coolhandfox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
KrefelderFox666 Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said: We can. Would you put money on it? I wouldn't put money on anything in regards to us, winning the league or relegation. I guess you could probably get bigger odds on us being relegated than winning the league now?
HighPeakFox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 13 minutes ago, KrefelderFox666 said: I wouldn't put money on anything in regards to us, winning the league or relegation. I guess you could probably get bigger odds on us being relegated than winning the league now? I'd imagine so.
volpeazzurro Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
Guest Danny Clender Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
urban.spaceman Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
coolhandfox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
Muzzy_Larsson Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 Just an observation but Puel still gets a hell of an amount of air time on here for being the previous manager.
HighPeakFox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 10 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 still celebrate the burning of Guy Fawkes, it's a national pastime.
coolhandfox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 1 minute 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. Good point mainly because he split the fan base, most were pro Puel or very anti, nothing really in-between.
lee7 Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
Gerard Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
sm1 Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 I think you only need to look at Vardy to see how Brendan has improved us. He's gone from a player who looked close to retirement to the best striker in the league.
Hammo Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
Milo Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
sdb Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
Milo Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
Woof Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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. Still, you don't see so many mentions of Pearson lately
volpeazzurro Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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.
coolhandfox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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???
HighPeakFox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 Even in good times, it is an immutable law of FT that someone must find a reason to bicker over something insignificant, or to invent a problem (such as a pass that results in a goal being actually terrible).
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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
murphy Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 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 ..Oh, the fun we had! Anyway, that's why his name tends to still crop up nowadays I suspect.
HighPeakFox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 12 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said: Yeah yeah yeah but it's an agenda etc etc etc After all, we cannot allow an alternative point of view, can we?
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 5 November 2019 Posted 5 November 2019 3 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said: After all, we cannot allow an alternative point of view, can we? Ha, no never, matey!!!! PS Thinking about it, Puel became the football equivalent of Brexit, very little middle ground with fans
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.