Brendan Rodgers

[Guest SO1]

12 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I don't think so, he'll only have 2 years left on his deal won't he? Someone would be willing to pay north of £30-35m knowing if you play to his strengths he will score 20+ a season.

Newcastle awaits and boy do they need him now. 50+mil.

Edited 1 December 2021 by SO1

[Guest SO1]

1 minute ago, casablancas said:

You’re brave   I agree with you. But brave. Lol 

Its a long way to Savannah across the Atlantic. Besides no guts no glory.

[sacreblueits442]

1 minute ago, Stevosevic said:

You would get 25m easy are you aware of the market these days? 

 

A mid table PL club would put 25m on the table for him tomorrow. 

....I do not see the market as buoyant as it used to be, if you are right then it would be a good return!!!

 

[Les-TA-Jon]

Blimey you lot are all talking like it’s Football Manager and we’ve £300m to spend. 
 

How exactly are we gonna do this big squad rebuild? 

[Stevosevic]

2 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

....I do not see the market as buoyant as it used to be, if you are right then it would be a good return!!!

 

You're aware a crap CB in Vestegaard moved for 15m because it was between PL clubs?

 

 

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

Blimey you lot are all talking like it’s Football Manager and we’ve £300m to spend. 
 

How exactly are we gonna do this big squad rebuild? 

We'll be selling over £100m worth of players this summer, possibly £150m

[sacreblueits442]

3 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

You're aware a crap CB in Vestegaard moved for 15m because it was between PL clubs?

 

 

...we were desperate, Southampton took advantage of the situation!!!

[Stevosevic]

Just now, sacreblueits442 said:

...we were desperate, Southampton took advantage of the situation!!!

And Iheanacho is a striker with a decent goal record. There would be a queue of clubs. 

 

Look at the amounts strikers move for. 

Edited 1 December 2021 by Stevosevic

[Ric Flair]

4 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

And Iheanacho is a striker with a decent goal record. There would be a queue of clubs. 

 

Look at the amounts strikers move for. 

Ings went for £30m with less than a year on his contract, injury prone and 30 years old. Iheanacho would be highly coveted. We'd get £35m +

[Scotch]

There's so many clubs that you could see Nacho doing well at. Brighton would be a different animal with him in their side. Leeds, Newcastle.... But West Ham would be the ideal fit for him. 

[Supergray22]

Not that I want him gone but I could see nacho doing very well for Brighton. Perhaps Brendan could persuade them to entertain a swap deal for Bissouma. He is the sort of player we hoped we would get with Soumare and would be an asset if and when youri moves on. Not that I want either nacho or youri to leave but time moves on. 

[volpeazzurro]

5 hours ago, Scotch said:

There's so many clubs that you could see Nacho doing well at. Brighton would be a different animal with him in their side. Leeds, Newcastle.... But West Ham would be the ideal fit for him. 

He would be an ideal fit for US if he was given more of a chance!

 

12 goals last year supposedly in 24 games, but many of them were bit part appearances. Vardy was 15 in 34 nearly all full games. 

 

When Vardy sadly goes (1 more full season?), who will we have apart from Daka? We are only 8th currently because unlike many sides around us we have a number of players who, although we are churning out piss poor performances, we can still come up with a goal.

 

Goalscoring forwards are notoriously the hardest players to buy, hence 30m for Ings at 30 years with his injury record. Daka may or may not make it but you need more than one striker anyway. Can we think of anyone else in our usual price bracket who is available and would come? Vardy was an incredible once in a lifetime signing so don't let's get our hopes up there. 

 

Iheanacho is proven at this level and we saw last season what he could do with a consistent run of games. Yet Rodgers conveniently forgets this and puts average squad players like Perez and Lookman in before him this season, why is that exactly? It certainly isn't down to systems because if in the last few games you'd replaced Lookman or Perez when he's made a cameo appearance, he certainly wouldn't have made a worse contribution than their very mediocre offerings whatever their allotted positions, in fact, you'd have probably got a lot better contribution and perhaps a couple of goals to go with it! 

 

Rodgers is again doing something seemingly irrationally against the common good of the club for his own egotistical purposes. He came here and decided that Iheanacho wasn't for him or his type of player and nothing he does will be good enough because stubborn Brendan can't  be seen to have possibly got it wrong, it's Brendan before club. It must have been through gritted teeth and clenched arse cheeks that he had to continually play him last year because once of the leash, Nacho embarrassed him and kept scoring, even then, unlike everyone else, Rodgers was reluctant to praise him and still had the odd snipe at him.

 

We are in great danger, I think, of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Rodgers supposed signings of Perez, Vestergaard and Bertrand to a lesser degree, and playing players out of position, is testament to his ability to spot a player. Compare those to Iheanacho, Praet and even Under because compared to Lookman and Perez,  they, and particularly Under, for whatever Brendan reason, certainly didn't get the opportunity Lookman and Perez has had to shine. I suspect he had more say in the signing of one or two of those compared to the others?

 

By the time we really need Iheanacho if he's sold, Rodgers I suspect will have gone one way or another and my prediction is that he'll have left us in a far worse position playing staff wise than when he came. I forsee a minor exodus this and next summer with little comparable quality to replace them.

 

Our recruitment team need to work independently from Rodgers and his sidekick Congerton for the future of the club or they'll be left in a sea of mediocre players that are hard to shift on highly paid long contracts. If Rodgers doesn't like it then probably this job isn't for him. He'll not get a much better opportunity because he's simply not good enough for an elite club. He wouldn't last 18 months. 

 

Edited 2 December 2021 by volpeazzurro

[Jimmy]

Nacho doesn’t fit our best system, he cannot play as a lone striker, isn’t really a number 10.

 

If he had more pace he would nail down the wide right spot, though I would like to see him given a run there

 

in order for us to play him we have to play 2 strikers but that doesn’t really suit everyone else.

Edited 2 December 2021 by Jimmy

[volpeazzurro]

16 hours ago, Jimmy said:

Nacho doesn’t fit our best system, he cannot play as a lone striker, isn’t really a number 10.

 

If he had more pace he would nail down the wide right spot.

 

in order for us to play him we have to play 2 strikers but that doesn’t really suit everyone else.

He managed to score 12 goals last season alongside Vardy in less than half a season when Vardy himself couldn't score. Iheanacho literally saved the day for us, without him we'd have perhaps finished less than halfway. 

 

So what number or position was he playing in then? There's too much talk of precious systems or shirt numbers at times it's utter nonsense. If you look at how Pep sets up at Man City there is no exactly defined role, players have to be fluid and not conform to a game of toy soldiers where they have totally restricted duties or risk a bollocking if they move out of an allotted position. Times and the game moves on. Granted, I don't see Iheanacho as a lone striker either but there are many other roles and combinations combined with the ability to adapt to the prevailing conditions on a football pitch.

Edited 2 December 2021 by volpeazzurro

[NasPb]

5 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

He managed to score 12 goals last season alongside Vardy in less than half a season when Vardy himself couldn't score. Iheanacho literally saved the day for us, without him we'd have perhaps finished less than halfway. 

 

So what number or position was he playing in then? There's too much talk of precious systems or shirt numbers at times it's utter nonsense. If you look at how Pep sets up at Man City there is no exactly defined role, players have to be fluid and not conform to a game of toy soldiers where they have totally restricted duties or move out of an allotted position. Times and the game moves on. Granted, I don't see Iheanacho as a lone striker either but there are many other roles and combinations combined with the ability to adapt to the prevailing conditions on a football pitch.

Agreed. Problem is Rodgers ain't pragmatic enough. Needs to be more open tactically. 

[The Year Of The Fox]

21 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

He managed to score 12 goals last season alongside Vardy in less than half a season when Vardy himself couldn't score. Iheanacho literally saved the day for us, without him we'd have perhaps finished less than halfway. 

 

So what number or position was he playing in then? There's too much talk of precious systems or shirt numbers at times it's utter nonsense. If you look at how Pep sets up at Man City there is no exactly defined role, players have to be fluid and not conform to a game of toy soldiers where they have totally restricted duties or move out of an allotted position. Times and the game moves on. Granted, I don't see Iheanacho as a lone striker either but there are many other roles and combinations combined with the ability to adapt to the prevailing conditions on a football pitch.

Can’t stand the Sky Sports talk of ‘He’s a number 10, 3, 8’ Stop trying to redefine a football position that’s absolutely no different to 10 years ago to try and sound edgy 

 

 

It’s the same people who try to drill into us that ‘the game has changed’ when it’s still 11 v 11 on a football pitch the last time I looked. 

 

 

 

Bore off 

Edited 2 December 2021 by The Year Of The Fox

[FoxyPalace.com]

Brendan hitting a dead end tactics wise. We always seem poor in the first half then improve in the second. Something just isn’t right, getting that Ranieri vibe just before he got the boot ! 

[volpeazzurro]

2 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Can’t stand the Sky Sports talk of ‘He’s a number 10, 3, 8’

 

Bore off 

Absolutely, they can't resist in pigeon holeing everyone and everything. I might see Chris Sutton as the archetypal number 10 to Alan Shearer but there can be different types of players. Bergkamp and Henry for example. 

 

Is Maddison a true number 10 as we're told? He says he's a number 8. He's currently doing well again in a slightly more withdrawn role, is he still a number 10 or something else? Perhaps if we sometimes let these players use their natural football brains more rather than coach everything out of them to get them to adopt a regimented system or drill, we'd probably see some better football.

 

Of course they're has to be some tactics and a manager to bring things together but, a talented manager for me, is one who is able to extract the best out of what he has available to him and not one that merely tries to get players to slavishly follow a system regardless of whether they have the required talents or attributes or not. 

[Mike Oxlong]

18 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Can’t stand the Sky Sports talk of ‘He’s a number 10, 3, 8’ Stop trying to redefine a football position that’s absolutely no different to 10 years ago to try and sound edgy 

 

 

It’s the same people who try to drill into us that ‘the game has changed’ when it’s still 11 v 11 on a football pitch the last time I looked. 

 

 

 

Bore off 

Email sky sports to say that their commentary discriminates against those with dyscalculia and they’ll soon stop ✋ 

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, FoxyPalace.com said:

Brendan hitting a dead end tactics wise. We always seem poor in the first half then improve in the second. Something just isn’t right, getting that Ranieri vibe just before he got the boot ! 

You do realise we were 17th, on the back of 5 loses on the bounce had only won 1 on 11 when Ranieri got sacked.

 

We are currently 8th and unbeaten in 3. 

Edited 2 December 2021 by coolhandfox

[Ric Flair]

1 hour ago, volpeazzurro said:

He managed to score 12 goals last season alongside Vardy in less than half a season when Vardy himself couldn't score. Iheanacho literally saved the day for us, without him we'd have perhaps finished less than halfway. 

 

So what number or position was he playing in then? There's too much talk of precious systems or shirt numbers at times it's utter nonsense. If you look at how Pep sets up at Man City there is no exactly defined role, players have to be fluid and not conform to a game of toy soldiers where they have totally restricted duties or move out of an allotted position. Times and the game moves on. Granted, I don't see Iheanacho as a lone striker either but there are many other roles and combinations combined with the ability to adapt to the prevailing conditions on a football pitch.

The only player that 3-4-1-2 suits under Rodgers is Iheanacho. If we play 4-4-2 we lose the midfield battle and if we play the diamond we are easily exposed by teams that are strong out wide. It's annoying as Iheanacho is a goalscorer and creator but only when he plays in a front 2. He can't lead the line on his own either, although I do wonder if that could be worked on better with 2 direct wingers, I thought Barnes and Ünder last season could have pushed on and Kelechi as a 9 that holds the ball up and feeds them but it wasn't overly great.

 

It's a tricky one.

[volpeazzurro]

10 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

The only player that 3-4-1-2 suits under Rodgers is Iheanacho. If we play 4-4-2 we lose the midfield battle and if we play the diamond we are easily exposed by teams that are strong out wide. It's annoying as Iheanacho is a goalscorer and creator but only when he plays in a front 2. He can't lead the line on his own either, although I do wonder if that could be worked on better with 2 direct wingers, I thought Barnes and Ünder last season could have pushed on and Kelechi as a 9 that holds the ball up and feeds them but it wasn't overly great.

 

It's a tricky one.

It is a tricky one you're right. I also think he could play in a 3 as some people get obsessed with wingers as opposed to width or even occasional width. I wouldn't for example say that Liverpool employ wingbacks but do allow their fullbacks to attack knowing that they've got two decent centre halves and a midfield that can be relied upon to cover. Sane and Salah are hardly wingers but can pull out wide. Whilst Salah is different class, I can still see Iheanacho working in a three with any two of Barnes, Vardy or Daka. Certainly more so than having Perez or Lookman on the right at all. With a midfield 3 of Ndidi, Tielemans and 1 other ahead of 2 centre halves and a fit Ricardo and JJ and I think we're in business. 

 

I also feel he could fit in a 442 combined with Vardy or Daka up front and we won't have Vardy too much longer. He's very different to both of them and I see that as a bonus as opposed to a problem. I just don't believe that you have to have a rigid and defined front two like an archetypal number 10. Vardy and Iheanacho combined perfectly well last season and actually it turned out that Vardy was a great and unselfish provider whereas some would just want him to be a sole target man. I still think Vardy and Kane could have been devastating for England. For me it's more about two forwards reading and understanding each other rather than having a prescribed area to operate in. If they constantly interchange it confuses defences.

 

If you'd had to rely on someone to score last season in the second half, you'd have had Iheanacho as number 1 on the teamsheet. How has he suddenly deteriorated so much in the close season that we don't even consider a start for him compared to some of the mediocrity we've actually fielded?

[Steve Earle]

9 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

They will, we've so many players approaching a year or two left on their contracts. This squad has been together for a long while and several want new challenges, we'd be foolish not to cash in now and rebuild. Plus, you can see that it's gone sale and Rodgers methods wearing off, so he has to rip it up or leave/be sacked.

I see where you're coming from but don't buy it. I don't see any evidence that it isn't a happy ship, nor that the manager's methods have gone stale. IMO you (and many on here) are over-reacting to a dodgy third of a season, massively affected by injuries, and recruitment decisions that don't yet look like the right ones. We'll see won't we. You might be proved right. 

[lanefox]

2 hours ago, FoxyPalace.com said:

Brendan hitting a dead end tactics wise. We always seem poor in the first half then improve in the second. Something just isn’t right, getting that Ranieri vibe just before he got the boot ! 

Ye I’m getting that vibe of being 17th in the league! Give your head a wobble

[moore_94]

57 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

It is a tricky one you're right. I also think he could play in a 3 as some people get obsessed with wingers as opposed to width or even occasional width. I wouldn't for example say that Liverpool employ wingbacks but do allow their fullbacks to attack knowing that they've got two decent centre halves and a midfield that can be relied upon to cover. Sane and Salah are hardly wingers but can pull out wide. Whilst Salah is different class, I can still see Iheanacho working in a three with any two of Barnes, Vardy or Daka. Certainly more so than having Perez or Lookman on the right at all. With a midfield 3 of Ndidi, Tielemans and 1 other ahead of 2 centre halves and a fit Ricardo and JJ and I think we're in business. 

 

I also feel he could fit in a 442 combined with Vardy or Daka up front and we won't have Vardy too much longer. He's very different to both of them and I see that as a bonus as opposed to a problem. I just don't believe that you have to have a rigid and defined front two like an archetypal number 10. Vardy and Iheanacho combined perfectly well last season and actually it turned out that Vardy was a great and unselfish provider whereas some would just want him to be a sole target man. I still think Vardy and Kane could have been devastating for England. For me it's more about two forwards reading and understanding each other rather than having a prescribed area to operate in. If they constantly interchange it confuses defences.

 

If you'd had to rely on someone to score last season in the second half, you'd have had Iheanacho as number 1 on the teamsheet. How has he suddenly deteriorated so much in the close season that we don't even consider a start for him compared to some of the mediocrity we've actually fielded?

Mane and Salah spend the most of their time out wide rather than in central areas of the pitch

 

They then come inside once they they are in a position to enter the box rather than going into the actual corner