Gus Poyet: Suarez sale cost Rodgers his job

[Paul Marin]

Gus Poyet thinks Brendan Rodgers might still be Liverpool manager if the club had not sold Luis Suarez...

http://www.skysports.com/football/ne...e-cost-rodgers

[Stonigut]

Paul don't want to get too deep into this argument on Rogers as I think you know my stance, but what exactly is your bottom line stance on Rogers.

[Peter R]

Suarez was a big loss as is Sturridge, he might as well have been sold too.
Interesting stat. JK's Prem record is the same as BR's after 8 matches. BR was in charge of the first 8 and JK the next 8.

While there is renewed vigour in the team as seen in better Europa performances and I actually didn't check that, it demonstrates the task of the manager is not as easy as some would have you believe.

Now watch some fool jump on this and seh me reh reh bout JK! Watch!

[Sir X]

Pointing out mitigating facts is foolish or expecting a truthful answer from any query ?

The records might be the same but the circumstances achieved under the two are they ?

BR bought these players, had them for the summer , he should have had them playing with more vigor, then the question is why not ? that would lead to more questions e.g direction of estimated future results ,would he have achieved worse or better given that you stated Klopp has more vigor?

Other questions are given the total outlay of money spent over his years of service,why should anyone support this type of vigor, given that we have the option of the upgrade JK ?

It would be foolish not to say reh reh about JK as it would be, to not say anything about BR- its called making an assesment .

[Peter R]

Bingo!!!

[Sir X]

Yep Proof .

[Peter R]

Yep...proof that some "fool" going jump on dis.. etc.

An since yuh like put a youtube in deh, mek mi oblige...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzaCbcq4z4c

[Sir X]

I hear you loud and clear ,and I agree with you for jumping .To remind you I said "yep proof "

Keep jumping.

[Assasin]

Did BR have them over the summer though?? Benteke, Firminho, Ings all came injured late.

The fact is the team got stagnant under Rodgers and the fact that Liverpool bought youngsters means that there is some grooming to do over the medium term. It happens to the best of coaches, just look at Rafa and Jose right now.

I have to respect Fergie and Wenger as they have been able to mold their team through thick and thin, those are execptional coaches. Even Klopp had a very bad half of year in Germany when his team was in the relegation zone.

Rodger era at Pool was one that was need for Pool to settle their finances somewhat. You forget that coaches were refusing Pool job when Rodgers took it? Rodgers tenure made it attractive for Klopp. He changed the long ball, made Liverpool place 2nd in the league and has a lot of potential talent in the squad and Liverpool could have paid off some debt, while they have gotten rid of some huge salaries that were going up in age. Liverpool as a club is better for Rodgers tenure and is in a better position to grow now than 4 years ago.

[Peter R]

[Sir X]

Johnny yuh deh pan fiyah diss mawning a love it .Peter says you are a fool.

[Paul Marin]

Johnny yuh deh pan fiyah diss mawning a love it .Peter says you are a fool.

Once again you are trying to re-write history. Peter said YOU were the fool, not Sass.

[Peter R]

Yuh haffi si wid X... we kno long time reading comprehension is not one of his strong suits.

[Paul Marin]

My stance on Rodgers is the same with every manager. They are deserving of our support. They have a very difficult job and are expected to be miracle workers. In Rodgers case specifically, he was hired after a very tumultuous start to the FSG ownership reign. They took over the club from a bunch of renegades who had no understanding of what they had acquired and were wrestling (in my opinion) also with a very steep learning curve not only in learning LFC, but also understanding how football works. For example, John Henry was unaware that player contracts were routinely broken.

Despite the environment, Rodgers made many mistakes of his own doing. He routinely (towards the end of last season and into this one) tried to put lipstick on the pig and it insulted the fans who (xceptions of course) know more than a thing or two about football. One thing that I continue to be ignorant about is the real level of control that he had over player transfers. I hear two stories - but it seems that he didn't have full control, and if that is true, then you can't put 100% of the blame for player selection on him. If it is not true, then he royally screwed up with the Suarez and Sterling money.

However, based on the Suarez debacle, I suspect he had little control. Which manager in their right mind would want to let Suarez go without having an equally proven and effective alternative lined up? Still, it was his cross to bear and he did a poor job of it. I think he made many mistakes, but, as his second season showed, he also proved that with the right personnel, he could take LFC to title challenging heights...even with a very thin squad.

If Rodgers is 100% to "blame" for the current squad, then he paid for it with his job. However, I am not too sure about that, so I give him the benefit of the doubt. Should he have been sacked? I think those of us who believe in fairness will say - "Not based on 8 games in" - but at the same time, you can't fault the owners. They have to think of the club first, and managers like Klopp don't come along every day. So I think they did the right thing, not necessarily fair, but they had to do it.

Based on his overall performance, I would give him a solid B-, a ways behind Rafa's A, Houllier's A, and Paisley's A++.

Last, the Liverpool manager's job is probably the hardest in football. We are a club that is living on our history, and our real fans are anxious to get back to where we once where. We also have to contend with the empty barrels that clog up the works with their ignorance and myopic understanding of a manager's priorities...e.g. there is one frequent poster on here who suggested that Martinez (who simultaneously won the FA Cup AND got Wigan relegated) would have been a better manager than Rodgers. That maybe the case, but getting a team relegated is not the manager you want as the LEAGUE (not cups) is the priority.

My hope is that Klopp will be able to do it, but as recent results show, it won't happen easily...and despite the great theater of it all (Bayern's bazooka vs. Dortmund's bow and arrow), it won't happen without significant funds. So whether it is Klopp, Rafa, Jesus, or Rodgers, consistently challenging for the title , will require a deeper squad, and more quality players. That's what City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs and Manu** all have on us.

As for Rodgers future. In keeping with the Liverpool Way, we extend to him and all former LFC managers the same dignity and courtesy. We will thank him for his service and wish him well...except when he comes to Anfield or otherwise plays against LFC...on that front, he walks alone...like X.

[Assasin]

Let me ask you this. If you were a owner and had to deal with the Torres transfer and how the money was spent, would you then give another manager who you may or may not have trust in full control over transfer?

Liverpool have a template and that is to buy Young talented players with the exception of a James Milner and few others. Liverpool wanted to rid the team of the huge salaries that were past their time, that is not necessarily a manager's wish but more of a management wish.