Best attributes of the past four City managers

[Tanya]

First ever thread topic. Please be gentle, ladies and gents.

 

Like many here, I am absolutely buzzing about the state of our club. We are replete with young, attacking players coupled with some old wise heads. While we haven't played anyone of note bar Watford in Brendan's reign, I am still deeply impressed by the manner we are dispatching sides. Even when we don't play all that well (Huddersfield) we are getting the job done with some very slick, attacking play. In terms of potential, I am not sure there are toooooooo many better clubs in the PL.

 

In this vein, it got me thinking of our previous managers, and how they helped to get us to the position we are today. I was wondering what you guys would say was the most positive attribute of every manager, in particular, how they've helped shaped the club.

 

For instance: Claudio was amazing but if I had to pinpoint his best attribute when managing LCFC I would say his ability to eschew his normal tactic of fiddling around and leaving the team mostly alone, and only changing when absolutely necessary. He saw there was magic and knew how to harness it.

 

Craig Shakespeare helped us get back to basics. Sure, it didn't progress the style but after the traumatising decision to sack Claudio (and the grossly unfair media coverage of this hard but right decision) his meat-and-potatoes play reinvorated the side and helped us stay up. Oh, and taking us through to a CL quarter final didn't hurt, either

 

Claude. Oh, Claude. Well, while he was many faults and it feels like his tenure was the most devisive in years, I still think he left the club with the bones to succeed. His committment to youth was fantastic and kinda crazy brave and his recruitment looks pretty decent too. 

 

Old mate Brendan Rodgers. It's perhaps too early to say, but if I had to pick one thing that's exciting me it's his tweaks to the midfield, and how it's unlocking Vardy. He's done away with the two DM (Mendy is still valuable off the bench) and has Youri/Mads releasing Vardy so much earlier. It feels like he's building on what Claudio/Claude tried to do (evolve the club from a purely countering attacking side) but has the tools and the systems to get the best out of our fast, dynamic attackers.

 

Some of you may prefer to do Pearson than Rodgers which is fair enough. I'm sure many of you will disagree with my analysis of the best attribute of these managers, and I am curious to hear what you all have to say. In the spirit of the thread, try, if you can, to pick out SOMETHING good the manager did

 

[urban fox]

As for Rodgers he also seems to also have the respect of the players and that personal touch that Claude lacked. Puels downfall seemed to be his lack of ability to communicate and a propensity to make some random team selections. Having said that his brief was a tough one, to transition the squad which to be fair he did a pretty good job of. Disbanding a large portion of the legends was never going to be popular, but necessary as it was becoming an ageing squad.

 

I agree that Claudio did a great job in bringing a stability, recognizing and playing to the strengths of the players at his disposal and during THAT season of deflecting pressure from the players. He also deserves credit for the few tweaks he made in shoring up the defence, particularly in the full back positions.

 

Shakey was obviously popular with the players as  a number two but lacked the tactical nouse. A bit hard done to considering the sides we played at the start of the season.

Ultimately though it is a results business, and regardless of what good stuff these managers achieved, points mean prizes.

 

lets hope Rodgers can fulfill the early promise and we push on next season

[Nicolo Barella]

To be fair to Puel, as soon as he got Tielemans he played him in the 4-3-3, I think it was personnel that made him play Mendy and Ndidi together.

[urban.spaceman]

19 minutes ago, Tanya said:

Claude. Oh, Claude. Well, while he was many faults and it feels like his tenure was the most devisive in years, I still think he left the club with the bones to succeed. His committment to youth was fantastic and kinda crazy brave and his recruitment looks pretty decent too. 

The sad thing about Claude’s reign is that he is actually a very good manager. He has a great eye for what a team needs and his recruitment was mostly excellent - Ricardo, Maddison, Evans, Tielemans have all been outstanding acquisitions and in areas of the pitch we desperately needed improving. Soyuncu, Benkovic and Diabate all look like decent young prospects for the future. Deirdre is the only dud, though I think we all knew that before we even signed him. Hopefully he’ll be a handy squad player in the coming seasons if (when) we're in Europe. 

 

What went wrong for him him was his stubbornness in persisting with Mendy and Ndidi, while at the same time being totally unpredictable with team selection. I think Claude had the right ideas but couldn’t translate that to the team consistently enough. It’s all very well producing a tactical masterclass to beat Man City when they’re chasing the title, but you have to beat the likes of Cardiff the following week. 

[LC/FC]

Pearson: With Shakespeare and Walsh originally set the work ethic whilst slowly rebuilding the club's identity and spirit of a collective unit all fighting for the club under the stewardship of our wonderful owners. 

 

Raneiri: Maybe he did add his "Italian tactics" discovering the magic 11 but that platform was created by the Holy trinity of the previous regime. But mostly masterfully dealing with the media and press.

Slowly slowly, 40 points, dilly ding dilly ding, clean sheet pizza etc etc. That whole time period was a dream and Claudio was the dream master. Managing the collective Ricky Balboa like stories of all the players and the squad including his own possible redemption after his time at Chelsea. Tapping into the worlds need for the greatest 5000-1 underdog story yet never letting that underdog story be stopped by pessimism or the usual expected crumbling from previous teams that have been in similar situations up until it was, Europe, Top 4, then finally the title when we had all but sealed it. But was Pearson's team. 

 

Shakespeare: Attempted to steady the ship and fix the mistakes that Claudio had made in now tinkering and not trusting in his players as much. Had a positive start but just couldn't replace the magic of 3 as just 1.

 

Puel: Should be a Director of Football with his penchant for rebuilding. Has brought in the influx of youth to create our new generation of possible title winners. But his football was too slow and ponderous. As we see now and have forseen a long time, we are not a club/team that likes to back off in that way. As we've realised now, we need that intensity and in your face attitude that makes Leicester, Leicester. Getting on the front foot and attacking with purpose and intent. From what people have said of the teams from the 60s, 70s, the successful 90s and our most recent decade. We are at our best when he start from minute 1 to minute 90 to get at them. Puel was just too calm and too placid a person that put too much emphasis on what to play instead of how to play. But like Nigel set the foundations for Claudio, Claude has now possibly set the next foundation for Brenden to create something better than we are. 

 

Rodgers: Too early to really say but there's a lot of positivity and spirit that hasn't been around since the Pearson era and Claudio year 1. That's important with bringing back the expirienced players into the fold instead of freezing them out. As much as Claudes fantastic desire to blood in the young players, as Nigel did, Brendan understands that young players need the older wiser heads to help guide and to share and teach the younger players the experience that they've all garnered through the years. Especially our Captain, our Goalie and our Striker. These earnest lower league players that actually made it to the very top of the mountain. We had the likes of Was, Kevin Philips, Cambiasso to bring that to the table and we had an excellent blend that managed to do the impossible. We've bloodied the top 6 before. We've knocked them out 1 time. We can, on our day, beat any and all of the top 6 we did Man City and Chelsea not too long ago. We've shown we can also dominate the lower opposition recently. Just hope that Brendan can bring out that consistency to be able to combine both those things as constantly being able to do both is what title challengers do. Maybe we need more of a magic ingredient to add. But currently with our midfield and back line if Vardy can still carry on as he has been doing, we could once again be that underdog force we were a few years back and just once again bring the world another amazing story. 

[Babylon]

O'Neill is the only manager since I've been watching us who has proved to have the full package in terms of team builder, motivator, man manager and tactician. 

[Cheesemaker22]

Ranieri - His charisma which helped make us the 'neutral's team' and built up a fantastic mood around the club.

Shakes - His pragmatism in getting us through a difficult period. Wish he was still at the club.

Puel - His vision for the future in giving game time to many of our fantastic young players and moving on some of the older ones.

Rodgers - Hard to say at this point, but I feel like he strikes a decent enough balance between the previous three managers and seems like a really good fit for us at the moment.

[Xen]

Ranieri's charisma deflected any pressure off our players and made the club intensely likeable to all except a small portion of North London. We had support from the nation because of Ranieri and the players benefitted from that, enjoying their football and getting results because of it. 

 

Shakespeare kept it simple when it needed to be, and was great at keeping the squad cohesive. He was a limited tactictian which proved his downfall, but he was exactly what we needed to recover from Ranieri's capitulation in the CL season.

 

Puel had good vision and did a fantastic job rebuilding the team after a few disastrous windows. He'd make a great DoF, but he just couldn't build a relationship with the players. I was Puel In for a long time (changed in the last few weeks before his sacking), and still maintain that he was exactly what we needed for that period, but he hit his limit here. If he continues as a manager he'd probably suit Ligue 1.

 

Rodgers (so far) is striking a pretty good balance between the three that preceded him. He's charismatic like Ranieri, but doesn't seem the type to tinker too much. He's bringing the team together again like Shakey (and Big Nige) did, but he's more tactically astute than Shakey and less stubborn than Nige. He seems to have a vision and has bought into the foundations that Puel laid, but is getting that across to the players better than the Frenchman ever did. It's still early days (we've only played a handful of pretty poor sides so far), but it's looking optimistic that he'll suit our club down to a t.

[Corky]

Ranieri- Excellent with the media, very good at sorting out the defence and getting the team to play to its strengths in his first season. Tactically very impressive.

 

Shakespeare- Good man manager and coach with the players. Got the team back onside after a difficult spell.

 

Puel- Gave an opportunity to the younger players and his signings this season (Evans, Ricardo, Tielemans, Maddison) have been impressive- I think Benkovic and Soyuncu will prove successful too.

 

Rodgers- Speaks very well, players clearly enjoy his style, attacking football, good signs so far.

[tylesta]

4 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

The sad thing about Claude’s reign is that he is actually a very good manager. He has a great eye for what a team needs and his recruitment was mostly excellent - Ricardo, Maddison, Evans, Tielemans have all been outstanding acquisitions and in areas of the pitch we desperately needed improving. Soyuncu, Benkovic and Diabate all look like decent young prospects for the future. Deirdre is the only dud, though I think we all knew that before we even signed him. Hopefully he’ll be a handy squad player in the coming seasons if (when) we're in Europe. 

 

What went wrong for him him was his stubbornness in persisting with Mendy and Ndidi, while at the same time being totally unpredictable with team selection. I think Claude had the right ideas but couldn’t translate that to the team consistently enough. It’s all very well producing a tactical masterclass to beat Man City when they’re chasing the title, but you have to beat the likes of Cardiff the following week. 

diabate is 24 in 6 months time. alwasy has looked loat in the premier league and is way out of his depth.

 

not really doimg anything in the turkish league at the minute either.

[CollinsLCFC]

I beleive we are starting to see the benefits of Puels reign now. 

 

He has set up a new foundation, of a young talented squad. It's evident he just wasn't the right person to get the engine going. 

 

If we miraculously win the league next season, we there be a proportion of our supporters saying that it was Puels genius work like we did Pearson

[foxile5]

Ranner's substitutions are what set him apart from Pearson. Give the two the same squad and the same season and Ranners wins it - he made solid substitutions at the right points in the game that had positive impacts; I doubt NP would've had done the same.

[foxile5]

4 minutes ago, CollinsLCFC said:

I beleive we are starting to see the benefits of Puels reign now. 

 

He has set up a new foundation, of a young talented squad. It's evident he just wasn't the right person to get the engine going. 

 

If we miraculously win the league next season, we there be a proportion of our supporters saying that it was Puels genius work like we did Pearson

Puel builds the house and someone else has the party - I forget which member on here said that but it was correct.

[brucey]

I was a bit bored...... so here you are

 

 

[HybridFox]

Pearson - Man management. Implements a structure around the club, starting from the bottom up. Financially sound.

 

Ranieri - Excellent with media. When not overdone, he can "tinker" tactics to perfection. Loved by all.

 

Shakespeare - Football man. Knows what is required on the field and directly involved in carrying it out in training.

 

Puel - Pragmatic. Experience from abroad and network of contacts attracts a certain calibre of players. Strong youth development with the right intital ideas.

 

Rodgers - Man of the people. Level headed. Visible progression in jobs taken. Stock continues to rise!

[ScouseFox]

pearson - consistent hair cut 

 

ranieri - made weird noises in press conferences 

 

shakespeare - won that champions league game 

 

puel - struggling here

 

brendan - pissed off all them celtic fans was 10/10