Perhaps the committee might table a motion to have LOLvren removed from the list of penalty takers.
Liverpool 2014/15 | WARNING: Contains strong amounts of Scouse nonsense
- Thread starter Wumminator
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Perhaps the committee might table a motion to have LOLvren removed from the list of penalty takers.
Do you write all your own jokes?
Steven Gerrard is obviously leaving in the summer, & I'd be amazed if the likes of Glen Johnson & Kolo Toure were offered new contracts. All 3 combined - whilst their contribution this season has been minimal to say the least - are taking £340,000 per week out of wages budget. So I think having that sort of money available to attract new players is more relevant rather than how much they'll cost.
Rodgers record isn't great though, that much is pretty clear (Committee or otherwise).
Also United's recent record isn't really relevant to Liverpool having to get it right first time due to their finances. United could buy a Di Maria every season and bin the ones that don't work out at a £40m loss and it wouldn't really affect us.
Your point is well made. The financial influence in football is creating tiers. Teams like Chelski, City, us and perhaps Arsenal can take the big money decisions and cushion the risk in overal financial power. Your lot and others are forming a second lower tier.
That isn't the point you were making though - you were specifically talking about Rodgers' transfer record so I think it is naturally also relevant to include records of other managers as a perspective, regardless of whether the club can afford the mistakes or not.
Ha ! There were better penalty takers still on the pitch so I have no idea how he got to take #5 !
Why are you singling out the Balotelli signing as a committee purchase? Are you trying to imply that Balotelli was the only committee purchase, therefore worth singling out as irrelevant to Rodgers' signings? How are other players signed - are they all committee purchases or how does it work?
I'd be concerned if I was a Liverpool fan if there were no uniform approach to signing players, with some signed being Rodgers' signings and others being committee signings, which is what I'm taking from your post above.
Of last year's signings, who else was committee and who else was Rodgers? Is it possible to tell? Or is it just the obvious failures that aren't Rodgers' fault?
Isn't Rodgers on the transfer committee, therefore at least partially responsible for Balotelli?
All of them are comittee purchases. Doesn't make sense to file the duds under committee and hail rodgers for the good ones.
Really not worth doing this again - it's all in this thread if you can be arsed to look for it. All will then be revealed.
Balo was a take it or leave it deal from the committee to Rodgers - him or no-one to back up Sturridge.
No disputing the fact that United are up there with the big money spenders. But Manchester United under Fergie - the best manager in the world for many years - had a clear style of play which evolved under Ferguson's long-term guidance. He brought players in who would fit into that style of play & who would embrace his ethos. Players would run through brick walls for him. & that's what made United the force they were under the man. But are your club now in a situation where they are simply throwing money at big money names just because they're available ? Spending £100 plus million on the likes of Mata & Di Maria is all well & good. But lets not forget they left Chelsea & Madrid because they were surplus to requirements & not because they had a burning desire to play for Manchester United. I don't see the hurt & the fear in many United players faces anymore when they walk off the pitch after a poor result/performance. You can't buy, or coach, desire, passion, & commitment. You need a manager first who can install that into the very fabric of the club. Everything else is just window dressing.
I couldn't be arsed looking for it in the thread, it's 246 pages long.
Your second sentence is funny in a circular reference kind of way. A transfer committee, of which Rodgers is a part, gave a take it or leave it deal to Rodgers. Even if I accept that he was just out-numbered on the committee, he's not exactly free of blame in terms of allowing the take it or leave it situation to materialise by not having signed someone else.
That's what the search function is for.
He's not blameless in that he accepted Balo as the only option, at the very end of the transfer window. However he wasn't on his radar - as he stated when the Remy deal fell through. I suppose the concept of starting the season with only Sturridge, Lambert and Borini forced his hand.
Read back - the original point was regarding how much Liverpool could spend this Summer. I estimated £25 - 45m depending on CL qualification and pointed out you'd be shopping in a different market than United Chelsea City and possibly Arsenal.
But if you are classing Balotelli as a "committee purchase" (presumably to exonerate Rodgers responsibility), you can't credit him with Sturridge for example.
Where did I claim Sturridge for Rodgers ? Stop making things up !
It's a twisted logic you're using. If Liverpool had started the season with Sturridge, Lambert and Borini then that would have been Rodgers' fault. Being in the position where his hand was forced (using your words) into signing Balotelli was Rodgers' fault. As you said, he also accepted Balotelli as the only option (implying that he could also have decided to reject him) - again, Rodgers' decision.
I fail to see how the signing of Balotelli can be put solely on a transfer committee - of which Rodgers is a member in any case!
Rodgers' transfer record is sketchy at best. Arguably his best signing for Liverpool since Sturridge has been Emre Can, and he's succeeding in a position he wasn't even signed for in the first place.
You didn't. My point was that Rodgers should get credit for every good signing, even where he may not have been the main deicing force behind it and likewise be held accountable for the likes if Balotelli.
You'd lose that argument every single time. It has quite clearly been Coutinho.
Agreed - slipped my mind, cheers for that.
All players signed by Rodgers here: http://www.lfchistory.net/Transfers/ByManager/25-1
Of those, I'd have maybe just Sturridge and Coutinho as unqualified successes so far, representing £20.5m of a total spend of £211.5m.
The next bracket are those that may join Sturridge/Coutinho as successes: Sakho (once we figure out if he can actually play football, but looks promising), Lallana (over-priced yes, but doing well at the moment - needs to step up when the team aren't playing well), Can (though he'll never be an unqualified success for Rodgers while playing in defence - he was bought as a midfielder after all), Markovic (not seen much yet, probably won't be first choice when everyone is fit), Origi (obvious reasons), Moreno (too young to judge properly either way). Representing another £91.35m of the £211.5m.
Which by my reckoning means that £99.65m, or 47%, of the £211.5m has been wasted by Rodgers.
I suppose it could be argued either way whether that's good business or not, I'm sure many other managers have worse records.
This post isn't aimed specifically at you Barney, just the first line!
That's a balanced post. I think if Sakho, Origi, Can, Markovic and Moreno become consistent first team regulars the record will be decent. As it stands though the likes of Borini, Allen, Mignonet, Lovren, Aspas, Balotelli & Alberto outweigh the definite successes.
Aspas was an excellent signing, if only for that superb corner in the Chelsea game.
You're right - any player that makes Di Maria's corners look incredible by comparison is a friend of mine.
It could also be argued that it's the quality of the team that's more important than the quality of individual players. You only have to look at your own side & David Moyes last season.
Another argument could be that in the same length of time that Rodgers has been at the club, United have spent much more & become significantly worse.
And as soon as you're ready, you can let me know how any of that relates to a discussion on Rodgers' transfer record with Liverpool. Or if you prefer to deflect into something else entirely different, then feel free.
Successes (10 - 117.1m + loan fee for Manquillo):
Allen
Sturridge
Coutinho
Toure
Sakho
Lallana
Can
Markovic
Manquillo
Moreno
Undecided (4 - 26.8m):
Yesil
Mignolet
Ilori
Origi
Failures (9 - 67.7m + loan fees for Sahin and Moses):
Borini
Assaidi
Sahin
Alberto
Aspas
Moses
Lambert
Lovren
Balotelli
How can you possibly call Lallana and Markovic successes yet?
Same way you'd think Di Maria is a success regardless of price
That list is nothing short of laughable
Because, so far, they have been good players for us. Obviously Lallana could do nothing next season and then you'd have to reassess or Lovren could go on and become the next Hyypia, and again, you'd have to reassess but as of now that is how I would label Rodgers' transfers.
Right, but pretty much nobody on here thinks he's a success, so what the feck are you on about?
What type of a success has Joe Allen been? I don't know of any Liverpool fan too happy to see him starting a game.
Kolo Toure a success? I presume this is on the basis that he's done nothing at all, good nor bad, which was about all that could have been hoped for on signing him.
Not sure what Lallana or Markovic have done to elevate them above 'undecided', let alone Manquillo and Moreno.
I'm also not sure how, when evaluating Rodgers' transfer record, a player who was signed to be a midfielder but has worked out OK as a defender (primarily due to being placed there as a result of other signings being a bit shit) qualifies that signing as a success. Sounds a bit dodgy to me.
I think Mignolet is hanging on to the 'undecided' column by the skin of his teeth there too, you're giving him the benefit of some serious doubt.
Kolo Toure a success? I presume this is on the basis that he's done nothing at all, good nor bad, which was about all that could have been hoped for on signing him.
Not sure what Lallana or Markovic have done to elevate them above 'undecided', let alone Manquillo and Moreno.
I'm also not sure how, when evaluating Rodgers' transfer record, a player who was signed to be a midfielder but has worked out OK as a defender (primarily due to being placed there as a result of other signings being a bit shit) qualifies that signing as a success. Sounds a bit dodgy to me.
I think Mignolet is hanging on to the 'undecided' column by the skin of his teeth there too, you're giving him the benefit of some serious doubt.
Also Mignolet undecided?
So let's get this straight, it's okay to call Lallana a success after half a sort of decent(ish) season but after almost two seasons of being average/rubbish, Mignolet is still undecided.
Come on, that list is a joke.
Mata and Shaw were probably better comparisons.
Yes, Mignolet undecided. He hasn't been rubbish for two full seasons, that's revisionist shite. He had a very good first four months to his Liverpool career, a shaky Christmas period and a decent end to the season. This year he had an ok start, a nightmareish three months and then a couple of months of very good form again.
Lallana has the second best goals/assists per minute in our squad after Sturridge.
Scouse logic?
Well, you'll have to forgive me because I can't be arsed to look for it. And neither can I be arsed to believe it. It's revisionist nonsense touted around in support of the Manager Cult.
There is a transfer committee. It was set up to ensure a level of continuity within the club after Rodgers refused to work with a director of football. And given that Louis Van Gaal was the prime candidate, who can blame him? Clash of the Titanic Egos right there.
Regardless of who is in what job at what time, the membership of the transfer committee is the first team manager, the head of recruitment, and the head of performance and analysis. The committee is chaired by the CEO and reports to Tom Werner who is the club chairman.
All transfer decisions are taken by the transfer committee. They have to be unanimous. If they're not, the first team manager has the final say. As current first team manager, Brendan Rodgers is a member of the transfer committee - not its victim, or a supplicant. He is involved in all its decisions - he is not presented with take it or leave it deals - and, as he has said, he has both the first word and the final word on all transfers - other than Werner's final financial decision.
Rodgers identifies the kind of player he wants, often he tells the rest of the committee who he wants. They then search for the right player or assess Rodger's recommendation. Fabio Borini was recommended by Rodgers.
To say that Mario Balotelli was not a Brendan Rodgers' signing is simply untrue - unless you are going to say that NO signings are Brendan Rodgers' signings. If at the late stage of the transfer window, the committee felt that Mario was the only acceptable candidate, then Rodgers was part of that process and had to approve the decision. He should bear his fair share of the responsibility for leaving it so late to sign a striker and for the decision to sign Mario.
As coach he should also take responsibility for his failure to make decent use of the player so far.
My opinion - for what little it's worth - is that Mario may still come good for Liverpool but whether he does or not, Rodgers and his apologists cannot claim credit for every good decision and pass the buck on the ones that don't pay off. Three months ago, people were blaming The Committee for everything. Now that most of the signings are bedded in and beginning to pay off, they're praising Brendan Rodgers for turning it all around and forgotten all about the Committee.
To be fair, I don't think I've ever seen Rodgers claim that Mario was "forced" on him. Although he may did leak as much through his regular mouthpiece James Pearce at the Echo. The most I've seen from him was something to the effect that signing Mario was a "calculated gamble" given the club's need.
To reassess Barney's list:
Successes:
Sturridge
Coutinho
Okay:
Allen
Poor:
Lambert
Lovren
Sakho
Toure
Failures:
Borini
Assaidi
Sahin
Alberto
Aspas
Moses
Balotelli
Mignolet
Predicted Success:
Can
Predicted Okay:
Lallana
Moreno
Undecided:
Markovic
Manquillo
Yesil
Ilori
Origi
Successes:
Sturridge
Coutinho
Okay:
Allen
Poor:
Lambert
Lovren
Sakho
Toure
Failures:
Borini
Assaidi
Sahin
Alberto
Aspas
Moses
Balotelli
Mignolet
Predicted Success:
Can
Predicted Okay:
Lallana
Moreno
Undecided:
Markovic
Manquillo
Yesil
Ilori
Origi
What has Lallana done this season to be a success? He's your most expensive signing in your current squad (second most expensive Liverpool player of all-time, only behind Andy Carroll) and is not a guaranteed starter. He's hardly tearing it up when he has started.
When you say he could do nothing next season - what has he done this season that marks him as an unqualified success in your eyes?
This season? He's had the best goals/assists per minute in our squad asides from Sturridge. He's put in some very good performances, he presses relentlessly. He was one of the few players that actually put in some decent showings during our run of being completely shite. He's done all this without a preseason and whilst having various injuries that have caused him to be stop-start.