Really appreciate the balanced views. The second half of the discussion rightly focused on the performance issues that must be addressed if we are to progress and develop.
In terms of numbers what are performance gaps that need to be bridged based on benchmarks? For example, if you take our malfunctioning number 8s what numbers should they be hitting just to get a sense of the size of problem we are facing ? Or a sense of the opportunity to be unlocked!
Like it - thanks Alan. I guess you can define the mean as you wish ? So if we wanted we could construct a sample that would allow us to benchmark not only to ourselves but to peers at European clubs ? Acknowledge such a construct may have flaws but it's to get a broader picture of the quality gap we are trying to bridge.
This thread from August was part of a project I started and your comment has reminded me to revisit - will work on it and make into a column for future.
Really insightful and as entertaining as ever. Thank you!
To what extent do you feel the inherent risks are understood by the coaching staff and how confident are you that the club understands the importance of addressing them in the next transfer windows?
Thanks-I think I have a hangover from Lennon’s approach of putting teams out and hoping that the better players find a way of winning; Ange’s, albeit very successful, tactical inflexibility is also a recent memory. Hopefully, BR finds a way to improve Engels’s ability to adapt to new tactics and develop his passing range.
In terms of how busy January is without a break, are you worried there is no scope there to make tactical improvements?
Rodgers usually did a bit of magic in Dubai in his first spell and we'd come back great (to my eye test memory anyway, numbers may contradict me), but it doesn't seem like this season there will be any time to work on things.
Celtic's system of play is well rehearsed and Rodgers is adept at subtle tweaks within it.. So if anything the lack of a break will benefit Celtic above all others due to having a bigger and more talented squad. Fatigue and injury will impact others more than Celtic. That said, Celtic's areas for improvement (and remember we are testing this against the higher level of opponent as a concern) are clear.
James don’t you think the coverage on Paramount Plus was the best they have ever put out. Commentary was quite good and the analysis I thought was great. Paul Mitchell and Stuart Lovell.
Second. Totally agree understand the analysis but I didn’t catch from the review what you think Brendan should tweak going into the next crucial month.
Hello David - Paramount+ broadcast quality has been inconsistent. They often just pipe in the Scotland feed, which I am just fine with. When they try to cover with their own people it has been hit and miss, IMO. Do agree that Sunday was better than usual!
You referenced left centre back, left full back and midfield all as areas that were suboptimal during the game. Indeed, these areas were identified as needing improvement before the season started and we signed someone in all of these positions just a few months ago. So why we are we still seeing these concerns?
If we set aside any personal opinions and just take Rodgers opinion, does he think that he signed players who improved the starting 11 or players who improved the squad? Well we could ask him but let’s read his mind by looking at who he decided should start each game compared to the alternative for these positions
- Taylor has started 17 games v Valle with 8 starts - so using Brendan’s choice of starter, Valle is a good squad player, indeed good enough to start a few games and not only be a substitute but Taylor is his preferred choice. So not an upgrade.
- Trusty has started 17, Scales has started 16, CCV has started 16 but missed a few with injuries which therefore flattered the games played by one or other of the other two. Again, Trusty is good enough to start instead of Scales at times but is he good enough to start every week instead of scales? It doesn’t look like it. So not an upgrade.
- Engels has started 14, Bernardo 11, McCowan 7. Compare this to Hatate 19 and McGregor 23. Are any of the three signings good enough to nail down a place v their competitors? It doesn’t look like it. So, I’ll go for not an upgrade on Bernardo or Hatate, wouldn’t be fair to compare to O’ Riley
- Let’s add in Idah since we also signed him. He has started 7 versus Kyogo 17. Not an upgrade.
So, let’s ignore all of our opinions, let’s not look at any transfer fees, let’s simply go with what the boss does, does he choose the new player or the alternative? Well, the stats for the new players versus the more established players aren’t great.
Obviously we are having a great season and hopefully they will come good like Kühn or indeed McGregor. Sometimes it takes time. I think Rodgers is a top coach and will improve everyone but it would have been good to have given him someone who improved the starting 11 and not the subs bench.
Hi Mike that is an interesting way of looking at things. I'd disagree with you and James on Trusty his obvious nerves on Sunday not withstanding. And left back is a real concern - Valle actually profiles better than taylor this season but against worse opponents. I think Bernardo will be fine as a very good squad player. Engels is becoming a dilemma and i'd love to see evidence of him adapting to Celtics needs.
To be fair Trusty has been starting more games recently so I suspect by the end of the season he will have started a lot more than Scales and by this logic would be seen as an upgrade.
Really appreciate the balanced views. The second half of the discussion rightly focused on the performance issues that must be addressed if we are to progress and develop.
In terms of numbers what are performance gaps that need to be bridged based on benchmarks? For example, if you take our malfunctioning number 8s what numbers should they be hitting just to get a sense of the size of problem we are facing ? Or a sense of the opportunity to be unlocked!
David
have a look at this as a starter - https://www.huddlebreakdown.com/p/is-rodgers-right-about-hatates-inconsistency?r=1r8uxs
Like it - thanks Alan. I guess you can define the mean as you wish ? So if we wanted we could construct a sample that would allow us to benchmark not only to ourselves but to peers at European clubs ? Acknowledge such a construct may have flaws but it's to get a broader picture of the quality gap we are trying to bridge.
As Alan referenced, his column had updated data.
This thread from August was part of a project I started and your comment has reminded me to revisit - will work on it and make into a column for future.
https://x.com/jucojames/status/1811023337553813538?t=6mp2wd2NKsdaa-T5BXUdNw&s=19
July!
Really insightful and as entertaining as ever. Thank you!
To what extent do you feel the inherent risks are understood by the coaching staff and how confident are you that the club understands the importance of addressing them in the next transfer windows?
Rodgers is an elite coach and i am sure they are aware of the limitations and risks
But real football isn't like Championship Manager in that we can easily swap one player for another. So in the short term it is tweaking and training.
Thanks-I think I have a hangover from Lennon’s approach of putting teams out and hoping that the better players find a way of winning; Ange’s, albeit very successful, tactical inflexibility is also a recent memory. Hopefully, BR finds a way to improve Engels’s ability to adapt to new tactics and develop his passing range.
Excellent as ever
thank you Conor
Great stuff as ever guys, cheers.
In terms of how busy January is without a break, are you worried there is no scope there to make tactical improvements?
Rodgers usually did a bit of magic in Dubai in his first spell and we'd come back great (to my eye test memory anyway, numbers may contradict me), but it doesn't seem like this season there will be any time to work on things.
Hi Liam
Celtic's system of play is well rehearsed and Rodgers is adept at subtle tweaks within it.. So if anything the lack of a break will benefit Celtic above all others due to having a bigger and more talented squad. Fatigue and injury will impact others more than Celtic. That said, Celtic's areas for improvement (and remember we are testing this against the higher level of opponent as a concern) are clear.
James don’t you think the coverage on Paramount Plus was the best they have ever put out. Commentary was quite good and the analysis I thought was great. Paul Mitchell and Stuart Lovell.
Second. Totally agree understand the analysis but I didn’t catch from the review what you think Brendan should tweak going into the next crucial month.
Hello David - Paramount+ broadcast quality has been inconsistent. They often just pipe in the Scotland feed, which I am just fine with. When they try to cover with their own people it has been hit and miss, IMO. Do agree that Sunday was better than usual!
Another insightful podcast
You referenced left centre back, left full back and midfield all as areas that were suboptimal during the game. Indeed, these areas were identified as needing improvement before the season started and we signed someone in all of these positions just a few months ago. So why we are we still seeing these concerns?
If we set aside any personal opinions and just take Rodgers opinion, does he think that he signed players who improved the starting 11 or players who improved the squad? Well we could ask him but let’s read his mind by looking at who he decided should start each game compared to the alternative for these positions
- Taylor has started 17 games v Valle with 8 starts - so using Brendan’s choice of starter, Valle is a good squad player, indeed good enough to start a few games and not only be a substitute but Taylor is his preferred choice. So not an upgrade.
- Trusty has started 17, Scales has started 16, CCV has started 16 but missed a few with injuries which therefore flattered the games played by one or other of the other two. Again, Trusty is good enough to start instead of Scales at times but is he good enough to start every week instead of scales? It doesn’t look like it. So not an upgrade.
- Engels has started 14, Bernardo 11, McCowan 7. Compare this to Hatate 19 and McGregor 23. Are any of the three signings good enough to nail down a place v their competitors? It doesn’t look like it. So, I’ll go for not an upgrade on Bernardo or Hatate, wouldn’t be fair to compare to O’ Riley
- Let’s add in Idah since we also signed him. He has started 7 versus Kyogo 17. Not an upgrade.
So, let’s ignore all of our opinions, let’s not look at any transfer fees, let’s simply go with what the boss does, does he choose the new player or the alternative? Well, the stats for the new players versus the more established players aren’t great.
Obviously we are having a great season and hopefully they will come good like Kühn or indeed McGregor. Sometimes it takes time. I think Rodgers is a top coach and will improve everyone but it would have been good to have given him someone who improved the starting 11 and not the subs bench.
Hi Mike that is an interesting way of looking at things. I'd disagree with you and James on Trusty his obvious nerves on Sunday not withstanding. And left back is a real concern - Valle actually profiles better than taylor this season but against worse opponents. I think Bernardo will be fine as a very good squad player. Engels is becoming a dilemma and i'd love to see evidence of him adapting to Celtics needs.
To be fair Trusty has been starting more games recently so I suspect by the end of the season he will have started a lot more than Scales and by this logic would be seen as an upgrade.