Now that it's official, I'm backing him 100% and I definitely believe he's the right man to take us back to the pinnacle.

Rodgers brings with him three of his most trusted backroom assistants from Swansea

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/9304765/The-new-Liverpool-coaching-staff...-direct-from-Swansea.html

And Steve Clarke I believe has been let go for good.

Art Morte wrote:Paul Lambert has offered his resignation to Norwich, whilst he is believed to be taking over the reigns at Aston Villa. I would have much rather seen Lambert at Liverpool than Rodgers and this is feeling bitter right now...

I can't say I agree with you on this one, Art. Paul Lambert has done some very good things, but of the two, I would take Rodgers every time (and twice on Sunday). To me, Rodgers feels like he has a system and a tactical approach that could transcend a single club and translate to various levels of clubs (from the smaller sides like Swansea to the largest in Europe like Barcelona).

Lambert, on the other hand, merely seems very comfortable working within certain boundaries, meaning he's good on a budget and can get the best out of his players. I'm no expert on Norwich's past season, but I remember them soaking up pressure and playing very direct quite often (a very traditionally English style, if you will). Grant Holt certainly benefited from this style, and perhaps Carroll would too. However, I'm not sure it's the style we want for LFC. This is my own perception, but many of their conquests this season seemed to be more opportunistic than dominating. Granted, these are exactly the type of performances we couldn't achieve this season, but I don't think we want to adopt that sort of small club mentality.

Now, I would love to see Lambert at Villa. I have no ill intentions towards them, and I honestly think he would do a good job there. It wouldn't be a huge departure from McLeish's setup, although it would be considerably more positive.

donttreadonred wrote:

Art Morte wrote:Paul Lambert has offered his resignation to Norwich, whilst he is believed to be taking over the reigns at Aston Villa. I would have much rather seen Lambert at Liverpool than Rodgers and this is feeling bitter right now...

I can't say I agree with you on this one, Art. Paul Lambert has done some very good things, but of the two, I would take Rodgers every time (and twice on Sunday). To me, Rodgers feels like he has a system and a tactical approach that could transcend a single club and translate to various levels of clubs (from the smaller sides like Swansea to the largest in Europe like Barcelona).

Lambert, on the other hand, merely seems very comfortable working within certain boundaries, meaning he's good on a budget and can get the best out of his players. I'm no expert on Norwich's past season, but I remember them soaking up pressure and playing very direct quite often (a very traditionally English style, if you will). Grant Holt certainly benefited from this style, and perhaps Carroll would too. However, I'm not sure it's the style we want for LFC. This is my own perception, but many of their conquests this season seemed to be more opportunistic than dominating. Granted, these are exactly the type of performances we couldn't achieve this season, but I don't think we want to adopt that sort of small club mentality.

Now, I would love to see Lambert at Villa. I have no ill intentions towards them, and I honestly think he would do a good job there. It wouldn't be a huge departure from McLeish's setup, although it would be considerably more positive.

People are all of a sudden throwing these concepts like "football philosophy; system; tactical approach; playing the tiki-taka way" in the air as if it has been revealed that that's how you will be successful. Which is partly true, you need to know what you're doing. But I'm not buying the extent to which people seem to credit footballing success to these things, these concepts.

At the end of the day it's 11 v 11 on the field and I don't believe that if you have got two sets of equally good players that a certain tactical approach is necessary better than some other. Mourinho has been insanly successful by not exactly playing the tiki-taka way, a style for which Rodgers has been praised.

To me a manager's most important job is to get the best out of the players (and resources) he has got available. I'm not quite sure what people actually mean when they say a manager has a "system" or " philosophy".

But both these managers have been on the big stage for such a short time - one season, really - that it's too early to say which one is better. The bottom line to me is that Lambert's CV is more impressive than Rodgers'. I believe Lambert is better from those two.

@Art:
That's a very valid argument. Lambert's record of two successive promotions and a 12th-place finish is impressive. Rodgers can't quite match that CV. However, he was able to produce better results in the recently concluded season on a very similar budget, after having to play their way into the Premier League via the playoff.

The reason I greatly prefer Rodgers comes down to the philosophy and system you alluded to. His is a tiki-taka/Barcelona-esque style, but that in-and-of-itself does not guarantee anything. A system's success lies in its ability to quell another team’s attacks and manipulate their defense in order to create goal-scoring chances. His particular system is founded upon the statistics of possession leading to wins. The stat he likes to quote is that you have a 79% chance of winning when you control possession.

What's nice about systems is that they are designed to consistently break down the opposition. However, it's not necessarily the system that is desirable, but the understanding the players have of their roles within it. When players have a framework to work within, they are able to better understand what they are required to do and what everyone else should be doing. This allows for a better understanding between the players on the field, as well as a more interchangeable nature for personnel. Additionally, players are more likely to be able to reproduce positive performances, creating consistency. This is something that eluded us all last season, and I believe it has a lot to do with shifting approaches and relying on individual brilliance instead of team effort.

What turned me off to Lambert as a candidate was his Hodgson-esque approach (meaning the semi-direct style, favoring long balls in to Holt). I personally prefer the control and "big-club" mentality that comes with a possession game. The long ball/counter-attacking philosophy is often employed by teams in the PL who merely wish "not to lose," and that's not necessarily what I want for Liverpool. The admirable thing about Swansea under Rodgers was that they always seemed to approach a game with the intention of taking three points away from the match. I didn't necessarily get that feeling from Lambert.

Because neither has an extensive history in the PL, it's difficult to say if there was a "right" or "wrong" choice, yet. We will have to wait until they have had their chance with bigger clubs before there can be a real discussion as to whether or not either was a good choice or a bad choice. As it is, I would say that they both represent a considerable risk due to their short time at the top level. The decision as for which to target must have come down to personal preference for the clubs.

I’m personally excited to see a Rodgers-prepared Liverpool side next season. I think his work with Swansea was brilliant. If he can implement a similar approach to the Liverpool side, we can hopefully build consistency and create more consistent opportunities for our best players to shine. This season we seemed to run out with the approach of: “Now what can Suarez/Gerrard/Lucas/Agger/etc. do to win us this game?” I’m looking forward to seeing an entire team performance that can be replicated week-in week-out, instead of hoping for brilliance out of a few players.

http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2012/06/bridging-the-gap-to-a-structured-playmaking-style/

This is a link to an article on The Anfield Wrap about how Rodgers may shape Liverpool. It's a much more in-depth explanation of what I attempted above.

Have to say I'm feeling really positive and optimistic again after the huge disappointment of Kenny's departure.

I think Rodgers could do a great job here provided we back him with our support and give him time. So far he's saying all the right things and looks to be really up for the job.

I'm especially happy that an Irishman is back at Liverpool

The future is bright

BR's bookshelf for anyone interested

Art Morte wrote:Paul Lambert has offered his resignation to Norwich, whilst he is believed to be taking over the reigns at Aston Villa. I would have much rather seen Lambert at Liverpool than Rodgers and this is feeling bitter right now...

Lambert.

Rodgers vs Lambert next week

Lambert!!!! Lambert!!!! Lambert!!!!!

Would get on the bandwagon again!! Btw they gave Chelsea a real run for their money yesterday!  

Rodgers on Soccer Saturday today

BR in an interview wrote:He said: "The more you're up there at the top, the more aggression and will and desire you have to stay there.

"It's only four games in but we've had four tough games and we have only lost once in the last 17 games now.

"We are getting a level of consistency, and that was the biggest thing for me.

"When I came here last year, there was no consistency in the performance. But now we are just churning out wins and if we can't win we are drawing games with resilient performances, like in the last 25 minutes against Swansea.

"I still believe we will get better and more fluent as the season goes on, so we are happy to be top and we are ready for a fight to stay there."

We're harder to beat, I'll give him that.

Still don't think we have that winning mentality just yet though.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/new-liverpool-contract-rodgers-agenda-2314796#ixzz2gEIiryHx

Mirror wrote:
New Liverpool contract for Rodgers on the agenda as Reds fear losing their manager
28 Sep 2013 22:30
Boss with less than two years left on his initial deal has admirers at Man City, Arsenal and Spurs... and has England potential




Liverpool want to tie manager Brendan Rodgers down to a new contract.

Rodgers, appointed as manager in June 2012, has under two years remaining on his deal and the Anfield giants are wary of taking any risks over his future.

The Liverpool board are yet to discuss a new contract with Rodgers, but it is believed to be on the club's agenda.

Rodgers has admirers at Manchester City, Arsenal and Tottenham, and could even be considered as a potential successor to Roy Hodgson if England fail to qualify for the World Cup.

Despite a run of three games without a win ahead of Sunday's trip to Sunderland, Liverpool have started the season well.

Rodgers and striker Daniel Sturridge won the Premier League Manager and Player of the month for August.

The 40-year-old Northern Irishman also impressed his bosses with his handling of the Luis Suarez saga.

   

wow...

I wouldn't be at all against giving him a contract extension. But would rather we wait till the summer. I don't like doing these things in the middle of the season especially since his contract doesn't run out next summer.

It is better to save some money, I think managers are not like players where we will get some transfer money so no need to rush into things. We can do it in 13-14 summer.

I don't think money is the issue here. Rodgers gets paid pretty heftily (even more so than a manager of his experience deserves). It would probably be an extension rather than a pay raise. I like Rodgers, he's done well I think. And I'm sick and tired of swapping and changing managers. This is his second year, I say give the guy another 2/3 year extension and see where he takes us. If we haven't achieved at least relatively consistent top 4 challenge by 5 years than we can think about what the future holds.

I am worried about money we had to pay him in case we had to sack him. I am not pessimistic here just thinking on the other side, if we do a contract extension for some 3 years and if we sack him like in his 3rd season, we will have to pay that huge amount as we had paid previously for other managers.

It would be very premature of our board to even consider sacking Rodgers before his 4th season if results remain consistently around the top 7 area. I'm so sick and tired of change. Just give the guy all the resources to see his project out. If his project doesn't work at its peak then think about change. I really don't see many negatives if we extended his contract for another 2 years. Even the financial side doesn't bother me.

It is going to be a big test for him. He may loose Suarez next summer, probably Gerrard too in few more seasons. So what kind of player he brings in and how he rebuilds the team is to be watched, how he uses young guns from the academy...lots of things will be there. But we should definitely wait before we extend his contract.

I dont know what criterias to set for him but in next 2 seasons at least a cup win OR 4th cup trophy, else a cup plus 5th or 6th...somethong on these lines. He is already being pragmatic in his approach, that is a good thing.

But if he shows improvement without finishing in top 4, I am all up for to keep him for more seasons.

I don't want any extensions until end of this season. Also, the rumors are rubbish. City! They will be after high profile person. Arsenal!! They will keep Wenger. Spurs!!! What's wrong with AVB.

Realistically you won't get a better manager than Brendan Rodgers, Liverpool should give him the confidence and support he needs by offering him a new contract. I believe he's the man to bring Liverpool back at the top.

As long as he shows improvement, he'll get given one at the end of the season.

We need stability. FSG know this. They won't sack him unless something terrible goes wrong.

something-red wrote:They won't sack him unless something terrible goes wrong.

anyways that wont happen