good as Ferguson? Ok.
None of those guys were doing much of anything on the pitch, as proven by what they are up to this season. Losing the best player in the league is a much bigger impact.
Yeah I agree with that but still United have had to deal with a lot of change this season. You'd imagine the amount of players in and out would have a big impact. Manager spent most of the summer at the world cup too.
Liverpool had the bigger loss of quality in Suarez last summer but United had the bigger upheaval in the squad and the club dynamics...if that makes sense.
Eboue talks much sense in this thread.
Rodgers has a great way of playing but a terrible eye for the right player. He would be great at a club like City or Chelsea where he can make top talent appear by going to sleep and waking up next morning. But struggle to show his true worth at Pool or even Arsenal where he'd have to settle for a Lallana when Wenger would know better.
Rodgers has a great way of playing but a terrible eye for the right player. He would be great at a club like City or Chelsea where he can make top talent appear by going to sleep and waking up next morning. But struggle to show his true worth at Pool or even Arsenal where he'd have to settle for a Lallana when Wenger would know better.
The spending of other clubs is far from irrelevant. Liverpool don't compete for the top 4 in a vaccum. They are competing against other clubs with far more money to spend on their squad. "Without Ozil and Sanchez", why are we taking them out? Just like you tried to take out Liverpool finishing 2nd last year. This stuff happened. It can't just be ignored.
Giving 4th a go is not on unfair target, agreed. But finishing 5th certainly isn't cause for a sacking. That would be monumentally foolish. It's crazy to me that you are already passing judgment on Origi. Do you watch a lot of Lille matches? The kid is 19 years old and hasn't played a minute for Liverpool thus far. You cannot pass judgment on him yet. It's as simple as that.
This is Rodgers third season, not his fourth. He will be on thin ice is not all you've said.
We had an exchange over him a few months ago as well. You seem to have a keen interest in downplaying his ability and accomplishments. He's not been brilliant obviously. But last season was pretty great and he's shown a lot of promise for them. There's no reason smart management would tie his future to finishing top 4. Another year of 5th place and developing the youth they bought into first team regulars would be promising.
- Status