Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Happy Fox

Brendan Rodgers

By Happy Fox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted

 

On 04/11/2019 at 08:19, EnglishOxide said:

 

Come on.

 

We played some lovely stuff under Puel too.

 

Rodgers has definitely improved defence and morale but like I said, he's achieved nothing yet. Get us into Europe, win a trophy and don't **** off at the first hint of an offer from another club and then he should get all the praise.

 

It's too early for all the arse licking.

Compare rogers progress to Puel's is like comparing light and day......

 

The table when Puel was sacked P 27, W 9, D5, L13, F 32, A 38, 32 pts   Point per game 1.19, goals per game 1.19, goals against 1.40

Compare with Rogers                   P 11, W 7, D2, L2  , F 27, A 8  , 23 pts   Point per game  2.09, goals per game,  goals per game 2.45, goals against 0.72

 

So in 16 games Rogers only need to pick up 10 pts, and score 6 goals and conceded no more then 30 goals to have a better record then Puel, it hard to argue that hes not doing a great job.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
volpeazzurro

volpeazzurro

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

 

Compare rogers progress to Puel's is like comparing light and day......

 

The table when Puel was sacked P 27, W 9, D5, L13, F 32, A 38, 32 pts   Point per game 1.19, goals per game 1.19, goals against 1.40

Compare with Rogers                   P 11, W 7, D2, L2  , F 27, A 8  , 23 pts   Point per game  2.09, goals per game,  goals per game 2.45, goals against 0.72

 

So in 16 games Rogers only need to pick up 10 pts, and score 6 goals and conceded no more then 30 goals to have a better record then Puel, it hard to argue that hes not doing a great job.

 

 

 

He's doing a tremendous job but firstly, would he of even considered taking it in the state we were in when Puel came? Could he have achieved such results had he inherited the exact same squad as Puel? Would he have been as successful at releasing certain players with an equally as good recruitment results?

 

It's like comparing chalk and cheese for me and no one knows. I don't feel the need however to slag off Puel or even compare the two managers. Claude Puel did some very good things for this club and I thank him for that albeit it was perhaps time for him to go when he did. Our current success has of course got a lot to do with the stewardship of our current manager but it also has equally got to do as much with the fact we now have far better players to choose from and a more stable environment for them to thrive in. For the present, the garden is very rosy, let's just enjoy it while it lasts. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Danny Clender

Danny Clender

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, urban fox said:

MON was widely touted as the best up and coming young manager of his generation when he signed him.

we have appointed some well know names in the past, Sven was seen as a bit of coup at the time (although that didn't exactly go to plan) similarly with David Pleat

As a club we have a bit of a checkered history in terms of picking our managers, but I believe that within footballing circles the LCFC job has always been seen as a good one, and outside of the money bags clubs, I also believe traditionally one of the best paid

Yeah, this is about how I see it too.

 

I just don't think we've ever recruited such a high pedigree of manager from the beginning.

All of our best and most successful managers have come in a little rough and worked up their potential.

 

Rodgers has come in with the right degree of skill and experience exactly at the right time for us.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
urban.spaceman

urban.spaceman

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

He's doing a tremendous job but firstly, would he of even considered taking it in the state we were in when Puel came? Could he have achieved such results had he inherited the exact same squad as Puel? Would he have been as successful at releasing certain players with an equally as good recruitment results?

 

It's like comparing chalk and cheese for me and no one knows. I don't feel the need however to slag off Puel or even compare the two managers. Claude Puel did some very good things for this club and I thank him for that albeit it was perhaps time for him to go when he did. Our current success has of course got a lot to do with the stewardship of our current manager but it also has equally got to do as much with the fact we now have far better players to choose from and a more stable environment for them to thrive in. For the present, the garden is very rosy, let's just enjoy it while it lasts. 

Probably not. At least in the context of his own career; he'd only just arrived at Celtic and had won his first treble. 

 

Puel's shortcomings are well covered and I'm not going to make a case to reinstate him. I was very disappointed when his name started getting traction with the bookies and extremely annoyed when it became true. However, and this is something I espoused at the time, he was never a managerial hire to definitively take us to the 'next level'. I supported him, and defended him on here, as a 'safe pair of hands' - a manager with experience of developing youth, an excellent record of developing clubs in France etc. We were never going to go down with him and neither were we going to finish in the top 6. Our summer and winter window under him were two of our best ever for transfers - he certainly knew a good player when he saw one and how they could fit in the team, but he could never get it to work. 

 

In retrospect he was a very good placeholder manager until we got Brendan.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

He's doing a tremendous job but firstly, would he of even considered taking it in the state we were in when Puel came? Could he have achieved such results had he inherited the exact same squad as Puel? Would he have been as successful at releasing certain players with an equally as good recruitment results?

 

No one will ever know, whether he would or wouldn't. The same goes for the recruitment and releasing of players as no-one has a clue how much of that was down to Puel or the DOF, scouting team etc.

 

16 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

 

It's like comparing chalk and cheese for me and no one knows. I don't feel the need however to slag off Puel or even compare the two managers. Claude Puel did some very good things for this club and I thank him for that albeit it was perhaps time for him to go when he did. Our current success has of course got a lot to do with the stewardship of our current manager but it also has equally got to do as much with the fact we now have far better players to choose from and a more stable environment for them to thrive in. For the present, the garden is very rosy, let's just enjoy it while it lasts. 

I'm not "slagging" Puel off, more celebrating the job the current managers is doing.  

 

I'm not sure about the statement better players as pretty much 10 of our first choice 11, were available to Puel and I think Rogers and his coaching time are responsible for creating the environment for the players to thrive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lee7

lee7

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, henrik_62 said:

Just an observation but Puel still gets a hell of an amount of air time on here for being the previous manager.

True! 

In my eyes he changed the way we played at a time when change was needed. 

He turned us into a possession based team rather than a side that relied on counter attacking the main issue though was that we moved the ball to slowly under him so found it hard to break teams down. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gerard

Gerard

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, henrik_62 said:

Just an observation but Puel still gets a hell of an amount of air time on here for being the previous manager.

 

We're third in the league and we have a team and a manager that can barely be improved upon as the players that would improve us wouldn't come here.

 

But...................we do need something to moan about. :)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hammo

Hammo

Posted
Posted

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.

 

The main difference between Rodgers and Puel - given that they had/have pretty much the same group of players to work with - is that Rodgers evidently has the ability to communicate and motivate the players, whereas Puel didn’t, essentially because his English was limited to the point of being monotonous and repetitive (and it never improved). It stands to reason that a lot of the players would have been as uninspired (and perhaps as confused and disinterested) by his team talks as we were by his post-match interviews, Vardy seemingly being the prime example.

 

Puel is doing well back at Saint-Etienne. He is a good coach with a fine track record in France. That’s where he operates best and that’s where he should have stayed.

 

No hard feelings, Claude, but we are a hundred times better off with Brendan.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Milo

Milo

Posted
Posted
On 04/11/2019 at 08:19, EnglishOxide said:

 

Come on.

 

We played some lovely stuff under Puel too.

 

Rodgers has definitely improved defence and morale but like I said, he's achieved nothing yet. Get us into Europe, win a trophy and don't **** off at the first hint of an offer from another club and then he should get all the praise.

 

It's too early for all the arse licking.

:nono:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sdb

sdb

Posted
Posted

I think he's the perfect fit for us. A club with CL ambitions, great young talent, secure ownership and the best facilities in the league on the horizon. Furthermore, he's got better job security than almost any other such club.

 

Not sure why people are talking us down here. We're a special club at the mo and it'd take a huge club and ever larger pay packet to get him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Milo

Milo

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, henrik_62 said:

Just an observation but Puel still gets a hell of an amount of air time on here for being the previous manager.

I only react - never start anything Puel related. No interest in what he's doing now, or whether people still want to talk about him....But...

 

I really can't let people get away with thinking he was any good. Sucked every teensy weensy bit of enjoyment out of watching a game. Every drop. nothing to get excited about. Nada. Zilch. Sweet fa. Just a vacuous tumbleweed facsimile of a game which we are now seeing can be beautiful, vibrant and positive.

 

Quiet stadium, quiet players, sideways stink-ball.

 

It. was. fecking. awful. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
volpeazzurro

volpeazzurro

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, coolhandfox said:

 

No one will ever know, whether he would or wouldn't. The same goes for the recruitment and releasing of players as no-one has a clue how much of that was down to Puel or the DOF, scouting team etc.

 

I'm not "slagging" Puel off, more celebrating the job the current managers is doing.  

 

I'm not sure about the statement better players as pretty much 10 of our first choice 11, were available to Puel and I think Rogers and his coaching time are responsible for creating the environment for the players to thrive. 

Puel was to some extent stranded without one recognised attacking midfielder and the ball over the top to Vardy was redundant, no Drinkwater to supply it and defences sat deep and nullified it. Tielemans, Maddison and Praet do change options somewhat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, volpeazzurro said:

Puel was to some extent stranded without one recognised attacking midfielder and the ball over the top to Vardy was redundant, no Drinkwater to supply it and defences sat deep and nullified it. Tielemans, Maddison and Praet do change options somewhat.

He Had both Maddison and Tielemans at he's disposal when he was sacked??? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpTheLeagueFox

UpTheLeagueFox

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Milo said:

I really can't let people get away with thinking he was any good. Sucked every teensy weensy bit of enjoyment out of watching a game. Every drop. nothing to get excited about. Nada. Zilch. Sweet fa. Just a vacuous tumbleweed facsimile of a game which we are now seeing can be beautiful, vibrant and positive. Quiet stadium, quiet players, sideways stink-ball. It. was. fecking. awful. 

Yeah yeah yeah but it's an agenda etc etc etc  lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
murphy

murphy

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, henrik_62 said:

Just an observation but Puel still gets a hell of an amount of air time on here for being the previous manager.

Henrik you joined us when Rodgers came here I believe?

 

So you missed out on the divisive Puel in/out debates that were raging here beforehand.  We were not always the happy and affable family that you see today  :ph34r:

 

..Oh, the fun we had!  :whistle:

 

Anyway, that's why his name tends to still crop up nowadays I suspect.

 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...