Rodgers due respect

[PhillippaT]

3 minutes ago, waylander said:

We have probably spent 300 million. Even bringing youth in . The black scarf brigade reaping what they sowed . Done nothing since Wenger left . It wasn’t Wenger they needed out I’m sad to say . It was the board . But I appreciate your comments too just fans need perspective especially ours at the moment. We have an outstanding setup at the minute instead of all the moaning enjoy it while it’s here every moment. Things change . 😉

The wife was another who wanted Wenger out too: I told her to be careful what she wished for!  

[Mickyblueeyes]

12 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

I work with a fair amount of people in football and I've never heard anyone describe him as anything like that.

 

We were 14th when he took over, we'd just beaten Swansea with Appleton in charge. And we were 12th when he was sacked.

Rodgers may have taken over a team with Tielemans, Maddison and Ricardo in, but he also had to pick up a dressing room which had morale at an all time low, unmotivated players desperately unhappy, looking to jump ship, bruised by a stubborn, boring manager turned the place into a toxic mess and wanted legends like Vardy and Kasper out.

But yeah he got well paid professional players to pass a football to each other, often side-to-side in their own half, so we must be grateful for that "transformation" I guess.

This is something that I feel is unfair criticism too. He has never come across as arrogant to me. Confident, yes. Not arrogant. His media displays and pre-match greetings with fellow managers and coaches suggest he respects his opponents. 

[sacreblueits442]

22 minutes ago, PhillippaT said:

The wife was another who wanted Wenger out too: I told her to be careful what she wished for!  

...just looking at this from the outside their demise began with Wenger still at the helm...!!!

 He really should have gone five years earlier and within that time there has been a handful of very good managers available, Allegri and Klopp was also on that list. 

   I believe if Wenger had not called time on his tenure, there was a contract on the table waiting to be signed.

  The people at the helm of Arsenal no nothing about the game and I suspect your other half is thinking on the same lines.

[Babylon]

15 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

I work with a fair amount of people in football and I've never heard anyone describe him as anything like that.

 

We were 14th when he took over, we'd just beaten Swansea with Appleton in charge. And we were 12th when he was sacked.

Rodgers may have taken over a team with Tielemans, Maddison and Ricardo in, but he also had to pick up a dressing room which had morale at an all time low, unmotivated players desperately unhappy, looking to jump ship, bruised by a stubborn, boring manager turned the place into a toxic mess and wanted legends like Vardy and Kasper out.

But yeah he got well paid professional players to pass a football to each other, often side-to-side in their own half, so we must be grateful for that "transformation" I guess.

Ranieri took over us 14th and left us 17th... I'm sure something else happened int he middle. 

 

Nobody said the transformation was complete, it was far from it and it became clear he'd never be able to. But you could see what we were attempting to do, if people think Rodgers would have taken over the team in the state Puel did, and done what he's done now they are kidding themselves. 

 

 

[Corky]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Ranieri took over us 14th and left us 17th... I'm sure something else happened int he middle. 

 

Nobody said the transformation was complete, it was far from it and it became clear he'd never be able to. But you could see what we were attempting to do, if people think Rodgers would have taken over the team in the state Puel did, and done what he's done now they are kidding themselves. 

 

 

As a fan, I found Puel's style and results underwhelming and inconsistent. He took points off all the Big Six yet lost at home to Cardiff and Saints as well as caving in to Crystal Palace several times. Obviously I don't know the ins and outs of his man-management and clearly it appears it wasn't good.

 

He wasn't a disaster like Taylor, just an underachiever who could be improved upon. Rodgers is much better and we're better for it. 

[Babylon]

7 minutes ago, Corky said:

As a fan, I found Puel's style and results underwhelming and inconsistent. He took points off all the Big Six yet lost at home to Cardiff and Saints as well as caving in to Crystal Palace several times. Obviously I don't know the ins and outs of his man-management and clearly it appears it wasn't good.

 

He wasn't a disaster like Taylor, just an underachiever who could be improved upon. Rodgers is much better and we're better for it. 

I don’t think anyone would argue different (other than the underachiever part).But he had a lot to do here and left us in a better position than he took over, and I’m not talking position. 
 

I’d say calling him an under achiever is harsh. Towards the end yeah we should have been doing more, but it was clear there were big issues down there as we saw under Ranieri and Shakespeare. And it’s already been shown that even this squad is capable of horrific runs of form under Rodgers. 

Changing a playing style and a whole squad isn’t a five minute job!

Edited 15 December 2020 by Babylon

[HighPeakFox]

4 hours ago, Babylon said:

Changing a playing style and a whole squad isn’t a five minute job!

Amen.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

6 hours ago, Babylon said:

(Puel) had a lot to do here and left us in a better position than he took over, and I’m not talking position. 

The club/dressing room was not in a toxic state when he arrived but it was when he left.

And he can take the credit for that because it was down to him - his arrogance, stubbornness and lack of any man management skills. When the mellowest of blokes (King, Albrighton etc) can't stand you, you've really fvcked something up badly.

 

His fanboys seem to think he reinvented the wheel by getting players to pass sideways to each other, FFS.

[foxes_rule1978]

8 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

The club/dressing room was not in a toxic state when he arrived but it was when he left.

And he can take the credit for that because it was down to him - his arrogance, stubbornness and lack of any man management skills. When the mellowest of blokes (King, Albrighton etc) can't stand you, you've really fvcked something up badly.

 

His fanboys seem to think he reinvented the wheel by getting players to pass sideways to each other, FFS.

To be honest he did have a good eye for a player, that helped us progress from just a counter attacking team to one that is now more dynamic. 

[Babylon]

4 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

The club/dressing room was not in a toxic state when he arrived but it was when he left.

And he can take the credit for that because it was down to him - his arrogance, stubbornness and lack of any man management skills. When the mellowest of blokes (King, Albrighton etc) can't stand you, you've really fvcked something up badly.

 

His fanboys seem to think he reinvented the wheel by getting players to pass sideways to each other, FFS.

Yawn... well passing sideways was a start because for a season or more before that we’d done **** all with it, hence us dispensing with two managers for being in relegation trouble.

 

Handling the dismantling of a title winning team and then pretty much switching the whole squad around whilst changing style of play and having an inexperienced team was no easy task, but Rodgers benefited. 
 

 

[Foxhateram]

If we had not sacked Puel, we would have continued to sink into relegation. His style of play was awful and predictable, teams knew two banks of four would prevent us from scoring. 

 

The atmosphere at the training ground was awful during his time. We nearly lost some of our key players as a result of him. Those saying he had an eye for talent.... Our scouting team does that job, not the manager. 

 

Rogers is streets ahead of Puel and his management style is much more like Pearson's, which is exactly what this squad needed to make it become a unit again. 

 

I still feel like we play negatively too often and that is something that Puel is to blame for. We play best when we press high, win the ball high up the pitch and move it quickly to find our pacey attackers. 

[Koke]

13 hours ago, Babylon said:

Changing a playing style and a whole squad isn’t a five minute job!

Edited 13 hours ago by Babylon

 

This was Shakespeare's last game in charge against WBA in October 2017. 

 

Schmeichel; Simpson, Morgan, Maguire, Fuchs;  Mahrez, Iborra, Ndidi, Albrighton; Ihenacho, Vardy.  

 

By the time Puel got sacked we had Chilwell, Maddison, Ricardo, Tielemans and Barnes in the team. 

 

I believe when Geoff says the atmosphere was bad and many players hated him. Puel was dismantling a title winning team so yeah I can imagine a lot of senior players were unhappy, and his style wasn't something they knew. But I dont understand why 2 things can't be acknowledged simultaneously, Puel was a bad man manager and Puel did a good job with moving on certain players and introducing younger players and ultimately left us in a better place overall as a club. If both of these 2 facts can be acknowledged then that should put the Puel debate to bed really.

Edited 16 December 2020 by Koke

[1972 Fox]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

Yawn... well passing sideways was a start because for a season or more before that we’d done **** all with it, hence us dispensing with two managers for being in relegation trouble.

 

Handling the dismantling of a title winning team and then pretty much switching the whole squad around whilst changing style of play and having an inexperienced team was no easy task, but Rodgers benefited. 
 

 

Well I for one am so thankful that the board relieved Puel of his duties when they did. Yes he did transition our playing style and we did make some good signings under his tenure, but it is clear from @UpTheLeagueFox's informed opinion that he had created a toxic atmosphere at the club. If he had stayed for much longer we would have lost some very important players.

 

Man management should not be underestimated as it is crucial to any chance of success. Rodgers seems to have excellent man management skills whereas Puel didn't.

[Babylon]

38 minutes ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

Well I for one am so thankful that the board relieved Puel of his duties when they did. Yes he did transition our playing style and we did make some good signings under his tenure, but it is clear from @UpTheLeagueFox's informed opinion that he had created a toxic atmosphere at the club. If he had stayed for much longer we would have lost some very important players.

 

Man management should not be underestimated as it is crucial to any chance of success. Rodgers seems to have excellent man management skills whereas Puel didn't.

So am I, that’s not what I’m arguing at all. The argument is that failing to give him any credit is, in my opinion bollocks. 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Foxhateram said:

If we had not sacked Puel, we would have continued to sink into relegation. His style of play was awful and predictable, teams knew two banks of four would prevent us from scoring. 

 

The atmosphere at the training ground was awful during his time. We nearly lost some of our key players as a result of him. Those saying he had an eye for talent.... Our scouting team does that job, not the manager. 

 

Rogers is streets ahead of Puel and his management style is much more like Pearson's, which is exactly what this squad needed to make it become a unit again. 

 

I still feel like we play negatively too often and that is something that Puel is to blame for. We play best when we press high, win the ball high up the pitch and move it quickly to find our pacey attackers. 

Puel is to blame for us playing negatively nearly two years after he was sacked? I’ve heard it all now. 

[David Hankey]

7 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Puel is to blame for us playing negatively nearly two years after he was sacked? I’ve heard it all now. 

I wouldn't say being 3rd and the strong possibility of going top is playing negatively.

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, Foxhateram said:

I still feel like we play negatively too often and that is something that Puel is to blame for.

This line of logic does nobody any good whatsoever, I'm afraid. 

[Grebfromgrebland]

With our best team available I can guarantee that we won't look negative.

 

Obviously when we have to pay the likes of Fuchs, Albrighton, big Wes, Thomas, Mendy there has to be compromises on our style of play.

 

The fact we're 3rd is remarkable.

 

Ricardo, Soyunchu, N'didi, Castagne will allow us to play very attacking again if we want to.

 

[Buce]

6 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

This line of logic does nobody any good whatsoever, I'm afraid. 

 

I dunno about that, it gave me a good laugh.

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, Buce said:

I dunno about that, it gave me a good laugh.

It depresses the hell out of me. The extrapolations of that line of thinking are all too common in society in general.

[Babylon]

Were we shit when he took over, yes. 

Did we improve league position, yes. 

Did he begin the process of changing style of play, yes. 

Did he oversee (with the club) a massive squad swap around, yes. 

Was he a shit man manager, yes. 

By the end was he getting enough of the squad he helped create, no. 

Was sacking him the right thing, yes. 

Was his style of play dull as dishwater, yes. 

Did he have a difficult job, yes unenviable. 

Did Rodgers benefit from the ground work he and the club put in, yes. 

 

No more comments on Claude ****ing Puel. 

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, Babylon said:

No more comments on Claude ****ing Puel. 

Good luck with that. I will count the incoming accusations of censorship  

[Koke]

7 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Were we shit when he took over, yes. 

Did we improve league position, yes. 

Did he begin the process of changing style of play, yes. 

Did he oversee (with the club) a massive squad swap around, yes. 

Was he a shit man manager, yes. 

By the end was he getting enough of the squad he helped create, no. 

Was sacking him the right thing, yes. 

Was his style of play dull as dishwater, yes. 

Did he have a difficult job, yes unenviable. 

Did Rodgers benefit from the ground work he and the club put in, yes. 

 

No more comments on Claude ****ing Puel. 

 

As the kids would say these days, hold this W for speaking big facts. 

[Corky]

What's all this stuff about fanboys? Are they people who don't believe he did a disastrous job but also think we've improved massively since he left?

 

There is nobody who loves him or is pining for him to return. Utter nonsense.

[ARTY_FOX]

Wrong thread 

Edited 16 December 2020 by ARTY_FOX