Brendan Rogers

[Man Friday]

As always, Handbags hits the nail squarely. Nothing to add to his comments except to say that I can't believe he's been successful tbh but let's just see how things pan out before we start believing that we had The Messiah under our noses without even realising it. Never-the-less, in the meantime "well done" to him and "good luck".

[DOYLERSAROYALER]

As always, Handbags hits the nail squarely. Nothing to add to his comments except to say that I can't believe he's been successful tbh but let's just see how things pan out before we start believing that we had The Messiah under our noses without even realising it. Never-the-less, in the meantime "well done" to him and "good luck".

Agree ....next season will prove whether Bren Rodgiola is able to apply his "football thinking" on the big stage ...because playing their "beautiful game" next season is going to be suicide for them and they will get ripped apart by a fair few teams, and the test for Rodgiola is does he have a plan B to tough it out in games, or will he stay loyal to his football beliefs and come straight back down with a thump ??...

[DOYLERSAROYALER]

The style of play Rodgers tried to implement just didn't work for Reading. Slick passing, pacey attacking threats and players who were comfortable switching with each other. Just didnt work out with us, nothing to do with transfer war-chests or anything else.

...you trying to say Rasiak wasnt pacey and slick then??? ...

And on that note...

AEL Limassol F.CHe signed his contract with one of the top teams in Cyprus, AEL, after leaving Reading due to the fact that his team could not afford him. He appeared in many matches of the Cypriot team but has found it hard to score a goal. He showed the country he has the ability but he always ended up unlucky, he has been given many chances but he does not seem ready to score the 'easy goal' that his team wanted him to do. They let him go because he was too good for the club, he is now in talks with Chelsea to replace mis-firing Fernando Torres.

see what you are saying Yateley .....
2010–2011 AEL Limassol - appearances 16 goals 0

[royalsroyalsroyals92]

I think his bit in the PO Final programme did spell it out completely... He was trying to get us to play the way swansea do in effect, but he knew it would take time - which he thought he had! You could see near the end of his time we were starting to play the slick football he wanted and create chances, which is what we were lacking at the beginning - i mean if you look at the Scunthorpe game where it was 1-1 the only thing missing was the fact that for whatever reason - we missed the simplest chances possible!
I do think that over the period of his contract we would have achieved his targets, and i dont believe we would of been relegated in the season he was with us, as things did look to turn a genuine corner!
The trouble is, nowadays so many teams are starting to play with that formation and in that manner, and i worry alot that soon those who arent are going to fall short as i see it as an extremely difficult formation to play against unless you match up with it like for like.
i was a fan of Rodgers and it was a shame he was sacked... but it doesnt take away from the fact McD has been BRILLIANT and i think he has been a total revelation

[Hoop Blah]

I think another factor that he alluded to at the time was that he wasted a lot of time trying things out initally because he saw it as a long term project.

I think it was his mistake that he thought he had a bit more freedom to experiment at the detriment of short term results but when we stuttered through those first few months it destabilised things too much.

I really don't think some of Coppells old guard were happy changing so quickly and so perhaps they didn't quite give him the support he needed to make too many sweeping changes so quickly.

[Royalee]

Basically because he wasn't given the time or money to carry out his plans...McDermott's much more in the mould that Madejski wants, but I think Rodgers' football is more attractive and long-termist.

[loyalroyal4life]

Basically because he wasn't given the time or money to carry out his plans...McDermott's much more in the mould that Madejski wants, but I think Rodgers' football is more attractive and long-termist.

Definately wasn't given the time to do what he wanted, he saw this as a long term plan to stick with Reading whether through thick or thin.

Think fact that he had dyer and sinclair on the wings helps, our wingers weren't in same league as them!

[Royal Rother]

Swansea were more or less the finished article before he took over, all Rodgers has had to do is tweak the attack to make them a little more capable of scoring and maintain Martinez's passing ethics.

At Reading he had next to nothing in place and would take a long time to build what he has at Swansea now, personally I think he would have achieved it but taken 3/4 years about it.

Different era but it didn't take McGhee that long to change the style. And that with such long ball stalwarts as Trevor Senior and Steve Richardson in the team, both of whom, in the twilight of their pro careers, added new dimensions to their game under McGhee. I well remember being gobsmacked when Richardson started playing one-twos and passing moves out of defence down in front of the South Bank instead of the usual hump forward down the line (or straight into touch!) which had been his trademark for many years.

I don't believe we would have gone down with Rodgers in charge.

[sandman]

It's at times like this where I wish I could find the picture of Gylfi sat on the bench behind Bodgers.

[Terminal Boardom]

Basically because he wasn't given the time or money to carry out his plans...McDermott's much more in the mould that Madejski wants, but I think Rodgers' football is more attractive and long-termist.

Not given the money? Rasiak, MacAnuff, Howard, Cummings and Mills spring to mind. Add Bertrand on loan and that adds up to a tidy sum.

[Arnie_Pie]

He likes 4-3-3. Our team were playing 4-4-2, so were taking time to adapt.

Swansea were already playing 4-3-3.

[floyd__streete]

Different era but it didn't take McGhee that long to change the style.

In McGhee's first season we struggled in midtable and went several months without a home win (sound familiar?). The following season we were in the lower reaches of the table for the first half of the season and looking pretty desperate until we clicked in the second half of that second season and the rest - as they say - is history. So I would say that it took 18 long months for McGhee to change the style successfully.

[Royal Rother]

So we agree, not 3-4 years.

Thanks.

[Ian Royal]

Why do you think that his time as a manager with us resulted in such absolute failure, given that he has now shown that he is not a crap manager at all. would him being given a big war chest to spend on his team have resulted in the royals returning to the top flight? please don't read this as an attack on Brian McDermot who, despite little managerial experience has been fantastic for us over the last year and a half.

No, I'd say it's a reasonable guesstimate to say that he spent more at Reading in 6 months than at Swansea in 12. So money had nothing to do with it.

[yappy]

As Brendan openly admits, he tried to change too much too quickly. Remember that summer we lost Doyle, Hunt, Hahnemann, Lita, Rosenior, Harper, Bikey and probably a few more I can't remember. On top of that a lot of back room staff left aswell, with Coppell and Dillon both leaving, so trying to implement a whole new style of play was probably too much too soon.

[handbags_harris]

So many people say that he wasn't given the time, or he wasn't given the backing by the club. Let's cover these one by one:

1) Time:- a long term project needs to produce reasonable results from the off. Most clubs can accept a mid-table season so long as they steer clear of relegation, however despite the fact that some of Rodgers' games in charge were undoubtedly good, we invariably dropped points when playing well (Cardiff City 0-1, Watford 1-1, Leicester City 0-1, Derby County 1-2, Scunthorpe United 1-1 - and they're just off the top of my head) and as such we ended up looking increasingly like we were fighting a relegation battle. I'll admit that there were signs that things were improving, performances looked to be more penetrative but firstly you have to consider that WBA 3-1 Reading and QPR 4-1 Reading were two of the worst, most gutless performances I and I daresay most others who bothered to travel have ever seen from a Reading team, and also that despite performances looking better, results only marginally improved. The same old frailties showed up time and again, and unfortunately the Scunthorpe result epitomised Rodgers' time as manager of Reading. Ultimately managers can get time, but if they go months with poor results they are sacrificed. That's just the way it is. In football, results come first.

2) Backing:- again many would say that Rodgers wasn't given the backing by the club, which I find utter tosh in all honesty. Somebody has already stated that Rodgers was given the go-ahead to sign (reported fees) Matt Mills (£2 million), Jobi McAnuff (£500k), Shaun Cummings (£300k), Gregorz Rasiak (can't remember, but his wages were collossal), Brian Howard (swap for James Harper), and Ryan Bertrand on loan. You're looking at over £3 million there, more than any other manager at Reading has spent in any pre-season outside the Premier League. If that's not backing, I don't know what is, and if Rodgers wanted to spunk most of his war-chest on a somewhat average defender than he was making a rod for his own back (let's not forget that he also stopped playing him). Yes, we had to wait for the selling off of many of our more valuable assets to cover the losses like any respectable business would do, not forgetting that those assets were also were high earners. The club maybe said they wanted to sell, but we know for a fact Stephen Hunt in particular made no secret of his desire to depart, regularly bad-mouthing the club at the end of transfer windows when he wasn't sold.

In short, Rodgers was the master of his own downfall here. He left us having secured six wins in 23 games, was overseer of some clueless performances which were the result of either bad tactical decisions or sending out totally inadequate teams (Gunnarsson and Cisse as a midfield pairing with Mills, Ingimarsson and O'Dea at the back? No wonder we lost 4-1 and were completely overrun ). He spent significant sums on players who either underperformed or were dropped completely when they questioned what exactly they were supposed to be doing. And on top of that he didn't enamour himself with the club's board. Regardless what anybody says, if you don't have the full support of the board in any job, you're skating on thin ice. The board will win every time.

[PEARCEY]

Thats a bit one-sided Handbags. Rodgers came in at a time when the club was on a downer after a dismal end to the previous season where we couldn't borrow a win at home for love nor money. We lost in Kevin Doyle our best player and Bikey and Hunt as well.
He did try and change far too much too quickly and making Pearce his captain was two years too soon...but he realised Siggy was ready(Coppell may not have) and the signings of Bertrand and Cummings should have worked...just feel their pace. With Pearce and Mills at centre-back we should have been sorted in defence. With Siggy pulling the strings in midfield and McAnuff a very decent signing we had (with Kebe) two good wingers. At the time Long wasn't firing nor really were Church and Rasiak but I don't believe Rodgers was far away from getting it right.....and he was only given five months.

[Hoop Blah]

1) Rodgers thought he was part of a club looking to build for the future and were willing to take a hit early on for the long term good. It was a mistake to think he had enough backing to get him through what was obviously a rough start. Things weren't as bad as many thought but we were going to struggle and were in a relegation fight, but it was one I thought we looked good to pull out of. Six months isn't enough time to rebuild the club after the summer we had and I think the club let themselves down getting rid when they did.

2) Taking those figures to be correct (as good a guess as we'll get really) it's a decent amount of money for us. However, when you look at the quality and number of players we lost (out of Rodgers control for the most part I think) and the money that brought in it doesn't look half as much. We lost real quality that summer and we were left with a much weakened squad who were also coming off the back of a really dire and depressing 6 months of failure. Those last months of Coppells tenure are often forgotten when people are criticising Rodgers time. Coppell couldn't turn it round with the quality of players he had but for some reason Rodgers was expected to succeed straight away where Coppell failed.

[handbags_harris]

Thats a bit one-sided Handbags. Rodgers came in at a time when the club was on a downer after a dismal end to the previous season where we couldn't borrow a win at home for love nor money. We lost in Kevin Doyle our best player and Bikey and Hunt as well.

He did try and change far too much too quickly and making Pearce his captain was two years too soon...but he realised Siggy was ready(Coppell may not have) and the signings of Bertrand and Cummings should have worked...just feel their pace. With Pearce and Mills at centre-back we should have been sorted in defence. With Siggy pulling the strings in midfield and McAnuff a very decent signing we had (with Kebe) two good wingers. At the time Long wasn't firing nor really were Church and Rasiak but I don't belive Rodgers was far away from getting it right.....and he was only given five months.

I hear that, and agree to an extent, BUT he still should have been able to develop a team that was comfortably mid-table with the players at his disposal. Instead we were in the relegation zone for much of his tenure and ultimately he paid the price for poor results. Not far from getting it right? I personally disagree, but we'll never know will we?

[Royalee]

Basically because he wasn't given the time or money to carry out his plans...McDermott's much more in the mould that Madejski wants, but I think Rodgers' football is more attractive and long-termist.

Not given the money? Rasiak, MacAnuff, Howard, Cummings and Mills spring to mind. Add Bertrand on loan and that adds up to a tidy sum.

I'm sorry, what was the value of players we sold during his time as manager? How many players had also been released that summer? On balance he wasn't given much money.