Really? It was always reported that he pushed for those particular deals and I can't recall it ever being disputed. As I touched on earlier, look back at the treatment of Rodgers signings to that of committee signings - players Rodgers didn't push for were always fighting an uphill battle to get in the side and often when they did, they'd be played out of position or dropped again at the earliest opportunity. Lovren/Sakho is probably the best example - both as bad as each other imo but Sakho was never afforded the same opportunities under Rodgers that Lovren was. Lovren had to have 10 bad games before he'd be dropped where as at the earliest opportunity Sakho would be out of the side.
Rodgers better than Mourinho
- Thread starter Psycho Sonny
- Start date
- Status
Yes really. If I believed every rumour in the papers I think we'd have a different starting 11. I find it very hard to believe Rodgers solely signed ALL the flops but then had minimal involvement in signing the majority of our starting 11. Also, Sahko was clearly a nut case, two managers had problems with him.
He didn't solely sign all the flops. It just so happened that the majority of the signings he solely pushed for ended up being flops. There were flops he wasn't responsible for too. Re Sakho, there was never any off field issues reported during his time under Rodgers to explain why he had to play twice as well as Lovren to get a game.
If I could be bothered I could find many articles that counter all of your points, but then that would also be based on the assumption the rumours are correct. Sahko is clearly a nut job as well as a distruptive infuence on the group, he showed his true colours on social media.
Its all well and good saying he had a shocker in terms of transfer now he has been sacked, but remember, when he got studge and couts in he was a genius. Personally, I reckon he has a good eye for a player, especially on the cheap!
Obviously neither of us have a direct line to those at the club making the decisions but none of this is new and none of it has ever been disputed. I agree Sakho was a nut job and unlike many others I wasn't bothered when he eventually left but whether it was him or Can, it was always his players and their players with Rodgers. And I've never seen anybody believe Rodgers had anything to do with signing Sturridge or Coutinho - as I mentioned before, it was reported (by every journo with connections at Liverpool) that Rodgers actually blocked the signing of Sturridge in his first summer, hoping to force the club into getting Dempsey over the line. There was a lot wrote about what went on in that first summer and Henry being furious with Rodgers antics - I suspect that played a big part in Rodgers not having much say in the signings over the next 18 months.
Thats fine you have your opinion and I have mine
Logic tells me that someone who has spent most their life doing their badges, learning in Spain and working with the special one cannot be the sole reason for the mistakes and must have had key involvement in the decent signings
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 11,134
- Location
- Crowmarsh
Rodgers is a fraud.
Let's face it, my cat would win the league with Celtic.
Let's face it, my cat would win the league with Celtic.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 4,245
- Location
- Inverkip
The EPL isn't that competitive, Man City look set to romp it. Other than Leicester, it has more or less been limited to 4 clubs with the rest happy to just play in the league and rake in the vast amounts of tv monies. If English teams where as good as the tv commentators like to make out, why are you not winning all of the European competitions every year?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,005
- Location
- Surrey
Because the league is so competitive. Unlike in weaker leagues where there are 1-2 strong teams the big teams in England can't rest players against most teams.
So competitive that one team is 15 points ahead already and haven't lost a game yet? You keep using that word but it does not mean what you think it means. If celtic were 15 points ahead in Scotland you'd all be saying that the SPFL is a joke league. Does this also mean the EPL is a joke league too?
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 4,245
- Location
- Inverkip
So, for all the big tv monies and guaranteed euro payouts, EPL teams can't bulk out their squads?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,005
- Location
- Surrey
Did that happen last year? Did City even win last year? That's what I mean by competitive. One freak season doesn't make it not competitive.
Spfl is a joke league, no one matches or challenges celtic, least in Premier league excluding current season there is always some one challenging a team.
There is a reason celtic do cack in Europe, soon as they face teams that can actually play football there turd.
No one is saying they'e aa top class league. What they're saying is going for that long undefeated is a great achievement, regardless of what league you're in. And is it any wonder that coming up against teams with squads worth one hundred times what Celtic's team has been assembled for turns out to be a very difficult thing to do? That Celtic even manage to compete on occasion in the champions league is amazing in itself.
PSG are 9 points clear of Monaco and Lyon and have only lost once all season. Is that also a joke league?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,005
- Location
- Surrey
Yes, France is famously an incredibly non competitive league for some time now 
Which should mean France is more competitive, or at least was previously.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,005
- Location
- Surrey
Yeah it was, but talking about history is pointless.
Rodgers is average at best. Taking Celtic on an unbeaten run in that league is hardly an achievement, it’s like Man City dropping down to a pub league and doing the same.
Plus the way he talks and conducts interviews really gets on my ****
Plus the way he talks and conducts interviews really gets on my ****
- Status