Chrysalis

Certainly last season it was wreckless to keep Rodgers on for so long. This season, from a pure business is business point of view, Enzo is sacked 100%, the best business men are ruthless. However from a reputation and respecting perspective you let the manager see the season out as after all we are still assured of top 4 at worst, and can still get promoted even from 4th. So disagree with you strongly on the financial point of view, its more of a moral and ideology issue in my opinion. Also we already breaching PSR, an extra 1-2 million isnt going to change anything there.

They would also need to not impose the style on that manager like they did on Smith.

There seems to be some kind of blind ideology towards it that some people cant see past, its very easy to see, they tend to blame individual mistakes when it doesnt go well, and think its players off form etc. Instead of realising its imposing something on players they not comfortably doing.

Didnt say they were, but it is important to use the players you have in a way they are best at, So a player that excels at A but can also do B doesnt mean B is the way to go.

Sure I can explain it more, the club wants us to play a specific style, Rodgers and Enzo were employed for that reason. Top wanted Rodgers for a long time, Enzo confirmed he was employed for the style of football. Yet the managers then have to work with players who are awkward playing that way of football and it requires expensive players, whilst the club doesnt have the financial means and/or willpower to overhaul the squad for it, hence me calling it a disconnect. When you say the players are able to completely play this way, why do we have threads after most games moaning about the performance of players, the odd time the team has been allowed to attack with pace, certain players have shined, but then when the team reverts to slow tippy tappy, those players who previously shined look lost, go missing etc. That is because they are not playing in a way that suits them. Of our current first 11, I would say only 5 players are comfortable with the style and one of them isnt an outfield player. I also didnt say all the players on the list cant play this way, but I do think this isnt using those players to the best of their abilities. A squad and style should be melded together in harmony, instead we have a mish mash. It is clear to see every game this season and last, too much of the team simply isnt comfortable with it. Then ask yourself why Enzo is also not utilising more of his squad, subs etc. It is because he has recognised those players cant handle the system.

Indeed, breach is a breach.

Cant say I am surprised, I think he is off in the summer, and probably already knows it.

You just described his style.

He will be gone in the summer regardless, no way Enzo is staying for another season in this division, but the second time wont be with a EPL squad. The question will be if the club keep trying to impose this style of football on the club, when it hasnt the means to have a squad to do so.

Mentality isnt there, looked like I was two teams with nothing to play for, Bristol City getting winner from outside the box, something Enzo has told our players to stop doing. I think its a combination of the players having lost faith in the system, and them knowing they wont be here next season. Cant see this being turned around now, its the playoffs with a team that isnt believing in themselves.

The players to blame then, not the manager, the shambles the club is in and so on?

Top forced Smith to change the system after one game, sadly the style of play emphasis is right from the top of the club.

You a football snob? Rodgers and Enzo seemed to have groomed you in that a certain style of play is superior or something.

We so timid going forward, no one wants to shoot, slow no pace. Team has lost its way sorry. Crazy that the game looks like two teams with nothing to play for. Thats what really is alarming from the performance.

I think its good coaching staff rather than a big fancy training ground that has impact on player development, and I think seagrave has hindered fitness levels as well as disconnected players from the city now they no longer train in the city. Seagrave is the sort of thing you build perhaps after winning about 10 titles, already have a big enough stadium and have revenue of several hundred million to actually populate it with talent, and even then I would have built it in the city.

Based on how they perform in quick attacking moves. Its an opinion formed on observation.

That will always be the case given our financial situation, the ownership needs to remove its obsession with this brand of football.

If we really are waiting until they 19, thats something we need to address, talent should be identifiable before that age, and first pro contracts are typically not expensive.

I have touched up on this a number of times in different threads. But I feel this is more relevant now given our financial problems. We know our ownership want a specific brand of football. However its my opinion the players we have had access to in recent years have included some excellent counter attacking players. Vardy Ricardo Barnes KDH Mavididi. Maddison Soyuncu Fofana Kasper Cannon Examples I can remember without looking at a list. Everyone in this list except Cannon is/was a first team regular. We know changing players is an expensive business, so has this been part of our problem, an insistence on a certain brand of football whilst not having the right players for it?

He can be put on gardening leave which is often what happens to managers, so still contracted under pay.

Its a sad state of affairs, but I think I agree with your analysis, this has to be approached in a way of how difficult the player is to replace, and no question Mads is an easier one than KDH. Sadly KDH is being hindered right now, the same way Barnes was, he is a prime counter attacking player, who I think also needs to be allowed to shoot whenever is a chance, with the current manager wanting him to play keep ball instead, which is why I think his output has reduced since the start of the season, however I think Enzo might not be with us next season, and KDH is the sort of player if we sell would probably doom us.

I think this book value (amortisation cost) has been misrepresented somewhat. Some think if e.g. a player has £5,000,000 amortised value left, it means if we sell for anything less then that, then its a loss on the books and not worth doing, that is actually wrong. The 5 million (plus the wages) is the existing loss on the books, if sold for 1 million, that existing loss is reduced to 4 million and the projected PSR loss is reduced by 1 million, so its basically an extra 1 million (plus gained wages) on the PSR balance. High wages has obviously hindered us getting rid of players, but I think we have also tried to be too stubborn on the selling price. Some times you just have to "cut your losses".

You don't think we have footballers for the love of the game? We have a different view on what people would choose to do, a footballer might be good at football but good at fixing computers and might have no interesting being a brick player, your comment seems so odd written by someone who perhaps acts like a mercenary in real life only ever doing what gives them the most ££, luckily not everyone thinks like that. The rest of what you mention, part time players and so forth isn't the end of the world, many sports work that way as did football in the past, and football still does work this way when you go far enough down the pyramid. I honestly don't know how people think this busted system we have now with a bubble waiting to burst, favouritism for the clubs with highest revenues and over paid players is something they want to keep whilst thinking rationally about it. The women's game has shown e.g. how bad things are where as soon as it went professional with big clubs involved its already broken. Just add a fixed wage cap, most important thing is its not based on revenue, kick out the big 6 who will threaten all sorts of nonsense including a break away league in opposition to it, reduce transfer windows so cant happen during a season, reduce squad sizes, add financial rules that restrict third party debt, wage caps should be set at a level where a club can get relegated and they wont need a parachute payment. TV contracts should require equal coverage of each club, and equal payments to each club in the division, no finishing position offset. As much as you want your glory games, we simply cannot fix FFP with the big 6 involved, they absolutely 100% want themselves to have an embedded advantage on spending budget, they also are overly concerned with European football things, which is leading to an increased emphasis on more European games at the expense of local cup games, as well as alignment of rules with UEFA which have contributed to the mess we have now. I would even accept all English clubs being banned from UEFA if it meant we could have saner rules in the game. I would also consider rules like national team can only pick X amount of players from one club which would help the problem of national players tending to cluster up at a few clubs, and might mitigate the issue of the England training camp of being a tapping up ground.

Interesting, I think their wages % not as bad as ours got, but there is a fair chunk of change on amortisation dragging it up, although well within permitted losses.

This is no conspiracy theory though, its a trivial work relationship investigation.