• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Rodgers vs 'The Transfer Committee'

Status
Not open for further replies.

keniget

6CM Addict
Administrator
I've noticed that during Rodgers time here there seems to be a feeling that some transfers are clearly Rodgers picks whereas others are the picks of the other lesser known members of the transfer committee.

Why is that? Has there been anything coming out of the club to give us cause to believe that certain players are Rodgers buys and certain others are not?

In terms of which signings belong to which camp it feels like the Premier League buys are attributed to Rodgers and the lesser known foreign imports are not. That's interesting because when I look at the signings we've made this summer (and prior to that), I'm generally a lot more positive about those that haven't been signed from rival Prem sides.
 
I've noticed that during Rodgers time here there seems to be a feeling that some transfers are clearly Rodgers picks whereas others are the picks of the other lesser known members of the transfer committee.

Why is that? Has there been anything coming out of the club to give us cause to believe that certain players are Rodgers buys and certain others are not?

In terms of which signings belong to which camp it feels like the Premier League buys are attributed to Rodgers and the lesser known foreign imports are not. That's interesting because when I look at the signings we've made this summer (and prior to that), I'm generally a lot more positive about those that haven't been signed from rival Prem sides.

The fact that Rodgers said shortly before we signed Balotelli that he would definitely not be joining us, and the fact that Rushie - a member of the Committee - has been pretty much the only LFC grandee to come out and defend Balotelli, both suggest to me that that signing was (at least initially) down to the Committee. I also wonder if the fact that Lambert has hardly had a look in suggests the same is true of him. Might Rodgers have actually wanted that marquee striker signing which so many have been saying we should have gone for, but the Committee knocked him back?
 
I don't see how any committee presiding over the transfer dealings of a top club could sell their best player for £75 million and then decide that he doesn't need replacing. I have no doubt that we tried to find a replacement striker. We just failed, that's all.
 
The fact that Rodgers said shortly before we signed Balotelli that he would definitely not be joining us, and the fact that Rushie - a member of the Committee - has been pretty much the only LFC grandee to come out and defend Balotelli, both suggest to me that that signing was (at least initially) down to the Committee.

Add to that the fact that Rushie has confided to the journalist John Richardson that he really has no faith in Mario at all, and the problems with shrouding the responsibilities seems even worse. It just provokes speculation and confusion. There must be much more clarity.
 
Liverpool's transfer approach about as scientific as the Muppet Show - and Brendan Rodgers deserves better
04 November 2014 08:56 AMDave Kidd

The Reds' three-man transfer committee has come up short with their summer dealings, yet it's the Kop boss who is getting the flack, says Dave Kidd

When Real Madrid wiped the fields of Anfield Road with Liverpool in their Champions League clash two weeks ago, the result seemed crushingly predictable to English eyes.

A team crammed with world-class players had demolished a mid-table Premier League side struggling desperately to cope with the loss of their one global A-lister, Luis Suarez.

Yet while visiting Madrid for Real’s Clasico victory over Barcelona a few days later, it became apparent that the result was viewed with rare significance at the Bernabeu.

Liverpool represented a genuine benchmark. Madrid had lost all of their three previous meetings, without scoring. And the Reds are one of the few clubs who can hold a candle to Real in terms of European achievement.

Often mocked as a club living on former glories, Liverpool’s history does resonate across the continent.

Carlo Ancelotti had posed liked a touristby the famous ‘This is Anfield’ sign. Having equalled Bob Paisley’s record of three European Cups, he spoke reverentially about the great man.

So Liverpool are rightly proud of their history and yet owner John W Henry and his Fenway Sports Group are less keen to remember what made the club great – strong managers.

Brendan Rodgers does not enjoy the same power as his great bootroom forebears, Shankly, Paisley and Fagan, even though his achievement in challenging for last season’s title ought to have earned him the right to autonomy.

Since Rodgers’ arrival in 2012, Liverpool’s player recruitment has been run by a transfer committee consisting of the manager, Harley Davidson-riding chief executive Ian Ayre, head of recruitment Dave Fallows and Michael Edwards.

Edwards, an ally of former director of football Damien Commoli, is 'director of technical performance’, his CV including references to ‘informatics’ and ‘analytics’.

Ayre was really leathered-up and getting his motor running when he boasted about the philosophy behind this committee: “A combination of old-school scouting and statistical analysis of players across the world for a more educated view of who you should and shouldn’t be buying.”

Yet when it comes to transfer ‘science’, Liverpool are at the Beaker from the Muppet Show end of the lab.

Of the 20 senior players recruited by this committee, only two have been true successes – Daniel Sturridge and Philippe Coutinho.

It is early days for this summer’s batch of post-Suarez signings but Alberto Moreno and Dejan Lovren made shocking errors in Saturday’s limp defeat at Newcastle, while the disappointing performances of Lazar Markovic, Emre Can, Rickie Lambert and Adam Lallana have been overshadowed by the Mario Balotelli circus.

Meanwhile, the myth about players needing time to settle in the Premier League has been exploded by six of its top nine scorers having never played in the division before this season.

While Diego Costa and Alexis Sanchez may have been out of reach, Diafra Sakho and Graziano Pelle are precisely the sort of nuggets recruitment ‘experts’ ought to be unearthing.

The committee’s previous signings - Luis Alberto, Iago Aspas, Kolo Toure, Simon Mignolet, Mamadou Sakho, Aly Cissokho, Tiago Ilori, Fabio Borini, Joe Allen, Oussama Assaidi, Nuri Sahin and Victor Moses have all failed to a greater or lesser extent.

Despite this, Rodgers fashioned a team who were within a Steven Gerrard slip of winning the title. His man-management is outstanding, his playing style thrilling and while defensive frailties have been glaring, he merits the chance to stand or fall by his own recruitments.

Nobody who covers Liverpool closely was left in any doubt that Rodgers did not want Balotelli, as a player or a man. At best, Rodgers was told by the committee that it was the Italian fruitcake or no striker at all.

The days of the truly all-powerful manager may have died with Sir Alex Ferguson’s retirement. Yet Jose Mourinho, Arsene Wenger and Louis Van Gaal are not having players imposed upon them.

Neither Ayre, Fallows nor Edwards are true confidantes of Rodgers – and recruitment by committee has failed at Anfield.

Yet if results continue to disappoint, starting in the Bernabeu tonight, Rodgers will be the man in the firing line.

He deserves better. And if Liverpool’s history is to mean anything, their manager should be free to manage from top to bottom.
 
He acts as though Rodgers has had nothing to do with all these 'failed' signings.
To be honest he does make it clear that Rodgers is part of that committee - he just suggests that his say is not as great as it should be.

In fairness, the moment Mario signed I thought Rodgers has been forced to accept him. He was clear as possible that he wanted nothing to do with the Italian.
 
To be honest he does make it clear that Rodgers is part of that committee - he just suggests that his say is not as great as it should be.

In fairness, the moment Mario signed I thought Rodgers has been forced to accept him. He was clear as possible that he wanted nothing to do with the Italian.


I don't think anyone on the committee really wanted him, surely, he wasn't even our bronze medal.
 
Probably true, but Rodgers said a week before we signed him that he didn't want him. It's not like there were a heap of other options that got taken off he table between him saying "no way" and us signing him.

Rodgers didn't want him - period.

I have to say that I did want to see us sign him but I wanted to see his signature as long as we got Eto'o as well. He's the only guy I could see on the market at that time with the potential to replace Sturridge (to some extent) in movement and goals. I could well be proven wrong and fine if someone has that proof but I personally think Rodgers would have liked Eto'o but the committee or FSG said no. Double negative if that's the case IMO.
 
I don't see how any committee presiding over the transfer dealings of a top club could sell their best player for £75 million and then decide that he doesn't need replacing. I have no doubt that we tried to find a replacement striker. We just failed, that's all.

I also don't think they decided Suarez didn't need replacing. What I'm wondering is whether Rodgers wanted a replacement whose quality was as close to that of Suarez as possible, and whether the committee decided it wasn't necessary to go that far.
 
I thought we wanted Sanchez but couldn't get him?

It's one thing having targets, it's another actually getting them.
 
The closest I've seen to Suarez is Reus.
The closest attainable player I've seen is Shaquiri. The fact he's almost certainly going in January makes him very tempting. He's as busy as they come and if Spurs get him (they're strongly linked) I'll cry
 
The closest I've seen to Suarez is Reus.
The closest attainable player I've seen is Shaquiri. The fact he's almost certainly going in January makes him very tempting. He's as busy as they come and if Spurs get him (they're strongly linked) I'll cry


Yes. I'm sure some at the club would prefer to hide behind the 'you don't get good signings in January' cliche, but Suarez wrecks that excuse, so we need to strengthen in the next window.
 
Yes. I'm sure some at the club would prefer to hide behind the 'you don't get good signings in January' cliche, but Suarez wrecks that excuse, so we need to strengthen in the next window.

It seems like our best recent signings came in January. We've bought so many players at this point, surely integration would be an issue.
 
Liverpool's transfer approach about as scientific as the Muppet Show - and Brendan Rodgers deserves better
04 November 2014 08:56 AMDave Kidd

The Reds' three-man transfer committee has come up short with their summer dealings, yet it's the Kop boss who is getting the flack, says Dave Kidd

When Real Madrid wiped the fields of Anfield Road with Liverpool in their Champions League clash two weeks ago, the result seemed crushingly predictable to English eyes.

A team crammed with world-class players had demolished a mid-table Premier League side struggling desperately to cope with the loss of their one global A-lister, Luis Suarez.

Yet while visiting Madrid for Real’s Clasico victory over Barcelona a few days later, it became apparent that the result was viewed with rare significance at the Bernabeu.

Liverpool represented a genuine benchmark. Madrid had lost all of their three previous meetings, without scoring. And the Reds are one of the few clubs who can hold a candle to Real in terms of European achievement.

Often mocked as a club living on former glories, Liverpool’s history does resonate across the continent.

Carlo Ancelotti had posed liked a touristby the famous ‘This is Anfield’ sign. Having equalled Bob Paisley’s record of three European Cups, he spoke reverentially about the great man.

So Liverpool are rightly proud of their history and yet owner John W Henry and his Fenway Sports Group are less keen to remember what made the club great – strong managers.

Brendan Rodgers does not enjoy the same power as his great bootroom forebears, Shankly, Paisley and Fagan, even though his achievement in challenging for last season’s title ought to have earned him the right to autonomy.

Since Rodgers’ arrival in 2012, Liverpool’s player recruitment has been run by a transfer committee consisting of the manager, Harley Davidson-riding chief executive Ian Ayre, head of recruitment Dave Fallows and Michael Edwards.

Edwards, an ally of former director of football Damien Commoli, is 'director of technical performance’, his CV including references to ‘informatics’ and ‘analytics’.

Ayre was really leathered-up and getting his motor running when he boasted about the philosophy behind this committee: “A combination of old-school scouting and statistical analysis of players across the world for a more educated view of who you should and shouldn’t be buying.”

Yet when it comes to transfer ‘science’, Liverpool are at the Beaker from the Muppet Show end of the lab.

Of the 20 senior players recruited by this committee, only two have been true successes – Daniel Sturridge and Philippe Coutinho.

It is early days for this summer’s batch of post-Suarez signings but Alberto Moreno and Dejan Lovren made shocking errors in Saturday’s limp defeat at Newcastle, while the disappointing performances of Lazar Markovic, Emre Can, Rickie Lambert and Adam Lallana have been overshadowed by the Mario Balotelli circus.

Meanwhile, the myth about players needing time to settle in the Premier League has been exploded by six of its top nine scorers having never played in the division before this season.

While Diego Costa and Alexis Sanchez may have been out of reach, Diafra Sakho and Graziano Pelle are precisely the sort of nuggets recruitment ‘experts’ ought to be unearthing.

The committee’s previous signings - Luis Alberto, Iago Aspas, Kolo Toure, Simon Mignolet, Mamadou Sakho, Aly Cissokho, Tiago Ilori, Fabio Borini, Joe Allen, Oussama Assaidi, Nuri Şahin and Victor Moses have all failed to a greater or lesser extent.

Despite this, Rodgers fashioned a team who were within a Steven Gerrard slip of winning the title. His man-management is outstanding, his playing style thrilling and while defensive frailties have been glaring, he merits the chance to stand or fall by his own recruitments.

Nobody who covers Liverpool closely was left in any doubt that Rodgers did not want Balotelli, as a player or a man. At best, Rodgers was told by the committee that it was the Italian fruitcake or no striker at all.

The days of the truly all-powerful manager may have died with Sir Alex Ferguson’s retirement. Yet Jose Mourinho, Arsene Wenger and Louis Van Gaal are not having players imposed upon them.

Neither Ayre, Fallows nor Edwards are true confidantes of Rodgers – and recruitment by committee has failed at Anfield.

Yet if results continue to disappoint, starting in the Bernabeu tonight, Rodgers will be the man in the firing line.

He deserves better. And if Liverpool’s history is to mean anything, their manager should be free to manage from top to bottom.

Yeah, but this ducks the obvious observation that most of Rodgers's own picks have hardly set the world alight. I also recall he wanted to exchange Henderson plus additional cash for Dempsey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom