Liverpool Rumours 189060

 

Use our rumours form to send us liverpool transfer rumours.

25 Mar 2015 05:00:01
Hello Eds and reds.
Just thought I would post Brendan Rodgers stats for every game he has managed up until now.
This includes the last game.

164 games
91 wins
33 draws
40 defeats
Goals scored 313
Goals conceded 185
Win Percentage 55.49%

We all have an opinion about the manager, some negative and some positive.
What is the absolute truth is that record.
There is no conjecture in that record.
No opinions just facts.

Now they include every game so that also means Friendlies as well but not too many to distort the statistics.
For me that is an impressive record and that is the basis for my continuing support of this manager.
I know that he has won nothing and that is the only statistic that matters but my point is that he is only going to improve as a manager as time goes on ( again my opinion).

It could go the other way but you would like to think given his age and experience that he will improve.
If that is the case and he improves that ratio to around 60% then we are in Fergie territory in terms of win percentage.

So my question is. Why get rid of a manager with a record like that?

Just to compare and I could only find Mourinho's stats up until March 2014 for Chelsea he has a win percentage of 67% which may have gone up or down a little bit.
That Mourinho record is staggering.
It really is although he still has many years to catch up to Fergie in terms of volume of games.
Ferguson ended with a percentage of 59% but you have to take into account the sheer amount of games he was in charge of.

But my point is that Rodgers can't be as bad as some people make out that he is.
I always considered a manager who is above 50% to be doing well.
Rodgers is above that as things stand right now.
He has loads of things still to learn as well, a blind man can see that but I feel that he is learning as he goes along which in my opinion makes that win percentage even more impressive.

He has not won a thing I understand that and will concede that point but is he really worth sacking?
I don't think so.
Welcome any thoughts.
Ed002 sorry for mentioning Chelsea and Mourinho again, I will go and say 10 hail Mary's now.

Just to add a little caveat to those stats.
In his first six seasons Alex Ferguson's win percentage was 43%.

{Ed001's Note - this is ridiculous. Stats are just nonsense. I could rip them to shreds, but if you are even wasting your time basing support for a manager clearly out of his depth on his record in lower league football and friendlies, then there is no point. Tim Sherwood had the best stats in Spurs' history as their manager, but he is a clueless tit who just messes about in training without actually doing any coaching.

I am disappointed that you would even bring this up. Why not break it down. Stats for the Champions League? Woeful. Stats for the Europa League? Embarrassing. Remove the friendlies altogether, as they are meaningless. Even then, they are just stats and you can twist them to show anything you want. It is about time you started analysing them, rather than just interpreting them.}

Agree0 Disagree4

25 Mar 2015 07:27:14
How can you twist his actual record as manager?
That is a strange comment.
That is how many games he has won lost and drawn since he has been here. simple really.
I honestly could not be arsed to remove his friendlies ed.
Just thought after you ripped him apart yesterday that I would clarify why I still support him.
And that record so far is not bad in my book.
Tim Sherwood was manager at Spurs for 10 minutes so of course his stats are warped.
I am not bashing and have never bashed anyone for having a different view to me, I prefer to chat about it as you well know.
His record in Europe is poor but they are included in the stats so it's not like I left them out to support my argument.
They are part of the 165 games total.
I have re-read the post and can't find anywhere where I have bashed any other fan. you need to take that back fella.
I value your opinion Ed but I don't always agree with it.
This is just one such occasion.

{Ed001's Note - so it is just his record at Liverpool? You never even specified that. But you have to analysis it, of course they can be twisted. I mean there are so many contributing factors to be taken into it. How good the team he is managing is compared to the opponents. How much money he has spent. When the games were played, as in how the opposition's mental state was etc, not the time of day, though even that can be a factor. Basically you have taken 3 years, with friendlies, which could be completely skewing the result, and not looked at anything else. May as well all admit Pep Guardiola is the greatest manager that has ever been and Bill Shankly was not very good if you are basing it purely on win ratio.....

I have re-read my reply and I have no idea where you got it from that I said you were bashing fans???? I think you need to get new glasses mate!}

25 Mar 2015 07:59:07
I do wear glasses and have just re-read it.
You said basing instead of bashing.
ha ha ha
I am pissing my self here now.
It's early Ed. Give me a break.
The funny thing is because I mis-read that comment I am now in a shit mood, so I fired off a couple of posts further down the page just basically calling ya for everything. ha ha.
Specsavers jonnybarnes89-90 is my new name from now on.
My apologies.
Ed from memory, we don't win that many friendlies under Rodgers so I don't think they skew the result too much.
And yes it was just Liverpool, I am not arsed about what he did before he was here.
Or indeed after he leaves.
I am not basing my opinion on just that ed, I just don't think he is as bad as being made out by some.
You don't win 55% of games over 165 by being crap.
That is all I am saying.
Still laughing though!!!

{Ed001's Note - oooohhhh basing! Now I see it.

As for that, it still skews it, even if it is against him, it still alters the result, which makes the stats false.

You do win over 55% if your team is better than 75% of the opposition if you are a crap manager though....}

25 Mar 2015 08:13:27
At least I have shown you why I still support the man.

{Ed001's Note - I just don't see that as a good enough reason. Especially when the team is clearly better than they are playing. For me a great manager gets players performing above expectations regularly, Rodgers does it for a couple of games and then we struggle for months. It has become a routine under him.}

25 Mar 2015 08:57:16
Jonnybarnes, send an email to the owners with the above meaningless stats begging them to give clueless Brendan another chance when they sack him in the summer. The man is out of his depth, end of story. Why do people want such an ordinary man in charge of LFC? Its as if u have accepted LFC to be perennial losers, which Brendan is btw. Such fans have no expectations and ambitions for the club they love, and it shows in the club's performances in the last 25 years (bar a few miracles of course).

25 Mar 2015 10:07:33
Worth remembering our club motto is You'll Never Walk Alone. I'll be getting behind the players and Brendan for the remaining games and see where we end up, top 4 is still very doable. Every proper Liverpool fan should be doing the same, not carping and wining at every poor result.

25 Mar 2015 12:52:10
Stats are meaningless, say, after a game where one team dominated possession but failed to score and conceded 3. Then the domination of possession becomes meaningless. When it comes to meaningful stats there are only two: goals scored, and win percentage.(obviously more but these are the ones people really care about.) Sorry Ed001 but 3 seasons is a large data spread and BR's win percentage should not be dismissed as irrelevant. Whether you think that 55% is good or bad however, that's up to you.

{Ed001's Note - win percentage? There is only one win percentage that matters - number of trophies won in those 3 years 0%. Winning games is irrelevant if you don't win the ones that matter.}

25 Mar 2015 13:45:53
we just don't get on ed.
Maybe it's me. as I can't stand Ed002 either:)
Maybe I need to look within.

25 Mar 2015 18:04:29
Stats can be skewed to suit the viewpoint of the person using them. For instance Wenger has played nearly 9 times as many games as Brendan (1056) and has a win % of 57.56 or something. Some could argue that this makes him a better manager because he has maintained it over a longer period. But many gooners would point to a trophy cabinet that is not as full as they would like despite the impressive stats. Point is at least they have won some. I would argue that the win percentage is irrelevant but rather the trophy's you accumulate that tells the picture. Had he the tactical nous to beat mancrapster united on Sunday I may have given him more latitude but his overall performance as a manager fails to impress me. Am I fickle? Maybe

25 Mar 2015 20:52:46
Indian Buzzer.
You obviously did not read my post properly.
If you actually read it then you will know that I posted it to spark some debate about the manager.
I just put it out there so that people know where I am coming from.
If you want to chat about the manager and whether he is good or not then don't use things like "He is out of his depth end of story"
How does that help the debate?
As for writing a begging letter????
What the actual.
I should write a letter to the people who employed him in the first place???
See you obviously just want to play the scapegoat game.
Pin the tail on the manager.
FSG signed him as manager and they signed him saying it was a long term appointment. Was that all BS then about the long term appointment?
How can your record as manager be meaningless?
You have made it clear you don't like him, fair enough, more power to you for that.
That is your opinion and I have mine.
But the object of a manager is to win games, the more games you win the more likely you are to win trophies.
55% is a good win percentage for a manager over a 3 year period in my opinion and it certainly does not suggest anyone who is "out of his depth" does it.
Hodgson WAS "OUT OF HIS DEPTH" with a win percentage of 33%
These are not stats that can be skewed they are simply his record as manager of Liverpool Football club.
I have put them on here to show that all those who claim he is crap are talking nonsense.
You may still want him sacked and I can accept that but that record completely destroys your argument that he is useless, inept or out of his depth.
Manager's who are useless do not win 55% of games over a 3 year period.
Not in the premier league.
That again is my opinion.
If you don't believe me then look at all the managers who have ever been in the premier league for about 3 years or longer like Rodgers and compare them against each other in terms of win percentage.
Simple.
There will be only three/four names with a better win percentage than him.
They will be Daglish, Wenger, Ferguson and Mourinho.
Are those managers inept, clueless, out of their depth or any other negative you wish to throw out there?
Thought not.
You may want to pick holes in the manager but his record is his record.
How can you twist a manager's actual record. It is completely black and white.
There is no magic bullet theory, no 2nd shooter on a grassy knoll.
It is just his record as manager.
That is why I put Ferguson's record on my post as a comparison.
I dread to think what you would have written about Ferguson in his first 6 years as manager.
One of the greatest managers in the history of the game would not have got past year three with you as chairman.
I would guess you would have been calling him useless, inept clueless and worse after about 10 months.
That is my point entirely.
3 years into a 5 year plan for me.
5 years gives the manager the correct amount of time to get it right in my opinion.
Others may disagree, but Like I said, I am old school.
5 years is a better time frame to judge a manager.

25 Mar 2015 20:53:47
I would suggest it is fickle to decide the fate of our manager on 1 game.
Like your name though so I will let you off fella.
HA Ha

25 Mar 2015 23:35:26
The one Stat you missed which rendered your whole post completely pointless was the stat 0 as in ZERO trophies won so far during that span. The win percentage is the dumbest stat there is IMO because Barnez just posted, it does not account for the a lot of other parameters. As for BR, his record is all there for us to see and the owners will make a decision based on that and that alone. The owners did not give BR 250m to play good footie. They did that because they want trophies (most important stat in football)and success and if BR clearly cannot give them that then why should they keep him? I have asked this question several times and STILL you are unable to answer that, Johbarnes90.

25 Mar 2015 23:47:29
I hear what you're saying but we are still growing with BR. Sometimes the team is just stagnant with a manager and then it's obviously time to rid. But Henderson was just saying BR is like a twelfth man. The players are getting better under him. I have my frustrations too. Obviously I would like us to win things and I too found it very strange he didn't tweak the system for United after Swansea had figured it out. But Let's not forget the state of the club when Rogers arrived. It was in shambles and now there is a real sense of building something. We went on a crazy run without Suarez. Players like Hendo, Cout, Ibe and Sterling are really stepping up. So i'd definitely say keep. Arsene is a different story, he's been there over two decades.

Look give me Simeone or Klopp and I would be happy. But De Boer? Has he really proven to be a top manager? Is that even possible in the Dutch league? I just hope we don't all turn on a manager who despite ups and downs is getting there, in favour of a quick fix, which leads to disaster. There are no shortcuts in life pal.

Maybe a little patience is needed?

{Ed001's Note - but how is he getting there? We have looked far worse this season than last, so he was getting there but now is going away from where we want to be....}

26 Mar 2015 05:53:01
Throw a fit Sturridge and Suarez into this seasons team and we would be challenging for the league. Replacing world class strikers is probably the hardest thing to do in the market.

{Ed001's Note - and whose fault is it that we never replaced Suarez so that we could challenge? The manager.}

26 Mar 2015 07:52:27
redohio. I did not miss that at all.
Again, Ferguson did not win anything in his first 3 years at United so what is your point?
The reason you give a manager time is so they build something tangible.
I am of the opinion that I would like to give him at least 5 years in the job and I point to that record as proof as to why.
If he improves that record by a little then we would be in great shape under Rodgers.
Which in my opinion flies in the face of those who say he is awful, inept etc.

26 Mar 2015 08:49:25
Again, as Ed points out, the failure to replace Suarez even remotely adequately is down to one man. Facts are, BR has failed. Times up.

26 Mar 2015 10:17:12
Season before Rodgers: 8th place finish, 2 finals, 1 cup. 100 mil spent. 18 months with 1 manager

With rodgers: 5th place likely, 1 possible final, 0 trophies. 250M spent, 3 years with 1 manager

Does he really deserve more time given the above and the outcome of his predecessor.

26 Mar 2015 12:31:04
We could finish 4th and win a cup still this year.

26 Mar 2015 16:27:13
Or we could not and he gets the sack.







 

 

 
Log In or Register to post

User
Pass
Remember me

Forgot Pass  
 
Change Consent