Brendan Rodgers

[Muddled]

I've no issue with him raising those points all it really does is say if he doesn't adapt and get it right he's not done his job and in all likelihood with FSG a he'll be heading out of the door and I think he's very aware of that.

And they will as well, these articles and quotes are all driven by questions from the press so if he's asked "why do you think you're struggling this season" is asked he's going to give a response that he believes is right hence the multiple response of the same answer

Sat in a press conference being asked the same questions over and over again he's got to say something and probably best not to contradict himself either.

Long and the short of it what he says to the press is irrelevant he knows he has to start getting the results or he's going to be out of a job, everything he says and all managers are just sound bytes for the press to shift newspapers/create page impressions.

In the article I read it as he is making reference to a combination of having, new players who are adapting, young inexperienced players, lack of training time which is all contributing to the current poor form which is equivalent to starting again. We needed a bigger squad and had no choice but to take gambles on young players.
I personally this BR needs to be given time.

Then why castigate him for having to answer daft questions

If he doesn't get it right he's going to be sacked regardless of what he says

Yep, the obsession with trawling his interviews is weird and if thats the worst thing he's said then i'd say he's handling them well. I understood it with Hodgson, he was a cunt and would make a cunt of himself in the first sentence, here though he's not saying much wrong.

:HI-5:

He should answer all questions in an antagonistic tone, followed by a 15 minute section of 'no comment' and then ten minutes of silence so we can then read on Est1892 (again and again) how Rodgers is feeling the pressure at a big club and doesn't have the first clue how to deal with our current predicament.

[Paul12]

I think what is so disappointing is that it was seemed so obvious that (a) we were winning games last season because we were outscoring other teams, so with Suarez going we needed to either replace effectively or reduce the number of goals conceded but we did neither, (b) playing Stevie G deeper would only work in an attacking side and that we therefore needed to improve the way the midfield protects the defence, but we are trying to do that by playing average defensive midfielders and putting more into midfield and that weakens our attack and adds only marginally to our defensive strength, and (c) we were over dependant on the goals and creativity of a few players and needed to address that, but we bought the wrong players. Added to all this: (d) there has been a major loss of form and confidence and (e) the manager is doing things the fans and, if rumours are true, the players do not understand.

At this point we need to (1) reset our expectations so that every defeat is not a calamity/source of further confidence-draining for the players, (2) play a style etc that reflects what we have rather than what we would like to have, and (3) buy probably two defense-oriented players in the next transfer window that can do a job now.

[calvoboy]

Have you read it? It's explained far better than I can do it justice here. Money is not a guarantee, the article stats that, its more about how you spend it. If you want to win it you need to spend on players for your best 11, then it comes down to the manager and how much of that investment is good enough to make it onto the pitch regularly. Every season only one from City, United and Chelsea are likely to win the league and thats exactly what has happened since Arsenal last won it in 2004.For a lot of that time it was only Chelsea and United.

We told our manager he had to be competing for the league in his third season yet we never realistically competed for the best players so it's no surprise those who did are the ones actually winning the thing. You could have the best manager out there, if he can't compete for the best players you are tieing one arm behind his back.

Also shows how the situation has changed since Arsenal last won the league - gone from not much between the value of squads to being a huge gap between Chelsea, City, Utd and the rest of us:

[G]

Also shows how the situation has changed since Arsenal last won the league - gone from not much between the value of squads to being a huge gap between Chelsea, City, Utd and the rest of us:

Yep, Ambramovich changed the landscape and Mansour has only added to it. It's now next to impossible for anyone bar United to keep up without massively increasing their wealth somehow. United's stadium is only part of it, it shows how well run they are commercially that they can keep up with City and Chelsea while being massively in debt too. All the success helped too of course

[ChrisDR1968]

Also shows how the situation has changed since Arsenal last won the league - gone from not much between the value of squads to being a huge gap between Chelsea, City, Utd and the rest of us:

I suppose in a way we should be grateful 2 clubs have sugar daddy owners as Man United would be in a position to completely dominate English football by now if they weren't there (still can't stand Chelsea though ).

I'm a little surprised that table seems to show our squad to be worth a bit less than when Rodgers first became manager in 2012

One question... will FFP tend to close the gap between these clubs over time or will City, Chelsea and United continue to have a comfortable lead over Arsenal and Liverpool?

[G]

FFP means you have to spend within your means so you musty increase your means to compete. We've been losing money every year for the last 3 so we are already struggling to stay compliant ourselves! Our means are very poor compared to United. City and Chelsea are building infrastructure to keep them at the top for years to come and gaining wealth due to success which will see them having plenty of spending power without their owners wallets being needed. Chelsea's transfer operations for years has been top class, buying established top starts when they need too while also hoovering up the best young talent who either make it or they can sell for very good fee's. Exactly what we are supposed to be doing but they are doing it better. then you have PSG giving them 50m for Luiz

The only way we can close the gap is bigger ground and make our commercial department far more productive than it is. We also need CL regularly cos the TV money for that doubles next season so if we aren't in it the hole we are in becomes ever bigger. Arsenal being in London and always in the CL appear to be best placed to keep up but they arent for some reason. Lack of success probably plays its part.

As Rafa said, we need to be perfect in the transfer market and the last 2 summers have shown we are anything but.

[Spaghetti Legs]

Best piece of defensive work we have seen from Brendan in 3 years

That would be funny if you hadn't of stolen it from another forum you sad git.

[marcus50bucks]

That would be funny if you hadn't of stolen it from another forum you sad git.

[Jaymo]

That would be funny if you hadn't of stolen it from another forum you sad git.

[DannyMan2006]

I'm not a fan of the supposed line up.

But in my mind, Rodgers is back to being daring if its true. He could easily have stuck with the same rubbish that's been played out last 5 games and hoped it worked.

Fair play for changing it up and going for a win. Brave, bold, that's what I'm talking about.

[G]

Yeah he needs to be brave. it might in all likely hood backfire but its preferable to more of the same and hoping something changes.

[Bender]

I'm not a fan of the supposed line up.

But in my mind, Rodgers is back to being daring if its true. He could easily have stuck with the same rubbish that's been played out last 5 games and hoped it worked.

Fair play for changing it up and going for a win. Brave, bold, that's what I'm talking about.

would love it if we outplayed them and win ...come on BR play an attacking game

[rodo]

Yeah he needs to be brave. it might in all likely hood backfire but its preferable to more of the same and hoping something changes.

[RichC]

I'm not a fan of the supposed line up.

But in my mind, Rodgers is back to being daring if its true. He could easily have stuck with the same rubbish that's been played out last 5 games and hoped it worked.

Fair play for changing it up and going for a win. Brave, bold, that's what I'm talking about.

Massive risk if true but what's he got to lose

[peekay]

That would be funny if you hadn't of stolen it from another forum you sad git.

You are correct. I deserved that. It was an oversight on my part, by the way. I have edited the original post.

If you look at my past posts on SCM and here, couple of times when I have taken something from another forum, I have acknowledged it.