The Rodgers effect on players

[Nalis]

Yes another BR thread. 

 

I see posts all the time about how a player was brilliant and now he's shit all thanks to Rodgers.

 

I do feel that while its true in some circumstances, I dont think its the case for everyone in the squad as some players receive this claim as an easy and convenient excuse of why they arent good enough anymore.

 

Do we decide which players fall into each category, or will the answer be at the end of the season with a year under new management?

[CosbehFox]

Btw (and I'll get pelters for this) I don't think it's the Rodgers effect. I think its the effect when you have a manager in situ for a continued period - football managers have a cycle of 3 to 4 years. 

[st albans fox]

Just now, CosbehFox said:

Btw (and I'll get pelters for this) I don't think it's the Rodgers effect. I think its the effect when you have a manager in situ for a continued period - football managers have a cycle of 3 to 4 years. 

Or you effectively change the squad over a five to six year period (which the rich clubs can do) 

[Ric Flair]

1 minute ago, CosbehFox said:

Btw (and I'll get pelters for this) I don't think it's the Rodgers effect. I think its the effect when you have a manager in situ for a continued period - football managers have a cycle of 3 to 4 years. 

Yup and ceetain managers have a much shorter shelf life. 

[Finnegan]

For me, I'm happy to draw a line in the sand and freshly judge everyone we've only ever seen play for Rodgers once they've had time to get used to Enzo. 

 

As has been pointed out earlier, that includes the like of Thomas who are our own products. 

 

I think confidence and motivation are absolutely enormous factors in how a player performs, we could see a completely new Soumaré, Daka or Faes under Maresca. All of them were extremely promising before they came here, all of them had pretty impressive early games and then all of them just slowly deteriorated. 

 

Maybe they'll never thrive in this country or this club, who knows. But I definitely don't feel comfortable judging them based entirely on the last year or two. 

[CosbehFox]

Just now, st albans fox said:

Or you effectively change the squad over a five to six year period (which the rich clubs can do) 

Yep, have the ability to successfully turnover players. Especially when you have the ability to bridge the wage gap easily enough (when players leave to a lesser wage but with two to three years left on their deal) to get a player away from your squad. 

[Fox92]

27 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Or you effectively change the squad over a five to six year period (which the rich clubs can do) 

 

I saw an interview with Pep and he put down part of his sucess is buying and selling players. Rio Ferdinand was interviewing, for BT Sport, and Pep threw the question back and asked Rio how many times did Fergie change the Man Utd squad despite them winning trophies. The answer was a lot, as we all know.

 

It's tough to do when you're not a big club with big resources, like both Manchester clubs, but I do think our players got comfy and went stale.

[Pliskin]

It’s all about adaptability, Pep gets away with it at city because they can afford to get rid of players who don’t buy into the philosophy and replace them. But what I do think he has a skill at is getting everyone on board. Even if you’ve got wads of cash it still takes a skilled coach to get the best out of them consistently. 
 

In Brendan’s case, I think he ran out of care before he ran out of ideas. If the passion goes you’ve no chance, and the players will read into that and just give in. 
 

If Enzo can bring a shred of that confidence with him from city, he should get the players onside. He seems to be doing a good job of it so far, he comes across as having a presence about him, the type of chap who when he walks onto a room he commands it. Much like his mentor Pep.

 

Although the training videos don’t give much away, I think you can see a bit more focus on the players faces, it’s clear Enzo has them thinking in the sessions which is good. 
 

I just hope and pray we don’t neglect the fitness though….. you have to be as close to peak as you can be in the championship from day one. 

[Chelmofox]

I might be particularly grumpy, but i think we need to move on from any 'Rodgers' thinking pretty quickly.  I no longer care of Rodger ruined Ndidi, or knocked Daka's confidence off a cliff.  The club need to decide now who to keep based on their current ability and their potential upside.  If someone just isn't good enough, even as a squad player we need to move on as quickly as possible. Enzo needs to look at Daka and if he thinks he can do the job then he goes all in trying to raise his game. If not, ship him off to Turkey.  This goes for all the supposed favourites, including Nacho, Kevin, KDH etc. 

[David Hankey]

What is the point of this thread? BR has gone, many of the players have or are moving on.

 

Let's look forward for God's sake!!

[gw_leics772]

15 minutes ago, David Hankey said:

What is the point of this thread? BR has gone, many of the players have or are moving on.

 

Let's look forward for God's sake!!

People read it, some respond, conversation innit.

 

Different people like different things.

[The Year Of The Fox]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

Btw (and I'll get pelters for this) I don't think it's the Rodgers effect. I think its the effect when you have a manager in situ for a continued period - football managers have a cycle of 3 to 4 years. 

All the more reason to have changed the manager almost 2 years ago, because, if nothing else, it was cheaper to replace a manager with a £20m pay off, than keep the manager and fund him with more than that to sign more players who could end up being the same quality as the other players he signed.

[davieG]

Unlike the Super 6 a club like LCFC can only manage to change a squad if the players coming in are good enough replacements we simply cannot afford to get it wrong, unfortunately ours for whatever reason were mostly ineffective.

[davieG]

33 minutes ago, David Hankey said:

What is the point of this thread? BR has gone, many of the players have or are moving on.

 

Let's look forward for God's sake!!

Because we still have plenty of players on long contract who haven't lived up to their previous quality,

Why is that?

We have to hope that there is some underlying reason and Maresca can bring out the best in them so they become valued members of the team rather than the jokers.

[VLC86]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

Btw (and I'll get pelters for this) I don't think it's the Rodgers effect. I think its the effect when you have a manager in situ for a continued period - football managers have a cycle of 3 to 4 years. 

It’s a bit of both and as others have said some have a shorter shelf life. Brendan speaks so well and draws people in but I think over time they saw through his bullshit which led to where we ended up. As well as many other factors that I can’t be arsed to repeat.

[indierich06]

The problem with Rodgers, as I saw it, was that he took his frustration with perceived 'lack of backing' and went out to the press every game of the season, telling them that our current crop of players weren't good enough, they desperately needed reinforcements - and that became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

On paper, that squad should have avoided relegation and arguably should have finished higher - but you could see the confidence had just gone through the floor. If you someone's telling you, day in and day out, that you're not good enough, you're going to start to believe it.

[st albans fox]

Rodgers had plenty of good ideas - eg - have a look at how he tried to use the full backs ahead of season 21/22. The pre season game where wes got his injury showed that we were capable of mixing it with the best on tactical approach and implementing new ideas in the game. But we didn’t have the depth to cope with wes’s injury - he was crucial to us playing that way.  And the players soon became disillusioned with the coach when it became obvious that we didn’t have the players to implement the game plan.  And the rest is history….

[Dan]

We went to pot under Rodgers because he's frequently shown himself to be really bad at buying players who fit his desired style of play. I just cannot fathom this obsession he seemed to have with buying players more suited to Dyche ball like Bennett and Vestergaard.

[Le Renard]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

Btw (and I'll get pelters for this) I don't think it's the Rodgers effect. I think its the effect when you have a manager in situ for a continued period - football managers have a cycle of 3 to 4 years. 

Or some players have a cycle for 3 or 4 years, Ferguson was a master at refreshing parts of the squad if you look at Man U's forward line during his time, it was usually changed every 3 years. I don't think there was the same forward line for more than 3 years in a row. 

 

[Dan]

2 hours ago, Finnegan said:

For me, I'm happy to draw a line in the sand and freshly judge everyone we've only ever seen play for Rodgers once they've had time to get used to Enzo. 

 

As has been pointed out earlier, that includes the like of Thomas who are our own products. 

 

I think confidence and motivation are absolutely enormous factors in how a player performs, we could see a completely new Soumaré, Daka or Faes under Maresca. All of them were extremely promising before they came here, all of them had pretty impressive early games and then all of them just slowly deteriorated. 

 

Maybe they'll never thrive in this country or this club, who knows. But I definitely don't feel comfortable judging them based entirely on the last year or two. 

I'd probably add Dewsbury-Hall into this as well as he's only ever been involved with a declining Leicester side.

[Finnegan]

10 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

I'd probably add Dewsbury-Hall into this as well as he's only ever been involved with a declining Leicester side.

 

True but he's also, IMO, done enough in his career to demonstrate quality and competence at Championship level at least. 

[CosbehFox]

41 minutes ago, Le Renard said:

Or some players have a cycle for 3 or 4 years, Ferguson was a master at refreshing parts of the squad if you look at Man U's forward line during his time, it was usually changed every 3 years. I don't think there was the same forward line for more than 3 years in a row. 

 

But as St Albans said that requires significant money ; which outside of the big clubs most don't have. 

[nahuelfox203]

 

Honestly, I didn't see him direct Rouger much. We hope that this maresca is up to the task and reinforces the potions that he needs to reinforce. In my opinion, the midfield would be one of them.

[Stadt]

3 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

Btw (and I'll get pelters for this) I don't think it's the Rodgers effect. I think its the effect when you have a manager in situ for a continued period - football managers have a cycle of 3 to 4 years. 

Longer if they're not so dogmatic and willing to change their methods, Rodgers isn't. Things go stale but bit Rodgers exacerbates this issue because his influence only grows as his clubs get worse.

[ARM1968]

Think he had a negative impact on some. A slightly positive effect on a few. I think it was more his personality and demeanour that affected more negatively. 
 

He’s gone now, so let’s move on and see who remains and how they perform under someone who appears to have both steel, a vision and a fair approach.