Suarez was a huge part of their success but he got banned a LOT. Wasn't their record still pretty fantastic during the many games he missed?
Brendan Rodgers - a re-evaluation?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
...and can't set up a defence.
I always thought he was let go too quickly. His brand of football was genuinely very good and i think he'll end up at a top club again one day.
Another thing, when i look at the England squad with a lot of young Spurs and Liverpool players in there, i can't help but think he'd do a good job for England. Obviously he's not English but i think his style of play would suit the current crop. I think there is enough talent in the England team which just needs a style imprinting on it which will bring the best out of the players. I'm not saying they're good enough to win anything but i don't think we'd embarrass ourselves as much.
Another thing, when i look at the England squad with a lot of young Spurs and Liverpool players in there, i can't help but think he'd do a good job for England. Obviously he's not English but i think his style of play would suit the current crop. I think there is enough talent in the England team which just needs a style imprinting on it which will bring the best out of the players. I'm not saying they're good enough to win anything but i don't think we'd embarrass ourselves as much.
He's a good manager and I think people were far too critical of him post Suarez. A team of Liverpools standard is always going to drop off when one of the world's best footballers leaves them. Overall he did a really good job there. At times they played cracking football and I thought he probably should have gotten more time. If he's can show that his sides can defend, I still think he's got a top level/ near top level job in him.
Then again Klopp has achieved much more and they had to move for him.
Then again Klopp has achieved much more and they had to move for him.
Agree. I think he's a worth a gamble from one of the teams looking to challenge the top 4 in the future when there is a new opening. It'll be up to him to prove he can build a quality defence but his footballing system is very progressive.
I am sorry but that seems the go to criticism for every manager nowadays. Anybody who doesn't play a deep defensive line and fills his defence with war horse defenders à la Terry or Gódin is going to get called that the moment his team concedes goals. The line between defence and attack is getting more and more blurred with the two being connected more than ever. You simply can't play a high line and commit as many men forward as his Liverpool Suarez led team did without sacrificing some solidity at the back. I mean even Barcelona look vulnerable when their attacking game is not functioning well!
Yes but...the clothes...*
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/brendan-ambassador-of-football.411399/page-3
*See pix for details.
His own worst enemy, sometimes, as far as public perceptions go, but a very good manager. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him managing a top club in one of the big leagues again and doing well.
Old Barcelona didn't. They just passed the ball round and round until the opposition forwards collapsed.
What about Spurs? They might not have great quality in attack but they're a fairly attacking team who very rarely concede.
He was extremely hard done by and what has changed since Klopp's come in? Rodgers would have attracted the same players that Klopp has signed. Its not like he signed Ibra and Pogba is it?
Liverpool were desperate for a "big" manager but the reality is, things are not that different.
Liverpool were desperate for a "big" manager but the reality is, things are not that different.
Just checked. During Suarez' 10 match ban their record was W7 D2 L1. Unbeaten for 9 consecutive games.
Last edited:
I do rate him as a "coach" - he has a clear vision and gets his teams playing stylish football. He improves young players and integrates them well into the first team. He also seems to appreciate learning from others which is commendable. Basically all the things Pochettino gets lauded for [fairly] but because Rodgers was at Liverpool no one would want to say it.
His problems aren't to do with what he does on the training ground. I'm pretty sure he went from a youth coach to Liverpool manager in 5 years. That probably explains why he is good with young players and struggled with bigger names and big egos. It's a massive rise and one he almost succeeded but it was in hindsight to big a rise. Someone said above he was a victim of his own success and I can't deny. That 2014 season raised expectations greatly when with hindsight we know it was the exception to the norm.
His problems aren't to do with what he does on the training ground. I'm pretty sure he went from a youth coach to Liverpool manager in 5 years. That probably explains why he is good with young players and struggled with bigger names and big egos. It's a massive rise and one he almost succeeded but it was in hindsight to big a rise. Someone said above he was a victim of his own success and I can't deny. That 2014 season raised expectations greatly when with hindsight we know it was the exception to the norm.
It might not be saying much but he is still the best British manager right now. I was surprised he went to Celtic when inferior managers keep getting one PL job after another.
He is mid table manager at best,his statement how defending is easy or something like that,while his Liverpool team was conceding every season 50+... a clown.
That run was split between two seasons. I think four games were during 12/13 and the other six were in 13/14.
I don't rate him, sorry but I just don't. In 13/14 we scored one more goal than Liverpool and conceded 13 less. It's not our fault they bottled under our pressure, but we certainly applied it. Luis Suarez was the absolute man for them that year and he carried them into that challenge, not Rodgers.
As for Celtic, come on, anyone could win that league with Celtic. It's like having a Championship level team in the Conference.
As for Celtic, come on, anyone could win that league with Celtic. It's like having a Championship level team in the Conference.
Whether the old Barcelona did or didn't is disputable I think but even if they didn't, it was because they were better at keeping possession and not at "setting up a defence" which is my argument. If one team wants to play a high defensive line in the modern game and attempt to be pro active and control the game, their best defensive strategy is to press and keep possession. This means that traditional defensive set-up counter productive and not a measure to judge a manager by really. Funny that you mention Pochettino's Spurs as I do consider him the best performer in terms of coaches in English football over the past two years. I think his Spurs team are the best coached team in the country and one of the reasons is his ability to strike a higher balance than most in that regard. If Rogers is behind someone like Pochettino is therefore no great criticism for me at least.
I'd say that Rodgers is a very good coach, not a very good manager i.e. very good at focusing on the technical aspect of things but lacks the necessary abilities to lead a team. I think his motivational weaknesses were his downfall at Liverpool as he just wasn't a strong enough leader to steer them away from mediocrity at the start of the '15/'16 season. That being said, he has shown himself to be very adept at nurturing talent; I haven't watched Celtic much this season but when I saw them away to Rangers on New Year's Eve, I was impressed at how fluid their passing was.
Good thread @Pogue Mahone
I find myself torn with Brendan being both a man utd and Celtic fan. Loved nothing more than laughing at him during his Liverpool tenure but now find myself backing him as one hell of a manager.
I find myself torn with Brendan being both a man utd and Celtic fan. Loved nothing more than laughing at him during his Liverpool tenure but now find myself backing him as one hell of a manager.
Brendan actually needed that little bit of humility knocked into him after getting a bit carried away after that 2nd place finish with Liverpool but I'm glad he is finding success with Celtic. His ability to organize a team defensively is not yet the same caliber as some truly great managers but his teams do play some attractive attacking football.
I don't remember him being banned during that season. Could be wrong.
One of the basics of setting up a defence is defending set pieces. Old Barcelona were stacked full of midgets yet still very good at it. Brendan's teams generally aren't full of midgets and aren't good at it. That's the difference in defensive organisation.
Better than Klopp and he's done an excellent job at Celtic. Brining in Dembele was just class business and Sinclair has been a major hit too. Delia was just terrible, though.
I am sorry I just disagree that Barcelona were strong at defending set pieces. I remember this being the go to tactic of everyone playing them from Chelsea to Bayern. Everyone spoke about exploiting their lack of heigh. In fact, you will find how a lot of journalists and ex players bemoaning the days when set pieces were defended properly.
While it is a shit league only drawing 1 game and winning the rest is a good achievement. Also he was unlucky with the CL group both Barca and city(draw twice).
Overall he is a very good manager but let it go to his head a bit. Would like to see him take over a team like Southampton and see how he would get on.
Overall he is a very good manager but let it go to his head a bit. Would like to see him take over a team like Southampton and see how he would get on.
He got too much stick for his last year with Liverpool and too much praise for the season were they finished second. The latter hat mostly to do with Suarez and a prime Sturridge (maybe Gerrard's last decent year as well) and after that he had them playing on the level you expect this squad to play.
Absolutely agree, can't listen to him at all.
Always been a good coach and proved it at Liverpool. What is in doubt is his managerial ability at the top level. By that I mean his media work being awfully cringeworthy (invites pressure I thought) and his man management at times (especially post Suarez) was quite poor I thought.
I'd expect him to be back in the PL after winning some trophies with Celtic. I remember strong City links during the 2013/14 season.
I'd expect him to be back in the PL after winning some trophies with Celtic. I remember strong City links during the 2013/14 season.
He's a talented manager, he did a good job at Swansea and I definitely wanted him to stay.
He has a strong belief in how he wants his teams to play, he ruins it by being a caricature of himself.
He has a strong belief in how he wants his teams to play, he ruins it by being a caricature of himself.
People need to remember that Suarez played pretty much a season and a half under Kenny Dalglish - a man who has 4 league titles as a manager on his c.v - & he never got anywhere near as much out of the lad as Rodgers did. It's certainly a bit misguided to say everything Brendan achieved was solely down to one man. He built a great attacking side that got us closer to the PL than anytime in a quarter of a century. He took a lot of flak from certain Liverpool supporters during the final few months of his Anfield tenure. I said to one lad who wanted him gone that it will take a change of manager at our club for people to realize that a change of manager ain't enough to have us challenging on a regular basis. Thought I was going to be wrong this year with Klopp in charge, but the old 'boom/bust' cycle rears it's head on here once again.
Sigh....
Sigh....
I think he's a decent manager but his inability to fix the defence was always an issue for me. We were 1-0 up at the Etihad and Stamford Bridge during 13/14 and lost both games 2-1. The City game was lost to two rubbish goals. If we'd been able to do what Mourinho's Chelsea did at City that season (they picked up a 1-0 win) then we might have won the league. That game swung it as much as the Chelsea and Palace games did in my opinion.
Looking back I don't think his results in the big games were that good either. His record against City, United, Chelsea and Arsenal was fairly poor.
I was never that impressed with his signings (an issue troubling Liverpool managers for a while). How many of his signings were classed as good transfers? I'd say Sturridge and Coutinho were the only two, with the likes of Lallana, Can, Balotelli, Moreno, Borini, Allen, Assaidi, Lovren and Lambert doing very little with Rodgers as manager. Some of them have done better with Klopp but that has little to do with Rodgers.
I agree with @redman5 that Suarez improved dramatically under Rodgers though, and some of the football we played during 13/14 was outstanding. He's a decent coach but I felt like we were going backwards towards the end of his reign. I don't think we'd be any better off if he was still in charge now.
Looking back I don't think his results in the big games were that good either. His record against City, United, Chelsea and Arsenal was fairly poor.
I was never that impressed with his signings (an issue troubling Liverpool managers for a while). How many of his signings were classed as good transfers? I'd say Sturridge and Coutinho were the only two, with the likes of Lallana, Can, Balotelli, Moreno, Borini, Allen, Assaidi, Lovren and Lambert doing very little with Rodgers as manager. Some of them have done better with Klopp but that has little to do with Rodgers.
I agree with @redman5 that Suarez improved dramatically under Rodgers though, and some of the football we played during 13/14 was outstanding. He's a decent coach but I felt like we were going backwards towards the end of his reign. I don't think we'd be any better off if he was still in charge now.
And blinded by those pearly whites
Seeing how Klopp has become as annoying as Brendan since his move in to Merseyside, I'll Bredant is of the best British/Irish manager out there. Is he cut for very top job? Maybe not (yet). If he can improve, he would have a re evaluation. He showed he could do a job with small club, mid table club & and took the chance to challenge if circumstances permits, dominate a one horse race league. That's solid experience, not any other active Irish/ British managers have.
& and took the chance to challenge if circumstances permits, dominate a one horse race league. That's solid experience, not any other active Irish/ British managers have.Remember that 2009 final? They cleared every corner with ease.
Really surprised that the record unbeaten in Scotland is so low. Just kind of assumed it would up around the 40-50 game mark.
Rodgers did very well to capitalise on the perfect storm that was the 2013/14 season. United utterly collapsed post-Fergie, Chelsea were yet again starting a season with a new(ish) manager who repeatedly said they weren't going to win the league, and Arsenal and Spurs were Arsenal and Spurs, with a resurgent City under their new manager being the only one to top them. Liverpool had no European distractions, and Rodgers utilised a system that was very effective for 95% of the season, that was built around Luis Suarez who was starting to emerge as a truly world class player.
After falling just short of winning their first league title in forever, expectations had (perhaps unfairly) been raised to a level that they'd not been at for a number of years. Their last title challenge had come out of the blue in 2008/09, and that was also the last time they'd qualified for the Champions League. It was obvious that Rodgers had failed to adapt Liverpool's tactics post-Suarez to be as effective as 2013/14, but that would happen in any team so reliant on the ability of one player when he left. The board gave Rodgers a summer transfer window to add strength to the squad after missing out in 2014/15, only to sack him 8 games into the 2015/16 season. If the board wanted a reason to get rid of him, they weren't going to get much better than missing out on CL football, and only winning 2 of their last 9 games, including a 3-1 home loss to Palace and a 6-1 away loss to Stoke in their final two games.
My personal feeling is that the Steven Gerrard Final Farewell Tour overshadowed the ambitions to retain their CL spot in 2014/15, and was a huge contributing factor in their end of season slump. When efforts should have been focused on getting as many points as possible during the run in and potentially winning their first bit of silverware since Dalglish's League Cup, all the focus was on Gerrard leaving and the possible fairytale ending of him winning the FA Cup one more time whilst also leading his team to CL qualification. This forced Rodgers into something of a no win situation. He either played an aging and increasingly useless Gerrard to go with the fairytale, or didn't play him and ruined the farewell of a club legend.
Gerrard started 16 of Liverpool's first 19 games, and just 4 of the next 10. In the 20 games that Gerrard had started at this stage, Liverpool won just 8, drew 5, and lost 7. In the 9 that he didn't start, they won 8, drew 1, and hadn't lost any. With 9 games left to go, Liverpool were 2 points off 4th, had been unbeaten in 13 (taking 33 from 39 points), and were on a 5 match winning run. Their 30th game was the game against United at Anfield, which is when the SGFFT began. As we all fondly remember, he came on as a half-time substitute to turn the game in Liverpool's favour, then got himself sent off less then a minute after the restart.
Liverpool won just 2 of their final 9 games and ended up in 6th, 8 points off 4th. By the end of the season, Liverpool's league record for games that Gerrard started was P25 W9 D7 L9, and P13 W9 D1 L3 for games that he didn't start. For what it's worth, the 6 points dropped during the unbeaten run were dropped in games that Gerrard started. Percentage-wise, Liverpool won just 36% of the games he started, and 69% of those he didn't.
As mentioned, focus had shifted from Liverpool qualifying for the CL and winning the FA Cup, as they were potentially on course to do, to Gerrard qualifying for the CL and lifting the FA Cup in one last heroic effort on his part. His inclusion in the team was detrimental to their league form, an the same happened in the FA Cup. Gerrard started just 3 of Liverpool's 7 FA Cup games that season. The first was the 3rd round tie against League Two AFC Wimbledon, which they scraped 2-1, and the second was 4th round replay against Championship Bolton, which they were actually losing until the 86th minute, not picking up the winner until the 91st, despite playing the last half hour against 10 men. The third and final FA Cup game that Gerrard started was the semi-final against Villa (which they lost), which happened to mark Gerrard's return from suspension following his sending off against United.
I think Rodgers can rightfully feel hard done by. He was given 46 games (split 38/8 between seasons) to prove that he could reestablish Liverpool as CL regulars and serious title contenders following the surprise of 2013/14, and had to cope with their best player in decades and the focal point of their team leaving, and a club legend hijacking the final part of the season to wish himself a fond farewell. He was sacked very early on in 2015/16 as it looked like the season's targets were already slipping away (seemingly with little consideration of how close they actually were to qualifying the previous season before Stevie Me stole the spotlight). Klopp was brought in to put things back on track, and is now 54 games in (split 30/24 between season), with Liverpool having finished 8th in his first 4/5 of a season (and Klopp's points per game after 30 games being just 0.1 better than Rodgers' was after 8), and this season, despite having no European football, United, Chelsea and City having new managers, and Arsenal and Spurs still being Arsenal and Spurs, they find themselves out of every cup and 5th in the league, with 0 wins from their last 5 league games, with that standing at 1 from 10 in all competitions (with the 1 being an FA Cup replay against League One Plymouth that now counts for nothing because they got knocked out by Championship Wolves).
I think anything Rodgers does domestically with Celtic should be taken with the largest pinch of salt because winning everything is the expectation with Rangers being shite, and I'm not convinced that he's actually good enough to reestablish Liverpool as a CL regular and serious title contender. That said, I'm not sure anyone is. The expectations following 2013/14 were and are silly, particularly in the time frame he was given and with the transfer budget Liverpool afford their managers. However, the goalposts appear to be shifting again following Liverpool's recent dive in form, and simply challenging for top 4 is seen as sufficient. Rodgers was sacked despite doing just that, and given almost no time to prove he could do it again.
I don't think he was as special as Liverpool fans made out during 2013/14, nor do I think he's as bad as people made out (myself included) at the time of his sacking. He's more than good enough to keep Celtic on top in Scotland, and a decent manager for mid-table PL side. I'm not sure he's got the strength of character or tactical nouse to be any more than that. Likewise, I don't think Klopp's as special as people made out during Dortmund's successful run, nor as poor as he looked during the first half of his final season at Dortmund, and has looked over the past month. I think he's an incredibly one-dimensional manager in terms of the tactics he employs, and his public persona/personality and the way he handles himself with the media is prone to backfire. I think both have enjoyed purple patches aided by a player, or players, emerging as world class talents under their management, with Klopp's purple patch obviously lasting longer and bringing in more success than Rodgers. How much they had to do with the emergence and development of such players remains to be seen as they manage at different clubs.
After falling just short of winning their first league title in forever, expectations had (perhaps unfairly) been raised to a level that they'd not been at for a number of years. Their last title challenge had come out of the blue in 2008/09, and that was also the last time they'd qualified for the Champions League. It was obvious that Rodgers had failed to adapt Liverpool's tactics post-Suarez to be as effective as 2013/14, but that would happen in any team so reliant on the ability of one player when he left. The board gave Rodgers a summer transfer window to add strength to the squad after missing out in 2014/15, only to sack him 8 games into the 2015/16 season. If the board wanted a reason to get rid of him, they weren't going to get much better than missing out on CL football, and only winning 2 of their last 9 games, including a 3-1 home loss to Palace and a 6-1 away loss to Stoke in their final two games.
My personal feeling is that the Steven Gerrard Final Farewell Tour overshadowed the ambitions to retain their CL spot in 2014/15, and was a huge contributing factor in their end of season slump. When efforts should have been focused on getting as many points as possible during the run in and potentially winning their first bit of silverware since Dalglish's League Cup, all the focus was on Gerrard leaving and the possible fairytale ending of him winning the FA Cup one more time whilst also leading his team to CL qualification. This forced Rodgers into something of a no win situation. He either played an aging and increasingly useless Gerrard to go with the fairytale, or didn't play him and ruined the farewell of a club legend.
Gerrard started 16 of Liverpool's first 19 games, and just 4 of the next 10. In the 20 games that Gerrard had started at this stage, Liverpool won just 8, drew 5, and lost 7. In the 9 that he didn't start, they won 8, drew 1, and hadn't lost any. With 9 games left to go, Liverpool were 2 points off 4th, had been unbeaten in 13 (taking 33 from 39 points), and were on a 5 match winning run. Their 30th game was the game against United at Anfield, which is when the SGFFT began. As we all fondly remember, he came on as a half-time substitute to turn the game in Liverpool's favour, then got himself sent off less then a minute after the restart.
Liverpool won just 2 of their final 9 games and ended up in 6th, 8 points off 4th. By the end of the season, Liverpool's league record for games that Gerrard started was P25 W9 D7 L9, and P13 W9 D1 L3 for games that he didn't start. For what it's worth, the 6 points dropped during the unbeaten run were dropped in games that Gerrard started. Percentage-wise, Liverpool won just 36% of the games he started, and 69% of those he didn't.
As mentioned, focus had shifted from Liverpool qualifying for the CL and winning the FA Cup, as they were potentially on course to do, to Gerrard qualifying for the CL and lifting the FA Cup in one last heroic effort on his part. His inclusion in the team was detrimental to their league form, an the same happened in the FA Cup. Gerrard started just 3 of Liverpool's 7 FA Cup games that season. The first was the 3rd round tie against League Two AFC Wimbledon, which they scraped 2-1, and the second was 4th round replay against Championship Bolton, which they were actually losing until the 86th minute, not picking up the winner until the 91st, despite playing the last half hour against 10 men. The third and final FA Cup game that Gerrard started was the semi-final against Villa (which they lost), which happened to mark Gerrard's return from suspension following his sending off against United.
I think Rodgers can rightfully feel hard done by. He was given 46 games (split 38/8 between seasons) to prove that he could reestablish Liverpool as CL regulars and serious title contenders following the surprise of 2013/14, and had to cope with their best player in decades and the focal point of their team leaving, and a club legend hijacking the final part of the season to wish himself a fond farewell. He was sacked very early on in 2015/16 as it looked like the season's targets were already slipping away (seemingly with little consideration of how close they actually were to qualifying the previous season before Stevie Me stole the spotlight). Klopp was brought in to put things back on track, and is now 54 games in (split 30/24 between season), with Liverpool having finished 8th in his first 4/5 of a season (and Klopp's points per game after 30 games being just 0.1 better than Rodgers' was after 8), and this season, despite having no European football, United, Chelsea and City having new managers, and Arsenal and Spurs still being Arsenal and Spurs, they find themselves out of every cup and 5th in the league, with 0 wins from their last 5 league games, with that standing at 1 from 10 in all competitions (with the 1 being an FA Cup replay against League One Plymouth that now counts for nothing because they got knocked out by Championship Wolves).
I think anything Rodgers does domestically with Celtic should be taken with the largest pinch of salt because winning everything is the expectation with Rangers being shite, and I'm not convinced that he's actually good enough to reestablish Liverpool as a CL regular and serious title contender. That said, I'm not sure anyone is. The expectations following 2013/14 were and are silly, particularly in the time frame he was given and with the transfer budget Liverpool afford their managers. However, the goalposts appear to be shifting again following Liverpool's recent dive in form, and simply challenging for top 4 is seen as sufficient. Rodgers was sacked despite doing just that, and given almost no time to prove he could do it again.
I don't think he was as special as Liverpool fans made out during 2013/14, nor do I think he's as bad as people made out (myself included) at the time of his sacking. He's more than good enough to keep Celtic on top in Scotland, and a decent manager for mid-table PL side. I'm not sure he's got the strength of character or tactical nouse to be any more than that. Likewise, I don't think Klopp's as special as people made out during Dortmund's successful run, nor as poor as he looked during the first half of his final season at Dortmund, and has looked over the past month. I think he's an incredibly one-dimensional manager in terms of the tactics he employs, and his public persona/personality and the way he handles himself with the media is prone to backfire. I think both have enjoyed purple patches aided by a player, or players, emerging as world class talents under their management, with Klopp's purple patch obviously lasting longer and bringing in more success than Rodgers. How much they had to do with the emergence and development of such players remains to be seen as they manage at different clubs.
@Alex99 Challenging for top four isn't good enough for most Liverpool fans. It's fine at the moment because we're still in the conversation but if we fail to break into the top four then it'll be seen as a failure.
I've seen plenty of posts from Liverpool fans on this forum, never mind what I've heard and seen elsewhere, that are already suggesting that a challenge for top 4 would be a good season. I don't think that's unreasonable, but the goalposts have moved post-Rodgers. The expectation was that by landing a manager with the reputation Klopp had (rightly or wrongly) was that you were going to break the top 4 with relative ease. It's now becoming apparent that it may not be quite as simple as that.
Very true... but in Rodgers case that might have been the only thing he had going for him... and he didn't even sign Rat Face, a gift from King Kenny
As the man himself would say, " to infinity and beyond ".