Rodgers v Puel

[OntarioFox]

17 hours ago, RowlattsFox said:

Under Rodgers we've only played Newcastle who came here and parked the bus, we lost. We will see how much we've improved when teams play like that. We've done well against big sides, reasonably good away from home against the rest. All of which was true under Puel. 

 

I think we are better, I still have my concerns and do think we're being slightly overrated by some of the press. Big difference for me, and it's important, is that people are behind Rodgers. Makes a massive difference on a match day. 

I would note that a Wolves side with more up-front quality came and parked the bus, and we got a point from the fixture (albeit VAR-assisted). You're not wrong that a failure to break stubborn defences down remains our Achilles Heel though, and I do hope Rodgers has learnt not to play two DMFs at home after that game. It was Puelball in all but name.

 

I really respect that Newcastle performance against us last year - I don't actually think we were that bad on the day, they were just resolute and got a classic "smash and grab", similar to what we managed at Stamford Bridge.

 

We've got Newcastle coming up again in a few weeks. That game will be a very good litmus test of whether we've really progressed in our ability to ride out those games against relegation-threatened opposition that will seek to frustrate our game.

Edited 3 September 2019 by OntarioFox

[Babylon]

On 01/09/2019 at 19:04, David Hankey said:

The record speaks for itself.

In terms of like for like results against Puel's it doesn't really so far, even back end of last season. I'm positive we'll be some way ahead of where we were with Puel come the end of the season. But we hovered around mid table pretty much all the time, some times flirting with 7th and it was only at the end we really started to drop off. We were horrifically inconsistent and the football was a very hard watch to say the least, but results wise it wasn't as horrific as people seem to make out. 

 

This season (Rodgers)...

Wolves H - Draw

Chelsea A - Draw

Sheff U A - Win

Bournemouth H Win

 

8 Points

 

Last season (Puel)...

Wolves H - Win

Chelsea A - Win

Cardiff A (No Sheff U... but Cardiff were the equivalent promoted team) - Win

Bournemouth H (Previous season as he didn't play them home last season) - Draw

 

10 points

 

Of course that only tells part of the story as I think we've been far more controlled in our performances this season, over those under Puel listed above. 

[ranxerox]

On 02/09/2019 at 09:05, volpeazzurro said:

Exactly,  you can only play the players you've got and when Puel arrived he had a right mixed bunch to be fair and some with some questionable egos/attitudes. Whilst what happened may well have been for the best, I wonder how Rodgers would have coped with the same situation and whether the players would have acted the same towards him whilst he was completing a big axe job. In fact without the players we had when he arrived and the promise of money to spend I'd doubt he'd have come in the same circumstances. 

Rodgers had a pretty big axe job to take on when we hired him. In addition he had the unenviable task of taking over from Dalglish who was let go despite being a club legend and fan favourite. Rodgers cleared out a lot of deadwood and some egos, and he got the players to buy into his system. He also did a great job of getting the best out of Suarez (no easy task) including after Suarez tried to force through a transfer move to Arsenal, which was as big a test of anyone’s man management skills as there is. He was instrumental in developing Raheem Sterling even while falling short in keeping him at the club. Steven Gerrard made it publicly clear on several occasions he really respected Rodgers as a manager in a way that went beyond mere lip service. 

 

His downfall was in the transfer market, the owners wanted a DOF from day one but Rodgers refused and made that a condition of being hired. He and the club eventually battled over signings and several of Brendan’s choices were abject failures. Club initiated signings tended to sit on the bench or end up out on loan. That friction became a real distraction culminating in the disastrous signings of Balotelli (club enforced) and Benteke (Rodgers signing but not really his type of player). 

 

His other major weakness was a was a lack of the mythical “plan B” against the parked bus. But that’s the main challenge for most “attacking” teams isn’t it. Often it seems the only guaranteed solution for plan B is quality on the pitch, and for the players to have belief in themselves. 

 

 

Edited 3 September 2019 by ranxerox

[David Hankey]

5 hours ago, Babylon said:

In terms of like for like results against Puel's it doesn't really so far, even back end of last season. I'm positive we'll be some way ahead of where we were with Puel come the end of the season. But we hovered around mid table pretty much all the time, some times flirting with 7th and it was only at the end we really started to drop off. We were horrifically inconsistent and the football was a very hard watch to say the least, but results wise it wasn't as horrific as people seem to make out. 

 

This season (Rodgers)...

Wolves H - Draw

Chelsea A - Draw

Sheff U A - Win

Bournemouth H Win

 

8 Points

 

Last season (Puel)...

Wolves H - Win

Chelsea A - Win

Cardiff A (No Sheff U... but Cardiff were the equivalent promoted team) - Win

Bournemouth H (Previous season as he didn't play them home last season) - Draw

 

10 points

 

Of course that only tells part of the story as I think we've been far more controlled in our performances this season, over those under Puel listed above. 

You can be selective all you like. The facts are that after 4 games we have 8 points and lie 3rd in the table, identical to our title winning season. Last season at the same point last season we had 6 points and were positioned 8th. The highest position Puel attained last season was 7th. Rodgers achieved this after just 5 games.

[volpeazzurro]

9 hours ago, ranxerox said:

Rodgers had a pretty big axe job to take on when we hired him. In addition he had the unenviable task of taking over from Dalglish who was let go despite being a club legend and fan favourite. Rodgers cleared out a lot of deadwood and some egos, and he got the players to buy into his system. He also did a great job of getting the best out of Suarez (no easy task) including after Suarez tried to force through a transfer move to Arsenal, which was as big a test of anyone’s man management skills as there is. He was instrumental in developing Raheem Sterling even while falling short in keeping him at the club. Steven Gerrard made it publicly clear on several occasions he really respected Rodgers as a manager in a way that went beyond mere lip service. 

 

His downfall was in the transfer market, the owners wanted a DOF from day one but Rodgers refused and made that a condition of being hired. He and the club eventually battled over signings and several of Brendan’s choices were abject failures. Club initiated signings tended to sit on the bench or end up out on loan. That friction became a real distraction culminating in the disastrous signings of Balotelli (club enforced) and Benteke (Rodgers signing but not really his type of player). 

 

His other major weakness was a was a lack of the mythical “plan B” against the parked bus. But that’s the main challenge for most “attacking” teams isn’t it. Often it seems the only guaranteed solution for plan B is quality on the pitch, and for the players to have belief in themselves. 

 

 

I think that's quite a fair assessment from me being an Liverpool outsiders point of view. When Sanchez went however, it did go a bit tits up and, as you say, his nous in the transfer market was questionable, as it was at Celtic with his mate Congerton. I do think the axe at Leicester was far more difficult however for a variety of reasons. I also thought that there was bad blood between Gerrard and Rodgers that was rather public at the time? 

 

For me, and I'm sure I'm in the minority, the jury is still out. Sometimes you just can't help but get a whiff of  bullshit compared with someone like Guadiola who wreaks of knowledge and class. He's been more than a bit fortunate with what he's inherited here which I think was cleverly calculated by him. I also think he left Celtic at the right time and don't overate his achievements there. I think that currently we are where we are due to the quality of our players and not necessarily by his tactical nous. But, blarney or not, our players do appear to like and believe in him which is a huge part of the battle in fairness so time will tell.

[HybridFox]

On the whole, fans did back Puel while he was here and you could see what he was trying to do, even though it didn't always pay off. The squad he left was definitely better than the one he inherited.

 

But boy I f**** love Brendan . A relatable figure to players, fans and media alike. I have an early feeling he may overtake King Nige 

[Oxfordfox83]

2 minutes ago, TK95 said:

On the whole, fans did back Puel while he was here and you could see what he was trying to do, even though it didn't always pay off. The squad he left was definitely better than the one he inherited.

 

But boy I f**** love Brendan . A relatable figure to players, fans and media alike. I have an early feeling he may overtake King Nige 

Well, that’s me done. 

 

I’ve now read absolutely everything, and there is nothing left. Thanks folks!

[BoyJones]

IMO Puel was the worst man manager since Peter Taylor. It's ok knowing tactics, formations and bringing on youth, but if nobody respects / understands / really likes you then you are doomed. 

 

The guy didn't give a cuss for the fans, sacrificing three quarter final ties by not playing our best team. I still can't believe that the owners took on such a negative figure. At least they put the matter right when they took on BR. 

[ARM1968]

On 02/09/2019 at 16:43, ThaiFox said:

We played 4-2-3-1 v Wolves three weeks ago, drew a terrible boring game 0-0 and started Ndidi & Choudhury in defensive midfield and played without wingers. It was as negative a performance as any I witnessed under poor old Claude.

 

There are certainly many similarities in tactics between BR & CP.

 

But there is no question BR is much better at the man management side. I like BR, he's personable, good with players, the media and already has a rapport with our fans, which CP never had.

 

However, BR has had the advantage of our younger players being already bedded in, plus he had an added bonus of having the fans on his side immediately, because the overwhelming majority disliked Puel, (as did our senior players).

 

Puel took over an aging squad that needed a massive overhaul. I certainly respect Puel for what he did with the bedding in of our youngsters, whilst keeping us well clear of the relegation zone.

You have a point, much like we did after the game. 

[ranxerox]

18 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

I think that's quite a fair assessment from me being an Liverpool outsiders point of view. When Sanchez went however, it did go a bit tits up and, as you say, his nous in the transfer market was questionable, as it was at Celtic with his mate Congerton. I do think the axe at Leicester was far more difficult however for a variety of reasons. I also thought that there was bad blood between Gerrard and Rodgers that was rather public at the time? 

 

For me, and I'm sure I'm in the minority, the jury is still out. Sometimes you just can't help but get a whiff of  bullshit compared with someone like Guadiola who wreaks of knowledge and class. He's been more than a bit fortunate with what he's inherited here which I think was cleverly calculated by him. I also think he left Celtic at the right time and don't overate his achievements there. I think that currently we are where we are due to the quality of our players and not necessarily by his tactical nous. But, blarney or not, our players do appear to like and believe in him which is a huge part of the battle in fairness so time will tell.

Ha ha the “blarney” definitely was an ongoing irritation to many fans me included. It’s just part of the package that comes with Rodgers. Not sure if he’s learned his lessons or not in that regard. 

 

[TJB-fox]

On 02/09/2019 at 16:43, ThaiFox said:

We played 4-2-3-1 v Wolves three weeks ago, drew a terrible boring game 0-0 and started Ndidi & Choudhury in defensive midfield and played without wingers. It was as negative a performance as any I witnessed under poor old Claude.

 

There are certainly many similarities in tactics between BR & CP.

 

But there is no question BR is much better at the man management side. I like BR, he's personable, good with players, the media and already has a rapport with our fans, which CP never had.

 

However, BR has had the advantage of our younger players being already bedded in, plus he had an added bonus of having the fans on his side immediately, because the overwhelming majority disliked Puel, (as did our senior players).

 

Puel took over an aging squad that needed a massive overhaul. I certainly respect Puel for what he did with the bedding in of our youngsters, whilst keeping us well clear of the relegation zone.

Wolves would have beat us if we had Puel

[Father Ted]

Claude Puel sucked the life out of the club. Look at the change in optimism now, away games selling out in 3 days, winning home games against lesser teams, attacking teams from the off, no Mendy and Gray. 

 

I mean, Puel dropped Vardy and started Gray as a striker. Says it all. Man was a monotonous cretin and if he was still in charge at the start of this season, i would have strongly considered returning my season ticket as it was getting boring walking out at half time every game 1-0 down to some wank side like Newcastle or Burnley, with 0 shots attempted. Honestly, how anyone can have a good word to say about Puel is beyond me, the worst football I have witnessed at the KP and that includes the Kelly/Levein/Holloway era.

Edited 4 September 2019 by Father Ted

[twoleftfeet]

should we not perhaps compare Puel with Pearson as the architects of great teams rather than the managers of them.

[Meat and 2 veg]

23 minutes ago, Father Ted said:

Claude Puel sucked the life out of the club. Look at the change in optimism now, away games selling out in 3 days, winning home games against lesser teams, attacking teams from the off, no Mendy and Gray. 

 

I mean, Puel dropped Vardy and started Gray as a striker. Says it all. Man was a monotonous cretin and if he was still in charge at the start of this season, i would have strongly considered returning my season ticket as it was getting boring walking out at half time every game 1-0 down to some wank side like Newcastle or Burnley, with 0 shots attempted. Honestly, how anyone can have a good word to say about Puel is beyond me, the worst football I have witnessed at the KP and that includes the Kelly/Levein/Holloway era.

Hahaha, have to be some sort of wind up.

[Ric Flair]

There's not a lot in it between Rodgers first 14 games and Puel's, that was the only real time I thought we looked even remotely impressive under Puel. We've got 25 points so far under Rodgers and Puel got 22 in those opening 14 games. Things started to take a turn a few games after for him and we ended that season an absolute disgrace for most of it. 

 

I don't see us nosediving like that under Rodgers, we could have blips as we are certainly not as good as is being hyped up right now but as a work in progress it could get better or there be a few bumps in the road. We are heading for that top 6 either this season or next though and I highly doubt we would ever have executed that under Puel. A decent 1st half of last season, if it could be called that was again seen to nosedive badly there after. 

 

Puel also mastered the art of trying to piss off every senior title winner here, he probably even wanted Vardy gone if he could. Simply staggering and he deserved the sack 10 times over for his Demarai Gray experiments at the GOATs expense.

[Wymsey]

There hardly much point in comparing, imo.

 

The club's worst manager was Ian Holloway; that led to years of building much-required solid foundations, particularly via Nigel Pearson, in order to give the club the opportujity to grow for the future (after such a torrid few years before Pearson arrived).

 

The club's best manager was, of course, Claudio Ranieri.

Even though he has a wishy-washy managerial history with big clubs before joining LCFC, he led our club to something that only very ambitious betting people would believe would happen - That season has ultimately led to world-wide praising from the sporting world and will inspire the current and future players to believe that, with hard work and integrity (alongside some luck), they can possibly achieve anything.

-

But we've now got Brendan Rodgers; who seems to have the club's interest/aims at heart - to develop the talented younger players at the club's disposal, alongside keeping the reliable and more-experienced players.

 

His interviews (at the training ground, and pre-match and post-match) illustrates that he knows what's needed at the club, and has got very relevant experience in driving teams forward as much as possible (see Celtic, with the quick attacking tactics) that with time he could apply greatly at LCFC.

 

After the disappointment of Puel's era, Rodgers is very much the individual who can stabilise things again (which very much seems now, already, with seemingly high-morale in the players in terms of their attitudes).

 

Am actually quite glad that Rodgers came in before last season ended; to allow him to thoroughly help him and his assistant (those that came with him to LCFC), to analyse how the players were performing under Puel and to help with recruitment aspects; plus it has made him to think how he can positively change player's thinking more, to both inspire the players to enjoy playing more and also to help the players to motivate/push each other more in order to try and increase the team's matchday performances overall.

 

Rodgers has had a decent start so far, despite some individual mistakes, but am very confident that this club can surprise many people again to achieve something - as the club seems to have the right ingredients again, like in the 2015/2016 season, in terms of the right manager being the perfect fit to get the best out of a squad that has strong potential.

 

Puel's strategy/tactics would serve well in a club that hovers around the relegation zone with little ambition, but not at a club like LCFC where (since the 2015/2016) the philosophy here is a need of greater ambitions and eventual achievement.

Edited 4 September 2019 by Wymeswold fox

[UpTheLeagueFox]

49 minutes ago, Father Ted said:

Claude Puel sucked the life out of the club.

As accurate a description as it gets.

 

6 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Puel also mastered the art of trying to piss off every senior title winner here

Also managed to piss off younger players, those in the backroom, training ground staff, academy players ... not sure there was a department he didn't annoy/upset/frustrate/decimate to some degree etc.

 

A national newspaper journalist recently told me that after an incident (or maybe incidents) during his time in France - football related - he decided not to give a shit about players, staff, fans etc and just do everything his way, come what may.

 

Not buying the line that he "did most of the groundwork" for Rodgers like Pearson did for Ranieri. Hogwash IMHO.

[TrentFox]

What is the point of this thread?? Am

i missing something? 🤷‍♂️

[norwichfox]

1 minute ago, TrentFox said:

What is the point of this thread?? Am

i missing something? 🤷‍♂️

We've over a bloody week to go before the next PL game, it'll surely get worse....

[Ted Maul]

18 hours ago, BoyJones said:

IMO Puel was the worst man manager since Peter Taylor. It's ok knowing tactics, formations and bringing on youth, but if nobody respects / understands / really likes you then you are doomed. 

 

The guy didn't give a cuss for the fans, sacrificing three quarter final ties by not playing our best team. I still can't believe that the owners took on such a negative figure. At least they put the matter right when they took on BR. 

Why? He's made them a shitload of money by developing player/squad value. 

[Shane]

26 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

 

Not buying the line that he "did most of the groundwork" for Rodgers like Pearson did for Ranieri. Hogwash IMHO.

Completely agree

[gurru991]

8 minutes ago, Ted Maul said:

Why? He's made them a shitload of money by developing player/squad value. 

I still think he would make a great DOF !!!

[Koke]

1 hour ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Not buying the line that he "did most of the groundwork" for Rodgers like Pearson did for Ranieri. Hogwash IMHO.

 

But he did though....

 

We know you don't like the guy but surely you have to concede that he did some good for the club. Compare the team Rodgers inherited from Puel to the team Puel inherited from Shakespeare. 

 

Your views are normally fair and balanced but I'm afraid you're having a complete mare regarding Puel. 

 

 

Edited 4 September 2019 by Koke

[Ric Flair]

16 minutes ago, Koke said:

 

But he did though....

 

We know you don't like the guy but surely you have to concede that he did some good for the club. Compare the team Rodgers inherited from Puel to the team Puel inherited from Shakespeare. 

 

Your views are normally fair and balanced but I'm afraid you're having a complete mare regarding Puel. 

 

 

I'd say Geoff probably knows more about what went on behind the scenes than the average fan like us. You only have to read that interview with Andy King and the interview Vardy gave last christmas to understand the sheer toxic environment he was creating. 

 

He's got the people skills of a dead badger, a god awful man manager. One of the worst out there.

[Koke]

9 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I'd say Geoff probably knows more about what went on behind the scenes than the average fan like us. You only have to read that interview with Andy King and the interview Vardy gave last christmas to understand the sheer toxic environment he was creating. 

 

He's got the people skills of a dead badger, a god awful man manager. One of the worst out there.

 

All that may be true but it doesn't change the fact that Puel left the club in a much better state than he found it in.

 

The guy had bad people skills, but he made other positive contributions to the club.

 

Dont understand why it has to be black and white with Puel. He can have both good and bad sides.