Job too big for Rodgers?

Liverpool Football Club - General Discussion

Is the job too big for Rodgers and last season was a flash in the pan down to Suarez carrying us?

Yes
43
55%
No
28
36%
Not sure
7
9%
 
Total votes : 78

Postby red till i die!! » Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:04 am

ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Mon Dec 15, 2014 11:20 pm wrote:Over on RAWK they are saying that James Pearce of the Echo has done an interview where he states that this transfer committee of ours is far more powerful than people think.
Apparently practically every decision is voted on by the committee and the manager hasn't got a veto, so in other words if he is out voted he can't do anything about it. Apparently Rodgers wanted to sign the likes of Costa, Eriksson, Vorm and Bony but was out voted and players have come in against his will too.
Apparently when FSG were looking for a manager practically everyone they interviewed (including Brendan) said they wouldn't work under a DoF so they created the idea of a transfer committee to still wield their influence. By all accounts there's a fella who used to work for FSG and he's saying that Brendan has fallen out with some of the members of the committee and the relationship between the manager and the committee has become 'unsavoury'.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... print.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... combe.html
User avatar
red till i die!!
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 8646
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:35 pm
Location: ireland

Postby ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:19 am

red till i die!! » Tue Dec 16, 2014 12:04 am wrote:
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Mon Dec 15, 2014 11:20 pm wrote:Over on RAWK they are saying that James Pearce of the Echo has done an interview where he states that this transfer committee of ours is far more powerful than people think.
Apparently practically every decision is voted on by the committee and the manager hasn't got a veto, so in other words if he is out voted he can't do anything about it. Apparently Rodgers wanted to sign the likes of Costa, Eriksson, Vorm and Bony but was out voted and players have come in against his will too.
Apparently when FSG were looking for a manager practically everyone they interviewed (including Brendan) said they wouldn't work under a DoF so they created the idea of a transfer committee to still wield their influence. By all accounts there's a fella who used to work for FSG and he's saying that Brendan has fallen out with some of the members of the committee and the relationship between the manager and the committee has become 'unsavoury'.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... print.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... combe.html


???
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb
LFC Guru Member
 
Posts: 12274
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:54 pm
Location: Liverpool

Postby ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:26 am

Doeboy » Tue Dec 16, 2014 12:03 am wrote:
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:20 pm wrote:Over on RAWK they are saying that James Pearce of the Echo has done an interview where he states that this transfer committee of ours is far more powerful than people think.
Apparently practically every decision is voted on by the committee and the manager hasn't got a veto, so in other words if he is out voted he can't do anything about it. Apparently Rodgers wanted to sign the likes of Costa, Eriksson, Vorm and Bony but was out voted and players have come in against his will too.
Apparently when FSG were looking for a manager practically everyone they interviewed (including Brendan) said they wouldn't work under a DoF so they created the idea of a transfer committee to still wield their influence. By all accounts there's a fella who used to work for FSG and he's saying that Brendan has fallen out with some of the members of the committee and the relationship between the manager and the committee has become 'unsavoury'.


Always had the feeling FSG are in this for a quick buck and making profit from player trading is one aspect of it. Their purchase of the club seemed opportunistic and was something that obviously needed to happen due to the mess those two clowns had left us in, but still oppurtunistic in nature.

If BR is having players dumped on him in favour of players he actually wants then that this is a big problem. I thought we bid for Costa last summer but he wasn't interested in the move. In hindsight, Eriksen is looking like the one that got away especially for the £11m or so spurs paid for him


If this is all true then Rodgers has been trying to work with one hand tied behind his back, mind you there are one or two things that don't paint Brendan in the best light, apparently he was against signing Sturridge but he was outvoted by the committee.
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb
LFC Guru Member
 
Posts: 12274
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:54 pm
Location: Liverpool

Postby red till i die!! » Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:44 am

ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:19 am wrote:
red till i die!! » Tue Dec 16, 2014 12:04 am wrote:
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Mon Dec 15, 2014 11:20 pm wrote:Over on RAWK they are saying that James Pearce of the Echo has done an interview where he states that this transfer committee of ours is far more powerful than people think.
Apparently practically every decision is voted on by the committee and the manager hasn't got a veto, so in other words if he is out voted he can't do anything about it. Apparently Rodgers wanted to sign the likes of Costa, Eriksson, Vorm and Bony but was out voted and players have come in against his will too.
Apparently when FSG were looking for a manager practically everyone they interviewed (including Brendan) said they wouldn't work under a DoF so they created the idea of a transfer committee to still wield their influence. By all accounts there's a fella who used to work for FSG and he's saying that Brendan has fallen out with some of the members of the committee and the relationship between the manager and the committee has become 'unsavoury'.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... print.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... combe.html


???


Thats what was being said when he got the job.

this is what he told pierce in may
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/fo ... er-7185770

this is pearces interview in which he discusses the transfers
Https://soundcloud.com/anfieldhq/james-pearce-corrected
User avatar
red till i die!!
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 8646
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:35 pm
Location: ireland

Postby RED BEERGOGGLES » Tue Dec 16, 2014 2:07 am

In May, Rodgers explained his significant role in the Liverpool transfer process to James Pearce of the Liverpool Echo:

"Obviously, I am involved heavily in the identification of the player,the principal idea when I first came in was that like any manager you will have the first call on a player and the last call. That's the call on whether he's good enough to continue to look at and try to organise a deal and the last call to say yes or no "

"There is a big part that goes on in between. In modern football you need to trust other people to do the work. That's something we do here and that's why we have had the success we've had"


Edwards is the committee's other main protagonist. A former video analyst whom Damien Comolli brought with him from Tottenham Hotspur, Edwards gained the trust of Liverpool's principal owner, John W. Henry, by presenting a statistical model for analysing potential signings.

Famously enamoured with Billy Beane's sabermetric approach to hiring baseball players, Henry believed that in the young Englishman he had a football equivalent.

Edwards was invited to spend time with Henry at the businessman's Florida mansion. His guidance was taken seriously when Henry and the rest of Fenway Sports Group sought a replacement for former Reds manager Roy Hodgson.

Aware that numbers mattered to FSG's vision for the club, Edwards appointed Ian Graham as Liverpool's director of research. Holder of a PhD in theoretical physics, Graham had developed a computer programme designed to add discriminative value to player performance statistics provided by companies such as ProZone.

When Rodgers, a scout or an agent suggested Liverpool sign a particular player, Edwards would have the player's numbers run through the Graham model. If the computer said no, the deal was off.

When Red Bull Salzburg were looking for a buyer for Sadio Mane in the summer, Liverpool were one of the clubs approached. Graham's analysis indicated the Senegal international wasn't good enough, so Mane ended up at Southampton instead (paid for with a fraction of the money Rodgers channelled to the South Coast club for Adam Lallana, Dejan Lovren and Lambert).

Mane's new club currently sit fifth in the league table, five points ahead of Liverpool.

Edwards' backing of a "moneyball" approach and Rodgers' limited knowledge of non-Premier League players has led to several standoffs.

Oussama Assaidi and Nuri Sahin were Edwards' men whom Rodgers assented to signing then hardly used in their preferred positions.

After seven league appearances in five months, Sahin's loan was terminated. The Turkey international ended the 2012-13 season playing a Champions League final for Borussia Dortmund.

Assaidi, recently identified by Raheem Sterling as his most skilful team-mate, per Sky Sports, was permitted a total of 83 minutes in the league before being loaned to Stoke City for the last two seasons.

In their first summer working together, Edwards pushed for Fiorentina centre-back Matija Nastasic to be recruited. Rodgers wanted a player with Premier League experience, but during the standoff, Manchester City bought the Serb instead .

Nastasic was named Manchester City's Young Player of the Year during his first season in England, while Liverpool still hasn't found a reliable central defender.

For another Premier League manager whose club also utilised the Graham model, part of that comes as no surprise.

"That guy was a serious nerd," he says. "And the program was ridiculous. The parameters were set from his own view of what a defender, midfielder or attacker should
do. They were ludicrous and inaccurate."

For two Anfield years, Luis Suarez's unalloyed excellence compensated for a multitude of recruitment and coaching sins. Yet between Edwards' faith in analytics and Rodgers' poor eye for a player, Liverpool have managed to blow well in excess of £250,000,000 pounds once payoffs and agents' fee are factored in.

Even the committee's conspicuous success, Daniel Sturridge, was recommended by an unconvinced Rodgers to only be brought in on loan.

If you were the man who paid this pair to run your football club, you'd be forgiven for wondering if you might not be better off replacing both of them.

Written by  Sunday times  ,and Sports illustrated Duncan Castles
Image
User avatar
RED BEERGOGGLES
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 8297
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 11:03 pm
Location: Liverpool

Postby jacdaniel » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:32 am

There is clearly fighting going on at the club that has led to these things coming out in public. 
Once again though, its the team and fans that suffer as a result of an un-united front behind the scenes. 

Don't think we can criticize Rodgers if some analytical guy is dictating who we should or shouldn't sign.

A football team should not be based around statistical data.  You can't look at stats without considering the environment that the stats were originally achieved in.
"When you walk, through a storm, hold your head up high"
User avatar
jacdaniel
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 2616
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:44 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby Kash_Mountain » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:45 am

LFC's transfer committee comprises
Ian Ayre (CEO),
Brendan Rogers (Coach),
Michael Edwards (Director of Performance)
Dave Fallows (Head of Recruitment),
Barry Hunter (Chief Scout), 
Dave Fallows (Head of Recruitmment)

From what I hear, The chief scout would take any  potential transfer to the  Committee . The Committee will jointly (a consensus) agree whether an offer will be made for any  player, then if they agree, they go to the Board for the funds/approval.
Image

ABSOLUTE STRENGTH       

ImageImage
User avatar
Kash_Mountain
 
Posts: 4635
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:22 pm

Postby jacdaniel » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:50 am

Do people really think a different manager will be able to thrive in this situation? 

New Manager:  "Hey, I really want player X who I know is an excellent defender and should succeed here in my system".
Stats Guru:  "Well, I ran his name through MY computer programme based on what I consider a good defender and MY programme says he is cack." 
New Manager:  "hmmm, so what do we do then" 
Stats Guru:  "Well, I've contacted Ian Ayre and he is bringing in player Y for you so you don't need to worry"
New Manager:  "But I don't really think he'll suit my system" 
Stats Guru:  " Well he will be arriving in training tomorrow"

The following day on the training field the manager is presented with a squad of players... half of whom he rates and the other half he doesn't.  Good luck keeping that squad of players.

As the fighting begins, the motivation goes.  The players become less productive and begin to under deliver.
"When you walk, through a storm, hold your head up high"
User avatar
jacdaniel
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 2616
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:44 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:03 am

RED BEERGOGGLES » Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:07 am wrote:In May, Rodgers explained his significant role in the Liverpool transfer process to James Pearce of the Liverpool Echo:

"Obviously, I am involved heavily in the identification of the player,the principal idea when I first came in was that like any manager you will have the first call on a player and the last call. That's the call on whether he's good enough to continue to look at and try to organise a deal and the last call to say yes or no "

"There is a big part that goes on in between. In modern football you need to trust other people to do the work. That's something we do here and that's why we have had the success we've had"




Well according to these new reports Rodgers was being economical with the truth here, he hasn't got first or last call on a player and he's frequently outvoted by the other members of the committee as well.
It wouldn't surprise me if this was all true tbh and it would certainly go a long way to explaining why certain players like Can and Markovic (who are reportedly committee signings) haven't had much of a look in whilst Rodgers signings like Lovren have been continually picked despite a string of poor performances.
In fact it's now increasingly looking ever more likely that Lovren was only dropped after a huge bust up with Gerrard in the immediate aftermath of the defeat at Palace, the Daily Mirror had a story about Lovren blaming the midfield for our defensive woes but now other papers are running with a story originating from the S*n that Gerrard and Lovren squared up to each other and Rodgers backed Gerrard.
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb
LFC Guru Member
 
Posts: 12274
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:54 pm
Location: Liverpool

Postby Kash_Mountain » Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:34 am

jacdaniel » Dec 16th, '14, 08:50 wrote:Do people really think a different manager will be able to thrive in this situation? 

New Manager:  "Hey, I really want player X who I know is an excellent defender and should succeed here in my system".
Stats Guru:  "Well, I ran his name through MY computer programme based on what I consider a good defender and MY programme says he is cack." 
New Manager:  "hmmm, so what do we do then" 
Stats Guru:  "Well, I've contacted Ian Ayre and he is bringing in player Y for you so you don't need to worry"
New Manager:  "But I don't really think he'll suit my system" 
Stats Guru:  " Well he will be arriving in training tomorrow"

The following day on the training field the manager is presented with a squad of players... half of whom he rates and the other half he doesn't.  Good luck keeping that squad of players.

As the fighting begins, the motivation goes.  The players become less productive and begin to under deliver.


FSG are restructuring things top down, the Committee will be gone soon enough Imo
Image

ABSOLUTE STRENGTH       

ImageImage
User avatar
Kash_Mountain
 
Posts: 4635
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:22 pm

Postby Boocity » Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:46 am

jacdaniel » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:50 am wrote:Do people really think a different manager will be able to thrive in this situation? 

New Manager:  "Hey, I really want player X who I know is an excellent defender and should succeed here in my system".
Stats Guru:  "Well, I ran his name through MY computer programme based on what I consider a good defender and MY programme says he is cack." 
New Manager:  "hmmm, so what do we do then" 
Stats Guru:  "Well, I've contacted Ian Ayre and he is bringing in player Y for you so you don't need to worry"
New Manager:  "But I don't really think he'll suit my system" 
Stats Guru:  " Well he will be arriving in training tomorrow"

The following day on the training field the manager is presented with a squad of players... half of whom he rates and the other half he doesn't.  Good luck keeping that squad of players.

As the fighting begins, the motivation goes.  The players become less productive and begin to under deliver.

Oh get real, do you think it's the transfer committee that coaches and picks the team, do they tell BR to play SG at DM, to play Sterling as a lone striker, no, BR does that and whether he didn't agree with some of the purchases is irrelevant, to not play them, to play players out of position and to persist with under performing players just so he can prove a point putting this clubs position at risk is totally unacceptable. Don't get me wrong I don't agree with thus committee format but trying to paint BR as the victim here is wrong. I would expect him to put aside his issues and concentrate on picking the best team to win games and if that means dropping his favourites then so be it but I don't believe he will swallow his pride and do that. This may not be all BR's fault but he is just making things worse at present and I cannot see that changing. A new experienced manager would start with a clean slate and evaluate the players available and get a team out to win games, they also wouldn't accept to be working in that situation in the first place and want some ground rules in place moving forward.
User avatar
Boocity
>> LFC Elite Member <<
 
Posts: 5138
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:13 am
Location: Abu Dhabi

Postby RedAnt » Tue Dec 16, 2014 10:06 am

Boocity » Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:46 am wrote:
jacdaniel » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:50 am wrote:Do people really think a different manager will be able to thrive in this situation? 

New Manager:  "Hey, I really want player X who I know is an excellent defender and should succeed here in my system".
Stats Guru:  "Well, I ran his name through MY computer programme based on what I consider a good defender and MY programme says he is cack." 
New Manager:  "hmmm, so what do we do then" 
Stats Guru:  "Well, I've contacted Ian Ayre and he is bringing in player Y for you so you don't need to worry"
New Manager:  "But I don't really think he'll suit my system" 
Stats Guru:  " Well he will be arriving in training tomorrow"

The following day on the training field the manager is presented with a squad of players... half of whom he rates and the other half he doesn't.  Good luck keeping that squad of players.

As the fighting begins, the motivation goes.  The players become less productive and begin to under deliver.

Oh get real, do you think it's the transfer committee that coaches and picks the team, do they tell BR to play SG at DM, to play Sterling as a lone striker, no, BR does that and whether he didn't agree with some of the purchases is irrelevant, to not play them, to play players out of position and to persist with under performing players just so he can prove a point putting this clubs position at risk is totally unacceptable. Don't get me wrong I don't agree with thus committee format but trying to paint BR as the victim here is wrong. I would expect him to put aside his issues and concentrate on picking the best team to win games and if that means dropping his favourites then so be it but I don't believe he will swallow his pride and do that. This may not be all BR's fault but he is just making things worse at present and I cannot see that changing. A new experienced manager would start with a clean slate and evaluate the players available and get a team out to win games, they also wouldn't accept to be working in that situation in the first place and want some ground rules in place moving forward.


A fair point. When any manager starts a new job he will need to work with players he didn't sign. What about the lads who have signed? Are they now pawns in this political game? They signed to play football. It's not their fault. And surely BR knew all this before he himself signed. What a mess.
"The S*n: The paper you wipe your ars.e on and more sh*t comes off the paper"
User avatar
RedAnt
 
Posts: 2345
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:33 pm
Location: Durham

Postby mart » Tue Dec 16, 2014 10:18 am

jacdaniel » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:50 am wrote:Do people really think a different manager will be able to thrive in this situation? 

New Manager:  "Hey, I really want player X who I know is an excellent defender and should succeed here in my system".
Stats Guru:  "Well, I ran his name through MY computer programme based on what I consider a good defender and MY programme says he is cack." 
New Manager:  "hmmm, so what do we do then" 
Stats Guru:  "Well, I've contacted Ian Ayre and he is bringing in player Y for you so you don't need to worry"
New Manager:  "But I don't really think he'll suit my system" 
Stats Guru:  " Well he will be arriving in training tomorrow"

The following day on the training field the manager is presented with a squad of players... half of whom he rates and the other half he doesn't.  Good luck keeping that squad of players.

As the fighting begins, the motivation goes.  The players become less productive and begin to under deliver.


The transfer committee clearly doesnt work that way at all. Rodgers is certainly no victim of the stats man and the players Rodgers wanted has clearly not been any better than the rest of our players. While Rodgers cant take all of the blame for all of the transfers, he is very involved in the transfer process and its Rodgers that picks the team and decide how to use the players we have.
mart
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:48 pm

Postby ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Dec 16, 2014 10:53 am

mart » Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:18 am wrote:
jacdaniel » Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:50 am wrote:Do people really think a different manager will be able to thrive in this situation? 

New Manager:  "Hey, I really want player X who I know is an excellent defender and should succeed here in my system".
Stats Guru:  "Well, I ran his name through MY computer programme based on what I consider a good defender and MY programme says he is cack." 
New Manager:  "hmmm, so what do we do then" 
Stats Guru:  "Well, I've contacted Ian Ayre and he is bringing in player Y for you so you don't need to worry"
New Manager:  "But I don't really think he'll suit my system" 
Stats Guru:  " Well he will be arriving in training tomorrow"

The following day on the training field the manager is presented with a squad of players... half of whom he rates and the other half he doesn't.  Good luck keeping that squad of players.

As the fighting begins, the motivation goes.  The players become less productive and begin to under deliver.


The transfer committee clearly doesnt work that way at all. Rodgers is certainly no victim of the stats man and the players Rodgers wanted has clearly not been any better than the rest of our players. While Rodgers cant take all of the blame for all of the transfers, he is very involved in the transfer process and its Rodgers that picks the team and decide how to use the players we have.


By the sounds of it jacdaniels example isn't a million miles away from how the transfer committee works, apparently Rodgers was dead set against Balotelli signing but he was outvoted on the issue so Mario was brought in against his will. The manager may be an integral part of the transfer process but without the power of veto he's a bit of a paper tiger.
Your other points have some credence though, I like Brendan but he seems obsessed with signing players from Swansea or players that he's worked with before, and although we haven't really had it confirmed who signed who, from the lists doing the rounds on RAWK and other sites it has to be said the committee's signings do look better than Brendan's.
ycsatbjywtbiastkamb
LFC Guru Member
 
Posts: 12274
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:54 pm
Location: Liverpool

Postby mart » Tue Dec 16, 2014 11:07 am

ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:53 am wrote:
By the sounds of it jacdaniels example isn't a million miles away from how the transfer committee works, apparently Rodgers was dead set against Balotelli signing but he was outvoted on the issue so Mario was brought in against his will.


According to the article RBG posted above, Rodgers managed to stop the proposed transfer of Nastasic so he clearly has some say in the transfers, while jackdaniels made it sound like Rodgers had no influence whatsoever.


And here is a quote from May this year:

Brendan Rodgers has praised the work of Liverpool FC’s transfer committee as the manager reiterated he will have the final say on all signings this summer.

“The principle idea when I first came in was that like any manager you will have the first call on a player and the last call.

“That’s the call on whether he’s good enough to continue to look at and try to organise a deal and the last call to say yes or no.

“We will never bring in a player here who the manager doesn’t want in. That’s a great credit to the owners and the other people at the club.

“We work very closely together – it’s worth stressing that. It’s key that we are very much one club.
Last edited by mart on Tue Dec 16, 2014 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
mart
LFC Super Member
 
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 43 guests