Backroom Shake Up.. Marsh & Pascoe gone.. More to come..
- Thread starter 737Max
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Yep, seems very much like they're trying to reduce the financial hit of sacking them all at once to my oh so cynical mind.
With all due respect. I don't see him doing that at all. this is forced on him.
The bigger hit is in handing out contracts to new staff, than keeping Marsh and Pascoe. Marsh's contract was up and Pascoe only had a year left. Surely if we're replacing them, then it's not going to be with two more yes men on modest(ish) salaries.
Well then it is exactly what he does. He could find the door with dignity and say that they failed as a team. It is hardly a year since he was on how fantastic team they are and how much they meant for the success of the club.
So the outcome of the review was 'we're going to sack the guys you sit next to'? Sorry Macca but unless you have the inside track on this that just sounds unlikely to me. Surely it's more likely the owners put Rodgers on the spot and asked him if and how he could improve on this season and he felt these two were worth the sacrifice.
Is he the GK coach? If so, I suppose he can point to Mignolet's resurgence in the second half of the season.
From the Echo by Ian Doyle
"Rodgers was reassured his job was safe but has been forced to accept changes to his backroom team to maintain the Reds hotseat."
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/liverpool-fc-assistant-manager-colin-9400427
Hahahahahaha. Only on an internet forum can that be a rational leap to make.
In many ways, the easiest decision for the owners would have been to sack Rodgers and all of his staff...especially with the clamour for Klopp. Something had to give on the coaching side and it was evidently never going to be just Rodgers. Can anyone seriously imagine Klopp or Ancelotti coming in to replace Rodgers and accepting Pascoe and Marsh as their assistants? It's pretty clear now that sacking Rodgers was never a consideration.
Rodgers probably went into the review thinking he would have to sacrifice something or someone in order to save his own skin. And if that's the case, I think he underestimated the strength of his own position with the owners.
I've seen some people compare Rodgers to David Brent and this scenario reminds me of the 'bad news, good news' scene...
BR: Guys, I've just come out of the review and there's bad news and good news. The bad news is, you've both lost your jobs.
CP/MM: Oh. Right. What's the good news?
BR: I've been kept on!
Rodgers probably went into the review thinking he would have to sacrifice something or someone in order to save his own skin. And if that's the case, I think he underestimated the strength of his own position with the owners.
I've seen some people compare Rodgers to David Brent and this scenario reminds me of the 'bad news, good news' scene...
BR: Guys, I've just come out of the review and there's bad news and good news. The bad news is, you've both lost your jobs.
CP/MM: Oh. Right. What's the good news?
BR: I've been kept on!
There's a massive contradiction in that article. On the one hand this has been forced on Rodgers but on the other it was a mutual decision between Rodgers, Gordon and Werner.
Who knew eh?
Whispers of Sami Hyppia and Bolo Zendon as replacements..
That would seem to indicate the modern game now has an over-reliance on video analysis and statistics ... maybe we should forge a new retro path and return to Ginsoak's days of 'gut-feeling', seemed to work well enough then !
But in our current state it is exclusive.
I simply can't read that without thinking Depth of Field (photography). So assume you mean we are extending the pitch.
Wonderful piece of deductive reasoning !
Something had to change didnt it, if Rodgers was to stay on. Some have talked about this rumoured overhawl since January. Compare those two to other assistant managers and first team coaches at the other top clubs.
Footballing wise and experience they're miles off.
As Macca said, maybe FSG have talked to Gerrard etc.
God knows, even though you find it funny it could be a good move.
Well they're not going to say one of them was unhappy about it.
He had to blame Rodgers somehow, obviously. As the Echo said, he was given an ultimatum.
Like I said, I can only see that there's been a compromise both ways, one on the transfer set up and the other on improving the support behind Rodgers.
The only way we'll know whether they are on the ball about it, is when we see what personnel come in on both fronts.
The only way we'll know whether they are on the ball about it, is when we see what personnel come in on both fronts.
Yes. But he's so uncompromising about The Vision Thing I can't see this working. If he's having people with other ideas forced on him they're undermining the very thing they liked about him in the first place. It's going to be interesting to see what happens, that's for sure.
Getting rid of Pascoe and Marsh was a cheap option.... FSG dont like heavy investmentd while they work on the stadium.
I think he'd sell his granny to keep this job.
- Status
Similar threads
-
- Locked
