|
Post by lordb on Apr 10, 2023 8:36:09 GMT
Wow. Something must be amiss because you'd think it would be an attractive job given their recent past. Money constraints? League position, it's April?
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 10, 2023 9:47:53 GMT
Leicester city football club haven't been able to replace key players like Kasper schmicheal , Robert huth and Jamie vardy with similar quality. But is this Brendan Rodgers fault? On an even bigger scale Chelsea have spent hundreds of millions messing up their recruitment but is that Graham potter's fault? The boards go to fall guy at any club is the manager. So no blame to be put on the boardroom then ! I am not convinced Brendan Rodgers and Graham potter are both poor football coaches. In the case of Rodgers yes, in the case of Potter no. Rodgers has been at Leicester for four seasons - he's the one who hasn't replaced those key players. In fact when he came in he brought in his own recruitment man who, as well as bringing in some good players, spent millions on some very average players. In the summer Leicester had no money to spend because of the over spending during Rodgers reign. Potter didn't even have 1 summer window to shape Chelsea the way he wanted it so definitely not his fault. Given Chelsea's staggering debt and massive under achieving squad it's hard to see how any manager can sort them out.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Apr 10, 2023 10:25:57 GMT
Wow. Something must be amiss because you'd think it would be an attractive job given their recent past. Money constraints? I imagine he’s happy to take a break with his severance pay rather than trying to save Leicester from relegation. I know I would be. He’ll get something in time for next season for sure
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Apr 10, 2023 10:48:39 GMT
Leicester city football club haven't been able to replace key players like Kasper schmicheal , Robert huth and Jamie vardy with similar quality. But is this Brendan Rodgers fault? On an even bigger scale Chelsea have spent hundreds of millions messing up their recruitment but is that Graham potter's fault? The boards go to fall guy at any club is the manager. So no blame to be put on the boardroom then ! I am not convinced Brendan Rodgers and Graham potter are both poor football coaches. In the case of Rodgers yes, in the case of Potter no. Rodgers has been at Leicester for four seasons - he's the one who hasn't replaced those key players. In fact when he came in he brought in his own recruitment man who, as well as bringing in some good players, spent millions on some very average players. In the summer Leicester had no money to spend because of the over spending during Rodgers reign. Potter didn't even have 1 summer window to shape Chelsea the way he wanted it so definitely not his fault. Given Chelsea's staggering debt and massive under achieving squad it's hard to see how any manager can sort them out. Rodgers isn’t a bad manager, he’s a good one who wasn’t moved on soon enough, like Hughes with us.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Apr 10, 2023 11:07:31 GMT
Football is a team game and the manager's role is just another part of that team.
The manager has to fit the club, squad of players, support staff etc.
A prime example is Jones who fits Luton well but not Stoke or Southampton.
One problem managers face today is the huge contracts players are on that can make them unmanageable; they become a law unto themselves, as we have seen with some of the characters Hughes signed for Stoke. Ferguson was very successful at ManU because of many factors but most importantly a player was removed/sold as soon as they showed any sign of being "too big for their boots" and posed any threat to who was in charge. Ferguson only wanted dedicated professionals who put the club first.
Many managers today seem to walk into an impossible situation, which I think existed at the end of Hughes tenure and prompted the remark about "who will take this on?"
Then there is the time factor. A manager needs time beyond the "new manager bounce" to get his ideas formulated and across to all the staff and implemented, but after 6 months in the job if there is no sign of a significant improvement then it is probably not going to happen. Even if an improvement occurs, success does not automatically follow. One reason is after a certain length of time, varying from individual to individual as we see on this MB, the staff starts to lose belief in the manager bringing success.
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on Apr 10, 2023 11:07:38 GMT
In the case of Rodgers yes, in the case of Potter no. Rodgers has been at Leicester for four seasons - he's the one who hasn't replaced those key players. In fact when he came in he brought in his own recruitment man who, as well as bringing in some good players, spent millions on some very average players. In the summer Leicester had no money to spend because of the over spending during Rodgers reign. Potter didn't even have 1 summer window to shape Chelsea the way he wanted it so definitely not his fault. Given Chelsea's staggering debt and massive under achieving squad it's hard to see how any manager can sort them out. Rodgers isn’t a bad manager, he’s a good one who wasn’t moved on soon enough, like Hughes with us. Good managers don't get moved on. You should be trying to keep them, not getting rid.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Apr 10, 2023 11:33:52 GMT
Football is a team game and the manager's role is just another part of that team. The manager has to fit the club, squad of players, support staff etc. A prime example is Jones who fits Luton well but not Stoke or Southampton. One problem managers face today is the huge contracts players are on that can make them unmanageable; they become a law unto themselves, as we have seen with some of the characters Hughes signed for Stoke. Ferguson was very successful at ManU because of many factors but most importantly a player was removed/sold as soon as they showed any sign of being "too big for their boots" and posed any threat to who was in charge. Ferguson only wanted dedicated professionals who put the club first. Many managers today seem to walk into an impossible situation, which I think existed at the end of Hughes tenure and prompted the remark about " who will take this on?"
Then there is the time factor. A manager needs time beyond the "new manager bounce" to get his ideas formulated and across to all the staff and implemented, but after 6 months in the job if there is no sign of a significant improvement then it is probably not going to happen. Even if an improvement occurs, success does not automatically follow. One reason is after a certain length of time, varying from individual to individual as we see on this MB, the staff starts to lose belief in the manager bringing success. Hughes’ ‘who else is going to do it’ comment was King Lear late stage hubris and denial on his part, it wasn’t an allusion to shadowy forces making the job impossible.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Apr 10, 2023 11:34:58 GMT
Rodgers isn’t a bad manager, he’s a good one who wasn’t moved on soon enough, like Hughes with us. Good managers don't get moved on. You should be trying to keep them, not getting rid. They do in the end. Even good managers have a shelf life in any one place. The days of the managerial dynasty are over.
|
|
|
Post by datguy on Apr 10, 2023 11:38:36 GMT
Speaking of Sparky!
Got Bradford four points off automatic promotion with a game in hand. Best of luck to him. Just don't give him an open cheque book in League 1.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 10, 2023 12:06:57 GMT
The interims are definitely getting weirder. Who next?
Sooty and Sweep in at Forest?
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Apr 10, 2023 12:09:12 GMT
Scattergun.
|
|
|
Post by apb1979 on Apr 10, 2023 12:12:39 GMT
It’s a shootout between the two main journalists . Ornstein v Romano who will be right
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Apr 10, 2023 12:20:43 GMT
Football is a team game and the manager's role is just another part of that team. The manager has to fit the club, squad of players, support staff etc. A prime example is Jones who fits Luton well but not Stoke or Southampton. One problem managers face today is the huge contracts players are on that can make them unmanageable; they become a law unto themselves, as we have seen with some of the characters Hughes signed for Stoke. Ferguson was very successful at ManU because of many factors but most importantly a player was removed/sold as soon as they showed any sign of being "too big for their boots" and posed any threat to who was in charge. Ferguson only wanted dedicated professionals who put the club first. Many managers today seem to walk into an impossible situation, which I think existed at the end of Hughes tenure and prompted the remark about " who will take this on?"
Then there is the time factor. A manager needs time beyond the "new manager bounce" to get his ideas formulated and across to all the staff and implemented, but after 6 months in the job if there is no sign of a significant improvement then it is probably not going to happen. Even if an improvement occurs, success does not automatically follow. One reason is after a certain length of time, varying from individual to individual as we see on this MB, the staff starts to lose belief in the manager bringing success. One thing to consider when comparing Hughes situation at Stoke and Ferguson at Man Utd, is that Fergie had huge resources to move a player on quickly if they didn't tow the line and he did many times, but he was always able to replace them if need be. Hughes didn't have that luxury, once he had signed players who were disruptive, he couldn't just get rid and replace them at the click of a finger, he had to make the best of it. to what extent that was his doing or the players will probably never be fully established.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Apr 10, 2023 12:22:58 GMT
Marsch has unexpectedly turned it down, so they're onto the D-list uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/jesse-marsch-turns-down-leicester-195155843.htmlOne possible option is former Aston Villa manager Dean Smith, most recently at Norwich City, who could yet be appointed – perhaps with former Leicester manager Craig Shakespeare as his assistant. Also mentioned in the process have been Rafael Benitez, and Martin O’Neill, one of the greatest coaches in the club’s history. I find it incredible that they didn't have someone lined up, what were they thinking?
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on Apr 10, 2023 12:48:34 GMT
Marsch has unexpectedly turned it down, so they're onto the D-list uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/jesse-marsch-turns-down-leicester-195155843.htmlOne possible option is former Aston Villa manager Dean Smith, most recently at Norwich City, who could yet be appointed – perhaps with former Leicester manager Craig Shakespeare as his assistant. Also mentioned in the process have been Rafael Benitez, and Martin O’Neill, one of the greatest coaches in the club’s history. I find it incredible that they didn't have someone lined up, what were they thinking? It’s just basic common sense. These days, all clubs should have a replacement lined up even when things are going well!
|
|
|
Post by Vadiation_Ribe on Apr 10, 2023 12:48:41 GMT
Football is a team game and the manager's role is just another part of that team. The manager has to fit the club, squad of players, support staff etc. A prime example is Jones who fits Luton well but not Stoke or Southampton. One problem managers face today is the huge contracts players are on that can make them unmanageable; they become a law unto themselves, as we have seen with some of the characters Hughes signed for Stoke. Ferguson was very successful at ManU because of many factors but most importantly a player was removed/sold as soon as they showed any sign of being "too big for their boots" and posed any threat to who was in charge. Ferguson only wanted dedicated professionals who put the club first. Many managers today seem to walk into an impossible situation, which I think existed at the end of Hughes tenure and prompted the remark about " who will take this on?"
Then there is the time factor. A manager needs time beyond the "new manager bounce" to get his ideas formulated and across to all the staff and implemented, but after 6 months in the job if there is no sign of a significant improvement then it is probably not going to happen. Even if an improvement occurs, success does not automatically follow. One reason is after a certain length of time, varying from individual to individual as we see on this MB, the staff starts to lose belief in the manager bringing success. One thing to consider when comparing Hughes situation at Stoke and Ferguson at Man Utd, is that Fergie had huge resources to move a player on quickly if they didn't tow the line and he did many times, but he was always able to replace them if need be. Hughes didn't have that luxury, once he had signed players who were disruptive, he couldn't just get rid and replace them at the click of a finger, he had to make the best of it. to what extent that was his doing or the players will probably never be fully established. There were too many expensive gambles under Hughes. If Arnautovic, Bojan, and Affelay didn't work out, it wouldn't have had such a huge negative impact as Imbula, Wimmer, and Berahino...
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Apr 10, 2023 13:21:47 GMT
Leicester's managerial approach has Stoke 2017 written all over it
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Apr 10, 2023 15:47:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 10, 2023 17:12:26 GMT
In the case of Rodgers yes, in the case of Potter no. Rodgers has been at Leicester for four seasons - he's the one who hasn't replaced those key players. In fact when he came in he brought in his own recruitment man who, as well as bringing in some good players, spent millions on some very average players. In the summer Leicester had no money to spend because of the over spending during Rodgers reign. Potter didn't even have 1 summer window to shape Chelsea the way he wanted it so definitely not his fault. Given Chelsea's staggering debt and massive under achieving squad it's hard to see how any manager can sort them out. Rodgers isn’t a bad manager, he’s a good one who wasn’t moved on soon enough, like Hughes with us. I agree he's a good manager but the poster I was replying to said that neither were responsible for the players at the club. Rodgers was and Potter wasn't - Rodgers has been there some time and spent a fortune through his own man in charge of recruitment. I agree they should have moved him on a lot earlier than they did - it looked like a stupid Mexican standoff between Rodger and the owners over compensation.
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Apr 11, 2023 7:01:29 GMT
I like Dean Smith but that smacks very much like what we did when we replaced Hughes with Lambert...
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Apr 11, 2023 13:57:28 GMT
Preparing for the Championship
|
|
|
Post by datguy on Apr 11, 2023 14:22:29 GMT
Dean Smith kept them up in the 19/20 season because goal line tech stopped working and a clear goal wasn’t given …
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Apr 11, 2023 16:53:39 GMT
I find it incredible that they didn't have someone lined up, what were they thinking? It’s just basic common sense. These days, all clubs should have a replacement lined up even when things are going well! Succession planning! Sadly, this and common sense are both as rare as hen's teeth in football
|
|
|
Post by logdog on Apr 13, 2023 6:18:12 GMT
Never been convinced by Rodgers, always been lucky enough to land jobs where clubs have been on the up. Be interesting to see how he would do taking over at a struggling team in decline. Not sure he would ever sign up for this. Doesn’t count as a ‘project’…
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 13, 2023 7:07:09 GMT
Never been convinced by Rodgers, always been lucky enough to land jobs where clubs have been on the up. Be interesting to see how he would do taking over at a struggling team in decline. Not sure he would ever sign up for this. Doesn’t count as a ‘project’… Leicester weren't on the up when he took over - since their Premiership winning season they'd declined to mid table also rans under successive managers. Rodgers turned them back into Champions League contenders. Liverpool had been going nowhere for years until Rodgers improved them. It was Klopp who inherited a team on the up. He took over at Celtic when they were the one horse in a two horse race. They weren't on the up - they were already there and had no where else to go. There's something unlikeable about Rodgers and his time had run out at Leicester and he should have been replaced last summer but that doesn't mean he isn't a good manager.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Apr 13, 2023 7:29:41 GMT
Never been convinced by Rodgers, always been lucky enough to land jobs where clubs have been on the up. Be interesting to see how he would do taking over at a struggling team in decline. Not sure he would ever sign up for this. Doesn’t count as a ‘project’… Leicester weren't on the up when he took over - since their Premiership winning season they'd declined to mid table also rans under successive managers. Rodgers turned them back into Champions League contenders. Liverpool had been going nowhere for years until Rodgers improved them. It was Klopp who inherited a team on the up. He took over at Celtic when they were the one horse in a two horse race. They weren't on the up - they were already there and had no where else to go. There's something unlikeable about Rodgers and his time had run out at Leicester and he should have been replaced last summer but that doesn't mean he isn't a good manager. That’s fair comment. Not sure what about Rodgers you find unlikeable but there’s others on here who share that view so there must be something about him that rubs certain types up the wrong way. Personally think he’s far more likeable than AN or any number of our previous managers but then likeability isn’t a quality I value too highly in a football manager. Goals scored is top of my list and AN is doing ok on that metric this year.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 13, 2023 8:35:03 GMT
Leicester weren't on the up when he took over - since their Premiership winning season they'd declined to mid table also rans under successive managers. Rodgers turned them back into Champions League contenders. Liverpool had been going nowhere for years until Rodgers improved them. It was Klopp who inherited a team on the up. He took over at Celtic when they were the one horse in a two horse race. They weren't on the up - they were already there and had no where else to go. There's something unlikeable about Rodgers and his time had run out at Leicester and he should have been replaced last summer but that doesn't mean he isn't a good manager. That’s fair comment. Not sure what about Rodgers you find unlikeable but there’s others on here who share that view so there must be something about him that rubs certain types up the wrong way. Personally think he’s far more likeable than AN or any number of our previous managers but then likeability isn’t a quality I value too highly in a football manager. Goals scored is top of my list and AN is doing ok on that metric this year. His narcissist personality is unlikeable, he's very much a drone. From a purely football aspect I don't like how his sides end up being a soft touch Cracking manager for a year or two but after that he should be moved on
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 13, 2023 9:14:50 GMT
Leicester weren't on the up when he took over - since their Premiership winning season they'd declined to mid table also rans under successive managers. Rodgers turned them back into Champions League contenders. Liverpool had been going nowhere for years until Rodgers improved them. It was Klopp who inherited a team on the up. He took over at Celtic when they were the one horse in a two horse race. They weren't on the up - they were already there and had no where else to go. There's something unlikeable about Rodgers and his time had run out at Leicester and he should have been replaced last summer but that doesn't mean he isn't a good manager. That’s fair comment. Not sure what about Rodgers you find unlikeable but there’s others on here who share that view so there must be something about him that rubs certain types up the wrong way. Personally think he’s far more likeable than AN or any number of our previous managers but then likeability isn’t a quality I value too highly in a football manager. Goals scored is top of my list and AN is doing ok on that metric this year. With Rodgers it's all about him - I don't particularly like egotists. However I agree likeability shouldn't be a big deal in terms of rating a manager - I don't particularly like Rodgers but I do think he's a good manager. I do like and rate Neil. He doesn't look like he'll take any shit but it's all about the team, not him. He's also a pragmatist - I don't think he's that bothered about how many we score as long as we win. Which is how you get promoted.
|
|
|
Post by logdog on Apr 13, 2023 11:18:46 GMT
Never been convinced by Rodgers, always been lucky enough to land jobs where clubs have been on the up. Be interesting to see how he would do taking over at a struggling team in decline. Not sure he would ever sign up for this. Doesn’t count as a ‘project’… Leicester weren't on the up when he took over - since their Premiership winning season they'd declined to mid table also rans under successive managers. Rodgers turned them back into Champions League contenders. Liverpool had been going nowhere for years until Rodgers improved them. It was Klopp who inherited a team on the up. He took over at Celtic when they were the one horse in a two horse race. They weren't on the up - they were already there and had no where else to go. There's something unlikeable about Rodgers and his time had run out at Leicester and he should have been replaced last summer but that doesn't mean he isn't a good manager. Martinez had gotten Swansea promoted and put together a good team before Rodgers got that gig. Liverpool had won one cup & lost in the final of another under Dalglish, the season previous to him taking over. Finished eighth - no great shakes but not exactly ‘going nowhere.’ Celtic? That’s the equivalent of a boxer fighting bums to pad out his win record. Leicester had won the league and then finished ninth twice before he got the job. He has spent plenty of money along the way. I’ll be convinced when he turns around a team in turmoil, with no money & battling relegation. I also see he’s been linked with the Spurs job today. I reckon I know how that one would end…🙂
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Apr 13, 2023 11:32:42 GMT
Leicester weren't on the up when he took over - since their Premiership winning season they'd declined to mid table also rans under successive managers. Rodgers turned them back into Champions League contenders. Liverpool had been going nowhere for years until Rodgers improved them. It was Klopp who inherited a team on the up. He took over at Celtic when they were the one horse in a two horse race. They weren't on the up - they were already there and had no where else to go. There's something unlikeable about Rodgers and his time had run out at Leicester and he should have been replaced last summer but that doesn't mean he isn't a good manager. Martinez had gotten Swansea promoted and put together a good team before Rodgers got that gig. Liverpool had won one cup & lost in the final of another under Dalglish, the season previous to him taking over. Finished eighth - no great shakes but not exactly ‘going nowhere.’ Celtic? That’s the equivalent of a boxer fighting bums to pad out his win record. Leicester had won the league and then finished ninth twice before he got the job. He has spent plenty of money along the way. I’ll be convinced when he turns around a team in turmoil, with no money & battling relegation. I also see he’s been linked with the Spurs job today. I reckon I know how that one would end…🙂 It was Rodgers who got Swansea promoted to the Premier League. He took over a Liverpool team that finished 8th and led them to their first genuinely serious title challenge for a quarter of a century. He finished 5th twice with Leicester after they'd finished 9th the two seasons season prior and 12th the year before that, having them in the mix for the Champions League and winning the cup. He has his flaws and when it goes wrong it goes spectacularly wrong, but he's a good manager.
|
|