Claude Puel and the recruitment in 2018

[BenTheFox]

2 minutes ago, Blue ROI said:

I wouldn't call Shakey's time at the club a shambles by any means.

 

We needed  that New Manager Bounce badly at the time. It fell apart for him with Spurs and Bournemouth at the very end of 16/17 but if Cl;audio was still there we could have ended up in turmoil.

 

Right to end it when we did but he served us well overall no doubt about it.

 

Claude's alright in my book too. Identified the defence needed sorting and we got Evans and Ricardo in.

 

As for Ghezzal and Benkovic well Pearson and Rodgers made a few less than stellar signings too don't forget.

They were worth a punt. Benkovic was highly rated and Ghezzal if you could get a tune out of him could have paid off. Neither cost a lot of money. It wasn't like Musa, Slimani, Silva etc. who for the most were expensive flops. 

[Guy]

1 hour ago, Xen said:

Puel was the necessary fall guy for that period. We needed someone to come in, make the difficult decisions to cut some deadwood, change our style a bit and bring in a few players who were capable of pushing us on to the next level (even if his tactics didn't allow that to be fulfilled). For that kind of thing he did well, but unfortunately that didn't translate at all to the on-pitch performance and he wasn't the right fit for us. Still, can thank him for bringing in Ricardo and playing a part in getting Tielemans here (even if it was too late to save his job).

 

Did a good job in some respects under some difficult circumstances, but a terrible job in others. Rodgers wouldn't have touched us if we'd tried to go in for him after Shakey, but Puel transitioned us nicely into a better foundation for Rodgers to take over. 

 

A transitional manager in a transitional period for the club. Nothing more, nothing less. 

Very accurately put! He was no great shakes at all as a manager and struggled to inspire the crowd over any of his time here....and arguably the team for some of the time! His English wasn't great either and he struggled to humour the media and such like too. All the same then the owners still did their homework as Puel was the right fit for us at that time. He steadied the ship and brought in some much needed stability to the club at the time. This was after after Shakespeare's interim and brief full time management spell after Ranieri had sadly lost the plot and after we'd also lost a crucial player the previous season in Kante. Things were then threatening to go haywire in the space of a season after winning the title!

The change for a more consolidation like period within the club was necessary after the heady highs of winning the league followed by the unfortunate come down the following season, call it a hangover season from our greatest ever before it! I also agree that Rodgers would probably have not looked twice at coming here had we been in the mess that we were before Puel was brought in to do what he was hired to do! It is very clear that Rodgers has very much moved us on since then though and long may this continue!

[splinterdream]

I think Puel was brilliant, he had a huge task to turn us into a possession based side whilst bringing through young players, I also admittedly didn't think that at the time due to his formations and the obvious missing link in midfield causing vardy to be isolated.

 

Puel brought in some amazing talent required to make us the team we are today, I think he knew he was under time constraints whilst not having the budget. I think he recognised the missing link and bought in youri, but by then it was too late. I think given more time he'd have been an incredible manager. Just my opinion mind. I think the 2 cdms was just his way of changing our play style, we just lacked the ball carrying midfielder for it.

[ARM1968]

I’ve said it many times, but Puel deserves some massive credit for his recruitment and eye for talent. We are in a better place because of him, despite some turgid football. 

[CrispinLA in Texas]

Always thought he would have been better as a DOF than as a manager because his man management was weak but his recruitment especially young upcoming talent was brilliant.

[katieakita]

When he came in he was the right man at the right time and steadied the ship and he left at the right time,  thinking of the players he helped bring in and cannot blame him for trying to hold out for more with little Wes (at £45 million he would be a bargain) as mentioned it was not the right time for Rodgers when Shakey left. He has gone and we have moved on would he be wanted to be involved with recruitment of young players, why not

[Wasyls Pec Deck]

He did a lot of the ground work - transitioning into the style of play we are much better at now. That said while he laid the groundwork it was pretty clear his time was up. He seemed to run out of ideas.

 

[Mickyblueeyes]

Very early on in his time here I remember an interview he had talking about the first team and youth teams and how he wants them all to play exactly the same way. Passing football etc. 
 

Since that interview we’ve seen Thomas, Chilwell, Barnes, Hamza and a few others making the odd cameo. I don’t think that’s a coincidence. 
 

He seemed like a manager who lacked certain likeable factors. However, he did bring some good to the club, recruitment and youth development I would pick out.

[BenTheFox]

6 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Very early on in his time here I remember an interview he had talking about the first team and youth teams and how he wants them all to play exactly the same way. Passing football etc. 
 

Since that interview we’ve seen Thomas, Chilwell, Barnes, Hamza and a few others making the odd cameo. I don’t think that’s a coincidence. 
 

He seemed like a manager who lacked certain likeable factors. However, he did bring some good to the club, recruitment and youth development I would pick out.

I watched a few u23 games pre-Puel and they were honking to watch. 

[StriderHiryu]

IMO Puel gets too much credit for recruitment. The person who *should* get credit for our recruitment is John Rudkin, our Director of Football. He had a long term strategy of what the club wanted to achieve over a long period of time after making mistakes in the 2016 window. He authorised signings that would add value to the club no matter who the manager was, something he realised he needed to do after Craig Shakespeare was given the boot. Puel definitely had a large part to play in convincing Ricardo and Tielemans to sign, as well as Maddison (I believe he called him up and told him he would give him the 10 shirt). But Iheanacho, Maguire, Soyuncu were all Rudkin signings.

 

The way our club is run, the DOF is responsible for signing the players, the manager is more of a head coach. That doesn't mean the manager doesn't get a say in our signings, but ultimately the DOF makes the deals. The DOF also plans for the long term, it was rumoured that Rodgers had been courted at the end of the 17/18 season after the home loss on the final day, but we knew Rodgers wouldn't be available till later on so waited before pulling the trigger.

 

Puel does deserve credit for the following:

- Getting rid of players that no longer suitable for us, despite being club legends; Simpson, Ulloa, King, James, Huth, Okazaki, etc. He did it the wrong way, but he did phase those players out.

- He blooded young players like Harvey Barnes and Ben Chilwell. Gray gots tons of game time too, even though he was sold later. Hamza Choudhury got given his debut too.

- Changed our style of play to possession football. It was horrendous at times, but we started playing out from the back under his tenure. We stopped just kicking it long every time.

 

I've got nothing against Puel, in fact I was behind him till nearly the end. He did a job for us and was not the worst. But Rodgers shows what a top manager could do with our squad.

 

But remember that Rudkin, once despised and hated on these forums pulled the ultimate redemption arc. He's actually a legend in my book, he stays in the shadows and lets the talking be done by club results. One of the best DOF's in European football!

 

 

Edited 16 May 2021 by StriderHiryu

[Corky]

The recruitment was much better under him than before, especially two years earlier, but the team weren't coached brilliantly and the games weren't good to watch. We were never getting into the top five and winning cups under him.

[BenTheFox]

14 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

IMO Puel gets too much credit for recruitment. The person who *should* get credit for our recruitment is John Rudkin, our Director of Football. He had a long term strategy of what the club wanted to achieve over a long period of time after making mistakes in the 2016 window. He authorised signings that would add value to the club no matter who the manager was, something he realised he needed to do after Craig Shakespeare was given the boot. Puel definitely had a large part to play in convincing Ricardo and Tielemans to sign, as well as Maddison (I believe he called him up and told him he would give him the 10 shirt). But Iheanacho, Maguire, Soyuncu were all Rudkin signings.

 

Puel deserves credit for the following:

- Getting rid of players that no longer suitable for us, despite being club legends; Simpson, Ulloa, King, James, Huth, Okazaki, etc. He did it the wrong way, but he did phase those players out.

- He blooded young players like Harvey Barnes and Ben Chilwell.

- Changed our style of play to possession football. It was horrendous at times, but we started playing out from the back under his tenure.

 

I've got nothing against Puel, in fact I was behind him till nearly the end. He did a job for us and was not the worst. But Rodgers shows what a top manager could do with our squad.

 

But remember that Rudkin, once despised and hated on these forums pulled the ultimate redemption arc. He's actually a legend in my book, he stays in the shadows and lets the talking be done by club results. One of the best DOF's in European football!

Shakespeare had a lot to do with the Maguire signing I believe. 

[TeaMen Tom]

In Puel's defense he never had the chance to use Tielemens, who'd have helped quite a bit.  As I recall those teams tried to play possession but most of the time ended up playing 'sideways' because no one could make the key pass that could help break a team down.  

[UpTheLeagueFox]

My first thought at the final whistle yesterday was: "I do hope Claude gets the credit he clearly deserves for the big part he played in all this..."

.

.

.

.

.

.

On a serious note, I'm far too ecstatic with the FA Cup win to get deep into the debate about Puel (or some of the ridiculous revisionism in this thread) but I will say there has never been a Leicester manager more despised by players and staff in my 30+ years reporting on the club.

Have a lovely week, everyone x

[Dan LCFC]

Depends really how much was down to him and how much was down to the recruitment staff at the time. There is no doubt at all though that during his time here we did recruit very well for the most part. Summer 2018 easily our best summer post title bring in Ricardo, Maddison, Soyuncu, Evans. Ward I think we overpaid for and Ghezzal didn't work* but that's a seriously decent window. Every window since has been gradual improvement.

 

* Even Ghezzal is actually doing it in Turkey. While I'm not suggesting he's the answer at all for us, he scored their league winning goal yesterday and if somebody had 8 goals and 17 assists from the wing we would be excited to be linked.

[Deeg67]

Amen to all of it.  Puel did the dirty work to make the last two seasons possible.

[BenTheFox]

2 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Depends really how much was down to him and how much was down to the recruitment staff at the time. There is no doubt at all though that during his time here we did recruit very well for the most part. Summer 2018 easily our best summer post title bring in Ricardo, Maddison, Soyuncu, Evans. Ward I think we overpaid for and Ghezzal didn't work* but that's a seriously decent window. Every window since has been gradual improvement.

 

* Even Ghezzal is actually doing it in Turkey. While I'm not suggesting he's the answer at all for us, he scored their league winning goal yesterday and if somebody had 8 goals and 17 assists from the wing we would be excited to be linked.

I could see there was a decent footballer in Ghezzal. The signing wasn't completely baffling. We took a chance on him and it didn't work. You win some, you lose some. 

[BenTheFox]

I hate the way he supposedly treated Andy King. That was completely unreasonable. Granted his services were no longer required but there's a right way to treat people and that isn't it. 

Edited 16 May 2021 by BenTheFox

[Dan LCFC]

13 minutes ago, BenTheFox said:

I could see there was a decent footballer in Ghezzal. The signing wasn't completely baffling. We took a chance on him and it didn't work. You win some, you lose some. 

Ghezzal was a bad mix. Came in for our best player who'd just left, played under a manager who didn't know how to set up a side to attack properly, he was doomed to fail. He'll not be our answer but he's not as bad as people think.

[BenTheFox]

2 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Ghezzal was a bad mix. Came in for our best player who'd just left, played under a manager who didn't know how to set up a side to attack properly, he was doomed to fail. He'll not be our answer but he's not as bad as people think.

Stell felt if he was given the chances that Gray had been given he would have delivered better numbers, not that it means that he was good enough. 

[Lambert09]

Puel would make a genuinely great DOF, his style of football is awful though. 
 

But I always said his signings made the transition to making us a possession based team and with exception of Ghezzal and diabate the signings made under him were great. 
 

obviously the credit doesn’t go to just him, but it’s hard to be mad at the guy who attracted Ricardo

Edited 17 May 2021 by Lambert09

[Deeg67]

What people forget is that for most of Puel’s reign he didn’t have the attacking options to set up substantially differently.  

[Guy]

5 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

My first thought at the final whistle yesterday was: "I do hope Claude gets the credit he clearly deserves for the big part he played in all this..."

.

.

.

.

.

.

On a serious note, I'm far too ecstatic with the FA Cup win to get deep into the debate about Puel (or some of the ridiculous revisionism in this thread) but I will say there has never been a Leicester manager more despised by players and staff in my 30+ years reporting on the club.

Have a lovely week, everyone x

In the words of a certain vintage tennis player, "You cannot be serious!" While I agree that he was somehow despised and disrespected the minute he set foot in the door at Leicester (not helped by Lineker's Twitter tweet stating some level of disbelief at the fact Puel had been brought in to replace Shakespeare), then all the same I think you forget that 13 years ago now we were a true circus act and in danger of disappearing into obscurity forever after dropping into League One after a horrendous two or three years of 'scraping by' in the second tier under mediocre managers - at best! That was always going to end in tears, as happened in 2008.

Thanks to Pearson signing on the dotted line (after not being kept on by Southampton), for our controversial chairman of the time "Mandyrich" in the close season of 2008, - when fans thought that hiring Pearson was a gamble at the time - then the majestic rest that followed over the next 13 years turned out to be a total miraculous chain of events. Sooooo the fact that Puel is now being cited as one of the worst managers of all time here (this includes the likes of Peter Taylor and the shambolic season that saw us recruit three hapless managers in Allen, Megson and Holloway!!), clearly shows how deluded a lot of modern day football fans are (that's if this poster is actually being serious!) - and how the expectation levels of the 'fans' of this great club have now become insatiable after our league title success five years ago. That will always be a mixed blessing from this day forth, going by posts such as the above ..... that totally ride roughshod over a manager who, although not perfect by any stretch, did what he was asked to do and then some - including dealing with the Vichai helicopter tragedy first hand - and who got us out of the mire when asked and stabalised the club. Also he was the reason why we have some of the talent in our squad now that we could only dreamed of having before Puel was hired. One of the greatest mysteries in the history of our club will surely remain why Puel was so disliked and disrespected. More like totally misunderstood and completely overlooked for not being the life and soul of the party! Rant over! 

[An Away Move]

Puel did more than anyone to transition us from being a counter attacking team to a team that can keep the ball. Some of the turgid football we played was a part of that transition IMO. He also showed that there is a ladder from youth development to the first team and I’m sure that galvanised our youngsters, aside from some stellar recruitment work. I think his contribution was immense even though he stank the place out. Or did he? I think he did add some bad odour with how he treated some players, but, and this will be triggering to some here, so did some of our fan base. Many recognised his contribution at the time, but for a lot of people he was a little bit too foreign/French, sounded like it and was ridiculed for it. Some of it was ugly. That was the greatest stench IMO. I think we have to own that because it was definitely a thing.  

Edited 17 May 2021 by SydenhamFox

[Deeg67]

3 minutes ago, SydenhamFox said:

Puel did more than anyone to transition us from being a counter attacking team to a team that can keep the ball. Some of the turgid football we played was a part of that transition IMO. He also showed that there is a ladder from youth development to the first team and I’m sure that galvanised our youngsters, aside from some stellar recruitment work. I think his contribution was immense even though he stank the place out. Or did he? I think he did add some bad odour with how he treated some players, but, and this will be triggering to some here, so did some of our fan base. Many recognised his contribution at the time, but for a lot of people he was a little bit too foreign/French, sounded like it and was ridiculed for it. Some of it was ugly. That was the greatest stench IMO. I think we have to own that because it was definitely a thing.  

No one likes to admit it, but “too French” was a big part of the problem.  He probably took more criticism around here for how he talked at his press conferences than anything else.