Brendan’s Signings

[jayfox26]

3 hours ago, Pete52 said:

McCoist is right. The thing is, Rodgers didn’t get enough out of the players he had at his disposal and certainly ****ed up in many ways, there’s no denying that, but no one can sit there and say that the club adequately supported him and gave him the tools to succeed in the past 18 months. 
 

Again, Rodgers underachieved, but it’s not all his fault. I don’t know what we expected but when we didn’t sign anyone apart from Faes to replace Fofana. 

They didn't back him in the last window because of the huge squad and wage bill we had created during his tenure. Squad full of players on high wages and we couldn't shift. The only thing I would say is, if they didn't want to back him, they should have sacked him last summer. Even without any new signings though, we still shouldn't be getting relegated and that is on Rodgers. He's failed to get the best out of the players he had. His antics at the start of the season were appalling. Blaming everyone from the board to the players to the fans, everyone but him. And again, this should have lead to him being sacked. In an ideal world, if he felt so hard done by, he should have resigned but we all know this is rare in the world of football as these over paid individuals always want their huge pay off. We certainly have more issues at this football club than just Rodgers but his negativity has turned many fans off and has demotivated and destroyed the confidence of the players to the point where its now irreparable and has lead to us being on the verge of relegation. 

[Dahnsouff]

3 hours ago, Guesty said:

I don't understand the fabricating bit? 

 

Vestergaard and Rodger's comments are public knowledge.

 

It was reported in the Athletic that recruitment and analytic staff left because of transfer disagreements. Our new Head of Analytics was only appointed last month.

 

Like I say, it's a nuanced situation. Both A and B have probably happened. Machiavellian might be a bit strong, but you just have to read about the end of his time at Liverpool and what FSG thought of him to know he lies: https://www.thisisanfield.com/2019/10/journalist-reveals-extent-of-fsgs-anger-at-brendan-rodgers-at-end-of-liverpool-reign/

 

Our board have given some managers like Pearson/Walsh and Puel a bigger than normal say in transfers; by and large recruitmentwise it was successful. So why would Rodgers be any different. They let him bring Congerton with him; but all those signings backfired. Then the club tried to go back to what worked before - according to the Athletic Rodgers never wanted Soumare, the club did - but then that backfired too. 

 

Now we have a totally imbalanced squad. Ultimately, it all falls on Rudkin and Top as they are responsible. Rudkin is a DoF in name only as far as I'm concerned; he seems like a totally out of his depth yes man. Someone who rode the coattails of other people's good work and decisions; who has now been completely exposed. But to say Rodgers fingerprints aren't all over some of these signings when he and a player have publicly said otherwise seems strange - which is what I was originally addressing.

 

 

Because it’s correlating, it’s not evidential. These things are public knowledge,  but you are using non conclusive statements to draw a conclusion, but that’s only my opinion of course. The buck has to stop with the owners unless they offload that responsibility then fair enough, just not sure there has been conclusive evidence that this is the case

[Guest Col city fan]

2 hours ago, jayfox26 said:

They didn't back him in the last window because of the huge squad and wage bill we had created during his tenure. Squad full of players on high wages and we couldn't shift. The only thing I would say is, if they didn't want to back him, they should have sacked him last summer. Even without any new signings though, we still shouldn't be getting relegated and that is on Rodgers. He's failed to get the best out of the players he had. His antics at the start of the season were appalling. Blaming everyone from the board to the players to the fans, everyone but him. And again, this should have lead to him being sacked. In an ideal world, if he felt so hard done by, he should have resigned but we all know this is rare in the world of football as these over paid individuals always want their huge pay off. We certainly have more issues at this football club than just Rodgers but his negativity has turned many fans off and has demotivated and destroyed the confidence of the players to the point where its now irreparable and has lead to us being on the verge of relegation. 

My son brought up an interesting thought when we were talking bout this yesterday.

When Rodgers discovered that there was going to be no more money for transfers, did he lose interest? 
Rodgers thinks of himself as an ‘elite manager’. And with that status comes money to spend on improving/rebuilding a squad. I wonder whether he just became disinterested when it was clear we were in a financial mess?
It’s got mileage that, I think.

[Stadt]

5 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

Stipulated?  

 

Stop to tell…..

Oh asked for his incompetent mate to come too then if that’s better 

[jayfox26]

1 hour ago, Col city fan said:

My son brought up an interesting thought when we were talking bout this yesterday.

When Rodgers discovered that there was going to be no more money for transfers, did he lose interest? 
Rodgers thinks of himself as an ‘elite manager’. And with that status comes money to spend on improving/rebuilding a squad. I wonder whether he just became disinterested when it was clear we were in a financial mess?
It’s got mileage that, I think.

Judging by the way he conducted himself, it wouldn't surprise me. Which brings me back to one of my original points that if he had any decency, he would have resigned. If he didn't want to make the most of the squad he had and make the best of it, then he should have resigned. He wouldn't have got his payout but would have left with his head held high. He should be adored by our fans for 2 top 5 finishes and our first fa Cup but many (including me) can't stand him after the way he's just (from my view) given up this season.

[murphy]

On 10/05/2023 at 07:04, Mark_w said:

You don’t think Wes Fofana was a decent signing?

A terrible signing.  Not because he can't play but because of the way it has worked out. 

 

£40m spent.  After impressing, he gets injured at the start of last season, not his fault but causing us to buy Jannick Vestergaard.   That cost us £15m, several points and two sets of wages for two non-playing players.  We continue to pay for Jannick to sit on is arse to this day.

 

This season, Chelsea comes calling, Fofana repays the club's support by going on strike. He goes for £75 but we have to give 25% to St. Etienne and spend another £15m with a last minute purchase for  Wout Faes.   

 

I make it that we made £56.25m for Fofana after paying St. Etienne, but he cost us £70m including his two panic buy replacements and derailed our season twice.   He has cost us big time, and ultimately  having a large hand in our relegation.

Edited 12 May 2023 by murphy

[murphy]

On 10/05/2023 at 15:11, jayfox26 said:

They didn't back him in the last window because of the huge squad and wage bill we had created during his tenure. Squad full of players on high wages and we couldn't shift. The only thing I would say is, if they didn't want to back him, they should have sacked him last summer. Even without any new signings though, we still shouldn't be getting relegated and that is on Rodgers. He's failed to get the best out of the players he had. His antics at the start of the season were appalling. Blaming everyone from the board to the players to the fans, everyone but him. And again, this should have lead to him being sacked. In an ideal world, if he felt so hard done by, he should have resigned but we all know this is rare in the world of football as these over paid individuals always want their huge pay off. We certainly have more issues at this football club than just Rodgers but his negativity has turned many fans off and has demotivated and destroyed the confidence of the players to the point where its now irreparable and has lead to us being on the verge of relegation. 

It irritates me deeply that Rodgers has escaped the stain of relegation on his CV despite forcing it upon us.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if the Rodgers self-promotion machine frames it that we were only relegated because we sacked him.

 

 

Edited 12 May 2023 by murphy

[Mark_w]

1 hour ago, murphy said:

A terrible signing.  Not because he can't play but because of the way it has worked out. 

 

£40m spent.  After impressing, he gets injured at the start of last season, not his fault but causing us to buy Jannick Vestergaard.   That cost us £15m, several points and two sets of wages for two non-playing players.  We continue to pay for Jannick to sit on is arse to this day.

 

This season, Chelsea comes calling, Fofana repays the club's support by going on strike. He goes for £75 but we have to give 25% to St. Etienne and spend another £15m with a last minute purchase for  Wout Faes.   

 

I make it that we made £56.25m for Fofana after paying St. Etienne, but he cost us £70m including his two panic buy replacements and derailed our season twice.   He has cost us big time, and ultimately  having a large hand in our relegation.

We don’t win the FA Cup for the only time in our history without him. That alone made it worth it for me.

 

I don’t really think it’s reasonable to use Vestegaard and Faes’ fees in the costs column for Fofana, his injury didn’t force us into signing Vestegaard, we chose to get him in having been linked at least a couple of times before. And the club had a very good idea Fofana was going for a lot of the summer, they had plenty of time to identify their target to replace him.

 

Ultimately there’s an awful lot of decision making that got us here, and whilst Fofana is an absolute ****, it’s not his decisions that have gotten us into this mess. We could have played a goalkeeper in goal for most of the season. Fofana had a lot of time left on his contract, we could have kept him and he’d have had to have played eventually (and even half arsed he’d have massively improved our defence).

 

He was an excellent signing who helped to win us the FA Cup, progress in the ECL, stay up last season, and then was sold for a profit. The fact that we haven’t recruited that wisely with other additions doesn’t make Fofana a bad signing.

[murphy]

No injury to Fofana, no Vestergaard.   We simply wouldn't have needed him.

 

It's not Fofana's fault of course and not his fault that we chose to replace him with a cornerstone of the second worse defence in the league, but that is just how it worked out.

 

If you want to argue that his signing won us The FA Cup, then fine, that is a reasonable point although I have heard the same said to justify Perez as a good signing because of that ricochet, but let's not pretend that we made any kind of profit on Fofana after Puel's cut and we should also bear in mind that his behaviour might well be a large contributory factor to the mess that we are in now.

[gerblod]

On 10/05/2023 at 08:58, ParkerPen said:

perhaps we can interest Wolves in Amartey, Daniel ?

Perhaps we should have stuck in a bid for Traoré, Adama or a swap with benefits.

[StevieH]

I think finishing 8th, 5th and 5th in the last 3 seasons created an element of lethargy with regards to recruitment and they took their eye off the ball. No plan after losing Schmeichel, Fofana and Evans injured all season. We are just not good enough at the back with a lack of Premiership experience. In my view the only player who is anywhere near good enough at the back is Cags who has only just started playing. We can score but we just ship goals and I don't see that changing in the next 3 games

 

[The Doctor]

On 10/05/2023 at 13:40, Vestan Pance said:

Rodgers more say over signings as his stay went on, hence the appointment of Congerton and the signing of Vestergaard.

well yes, a manager will have input on signings, he'll say that these are the positions he wants filled, or suggest specific targets, but recruitment at any competently run club now is not under the sole control of the manager (who in reality nowadays is a head coach) but done by a recruitment panel headed up by the DoF, Congerton was Rodgers attempt to get more control on that panel but it will still signed off by the jumped up youth coach

Edited 12 May 2023 by The Doctor

[FoxyLeon]

On 10/05/2023 at 11:13, Finnegan said:

They're not Rodgers signings. 

 

They're Rudkin signings and even then they'll all have been picked out, evaluated watched and analysed by different scouts and data analysts under different heads of recruitment. 

 

I really wish we'd get over this absolute obsession with attributing responsibility for signings to managers. Rodgers job was managing the squad he was given, he did so poorly and was sacked. 

 

If that was true, then why did we hire Congerton, when Rudkin was already undertaking that role?

 

It's not true, and this Rudkin hate is getting out of hand. Rodgers was given the same backing/support as Pearson, meaning he was allowed to make adjustments to the Club as he saw fit. So he changed the medical staff that was excellent, to one that has given us nothing but problems.

How do I know Rudkin isn't identifyng targets? There is no correlation of our recruitment between Ranieri, Puel and Rodgers, despite Rudkin supposedly heading up a head of recruitment as you're suggesting. The key signings of Lookman and Bertrand further show that Rodgers had full charge, as well as Castagne and others who were on Congerton's list at Celtic. 

 

Rodgers's assistant was one he worked with at Celtic. The head of recruitment that arrived was one he worked with at Celtic. His signings were players he had worked with before or were identified at Celtic. Even the doctor we brought in, no doubt on Rodgers's guidance, was in Scotland when Rodgers was. Ever since Vichai/Top owned the Club, they've given full responsibility to the Manager. Hence Pearson brought Walsh as Head of Recruitment. 

 

Rodgers's job, as with every manager under this regime, involved free reigns of the Club. If Rudkin was doing what you say, why on earth would we employ Congerton?

[Sly]

On 10/05/2023 at 08:02, VintageFox73 said:

Yeah he was class but the less said about him the better  

Chelsea fans don’t think so 😂 

[sacreblueits442]

On 10/05/2023 at 12:24, Mee-9 said:

Wonder where we'd be if we had signed Lookman and kept Schmeichel. 

 

...I suspect if Schmeichel was still here, Rodgers would not be here!!!

Lookman I suspect would be something else.

[sacreblueits442]

4 hours ago, murphy said:

No injury to Fofana, no Vestergaard.   We simply wouldn't have needed him.

 

It's not Fofana's fault of course and not his fault that we chose to replace him with a cornerstone of the second worse defence in the league, but that is just how it worked out.

 

If you want to argue that his signing won us The FA Cup, then fine, that is a reasonable point although I have heard the same said to justify Perez as a good signing because of that ricochet, but let's not pretend that we made any kind of profit on Fofana after Puel's cut and we should also bear in mind that his behaviour might well be a large contributory factor to the mess that we are in now.

...I am sure we made a profit on Fofana, even with the sell-on fee we had to pay back to Saint Etienne!!!

[Finnegan]

2 hours ago, FoxyLeon said:

why did we hire Congerton, when Rudkin was already undertaking that role?

 

Rudkin is the Director of Football, Congerton was the Head of Recruitment - they aren't the same role. The Director of Football sits above the Head of Recruitment in the corporate hierarchy. 

 

[inckley fox]

On 10/05/2023 at 18:34, Col city fan said:

My son brought up an interesting thought when we were talking bout this yesterday.

When Rodgers discovered that there was going to be no more money for transfers, did he lose interest? 
Rodgers thinks of himself as an ‘elite manager’. And with that status comes money to spend on improving/rebuilding a squad. I wonder whether he just became disinterested when it was clear we were in a financial mess?
It’s got mileage that, I think.

Honestly Col, and I'm not saying that your lad isn't a good deal more perceptive than most City fans, but I just took that as a given!

[Gamble92]

10 hours ago, StevieH said:

I think finishing 8th, 5th and 5th in the last 3 seasons created an element of lethargy with regards to recruitment and they took their eye off the ball. No plan after losing Schmeichel, Fofana and Evans injured all season. We are just not good enough at the back with a lack of Premiership experience. In my view the only player who is anywhere near good enough at the back is Cags who has only just started playing. We can score but we just ship goals and I don't see that changing in the next 3 games

 

Lethargy maybe. Arrogance too

 

The conversation was almost definitely along the lines of "okay we can't spend because we aren't in Europe, but we can get away with it if we let the goalie go because there's a decent one as number 2, and the rest of the squad is easily top half"

 

Didn't equate for all the players with their heads turned looking for moves, the squad morale, the manager actively ruining them all either by boosting his own PR or sheer stubbornness. I could go on.

 

It's sickening to think if I'd had Rudkin's job for the last few years we'd be at least top 7. Not even bragging.

[Sly]

Tielemans is a Puel signing, for what it’s worth.

 

Fofana and Perez we’re good signings in my opinion. 
 

We can’t blame the Fofana injury, with us purchasing Vestergaard as bad business. Brendan Rodgers has chosen to play flappy McWard and bomb scare Amartey all season, rather than Iversen and Soyuncu. 
 

He’s then allowed Perez to go and we could have really done with his work rate these past few months, as Teté has been a disaster. 

[melvinmmelvin]

These need to be balanced against players we've lost...

[erlee]

Wout Faes has that un;lucky look everytime i see him on TV.. before/during/after match