Topic: Expectations For 2015/16 Season (Brenties Crystal-Ball Thread Mk. II)

[Butcher Knife Roberto]

Can't but disagree with the above:  Courtois (23) Azpilicueta (25) Cahill (29) Zouma (20) Terry (34) Ivanovic (31) Fabregas (28) Matic (27) Oscar (23) Hazard (24) Ramires (28) Cuadrado (27) Willian (26) Remy (28) Falcao (29)
and Costa is only 26 (believe it or not!).

Hardly a team of 'pensioners'. For me still the team to beat this season.

Genuinely interesting - perhaps they just have a curmudgeonly nature, or that John Terry has been around forever. I stand corrected! I still think we'll finish above them though. Call me mad but I just have a feeling in my bones about it. I am happy to be mocked at the end of the season if it all goes belly up.

[clinical]

Not really, the pressure on our forwards to score the goals now is the same as the pressure on Rafa's team to keep clean sheets, no difference really. I'd say a team which scores lots of goals is more likely to finish higher than teams who concede less.

But the difference is they now have to score more. That's fine when you have a magician like Suarez as we proved.

Are we going to score over 100 goals again? Doubtful. So how do we make the ratio we had which in the 13/14 season was around 2:1 in terms of goals scored: goals conceded

The only way to do that is to concede less either through set up or personnel. I can't see the set up changing too much.

If you look at the teams at the top they all have at least a 2:1 ratio. We simply didn't last year and is why we finished 6th

[Torben Piechniks Y-Fronts]

Chelsea have a much stronger defence than us , city have a stronger attack as do Arsenal. United have neither and are the ones we have the best chance to overtake this year. Think they will go big in the next few weeks in the market but I'm not overly impressed by their squad as it stands or manager to be honest.

If, and it's the usual big fucking if, we get a bounce from last years signings and this summers hit the ground running (and fuckin scoring) then we have a good chance of breaking top four, a bloody good chance.

Sturridge back will give us a massive boost whether it's for ten or thirty games so I am increasingly confident.

[ShayGuevara]

Not really, the pressure on our forwards to score the goals now is the same as the pressure on Rafa's team to keep clean sheets, no difference really. I'd say a team which scores lots of goals is more likely to finish higher than teams who concede less.

The top 4 teams the past 5 years have been the top 4 scorers. Conceding has no correlation anywhere near that.

[Funky_Gibbons]

But the difference is they now have to score more. That's fine when you have a magician like Suarez as we proved.

Are we going to score over 100 goals again? Doubtful. So how do we make the ratio we had which in the 13/14 season was around 2:1 in terms of goals scored: goals conceded

The only way to do that is to concede less either through set up or personnel. I can't see the set up changing too much.

If you look at the teams at the top they all have at least a 2:1 ratio. We simply didn't last year and is why we finished 6th

No, it's because we lost both Suarez and Sturridge and didn't have adequate replacements for either.

To go back to your comment about longing for the days of a tight defense under Rafa, it's like him losing both his first choice centre halves and replacing them with someone who is either over-the-hill and slow or can't be bothered to chase after the attacker or get into the box to head the ball away.

United never had a 1-2 ratio for goals scored and conceded.

The top 4 teams the past 5 years have been the top 4 scorers. Conceding has no correlation anywhere near that.

Exactly, I think history has shown the leading scorers finish higher than the tightest defence, you need a balance but scoring is always harder then defending.

[ShayGuevara]

Good read.

Would argue our chance creation didn't go down last season but Firmino should replace what Sterling provided and Milner what Gerrard did. Hopefully at least.

What Milner and Clyne give us is more energy and work rate which is key to our system rather than Johnson and Gerrard who's legs have gone.

I agree regarding goals we'll score the 70+ that's normally enough for top 4. I feel you are over rating Arsenal, for me they get too many injuries and don't have the game changers Chelsea or City have. They've a very good side but for me it's not a title winning side. Either them or United are most likely to drop out of the top 4 in my opinion, City not impossible but doubtful with Toure, Bony, Sterling, Aguero and Silva capable of 70 goals between them.

I do think we've a really good chance of 4th and who knows maybe even 3rd. Too many changes though over the past two seasons and too many young players means 1st is a lot to ask for. Let's not forget City took 3 years of investment in 23 or so year olds to win the title and that was with an almost unlimited budget, it took time for the players to gel and click.

What is in our favour is United aren't as far into their transition as us even if they have had bigger investment than us. Catching them is very realistic with the added goals and a full team of Rodgers players.

[ShayGuevara]

Exactly, I think history has shown the leading scorers finish higher than the tightest defence, you need a balance but scoring is always harder then defending.

Yes, scoring goals wins leagues. 3pts for a win and 1 for a draw means going for the jugular is the most effective way to make your way up the league. 1 win and 2 losses being worth 3 0-0's. As a top side you have to fancy yourself to put away the smaller clubs when attacking them more than 1 in 3. Cup comps I'm contrast 1 loss and it's over so being cautious is key.

It's why I wasn't as disapointed as many to see Rafa or indeed Kenny in the end to go. Both got too many draws because of a defence first preference. Of course both had cup success that Rogders for me will never replicate but the leagues the holy grail for us after so long without it.

[killer-heels]

Yes, scoring goals wins leagues. 3pts for a win and 1 for a draw means going for the jugular is the most effective way to make your way up the league. 1 win and 2 losses being worth 3 0-0's. As a top side you have to fancy yourself to put away the smaller clubs when attacking them more than 1 in 3. Cup comps I'm contrast 1 loss and it's over so being cautious is key.

It's why I wasn't as disapointed as many to see Rafa or indeed Kenny in the end to go. Both got too many draws because of a defence first preference. Of course both had cup success that Rogders for me will never replicate but the leagues the holy grail for us after so long without it.

The goals scored column has to be our main aim. Coaching a strong defence takes time and Rodgers quite frankly has only fashioned a decent defence for a portion of his time here and thats in a system which we will probably only see again if we are struggling.

We can hope for a great defence but chances are that will never come but what we have to do is maximise the things we can do well which is score bucket loads.

[fowlermagic]

Scoring goals win you leagues of course but it sure would help if your defense was even top 4 or even top 6. Even if it was top 6 two years ago I think it would have won us the title. Also imagine the foundation a solid defense would give us every week. Nothing too fancy, 4 lads in a backline who know their basics and would not be prone to a hands in your face mistake every bloody game. Instead we had to take from the attack / CM and add another player into the backline. That's brilliant if you have two flying fullbacks who can provide you goals & assists. How many goals & assists have we ever got off our full / wingbacks in one season. Less than 5 combined maybe. Not enough to make up for a top 8 goals against stat.

[kavah]

great read - cheers

[killer-heels]

Scoring goals win you leagues of course but it sure would help if your defense was even top 4 or even top 6. Even if it was top 6 two years ago I think it would have won us the title. Also imagine the foundation a solid defense would give us every week. Nothing too fancy, 4 lads in a backline who know their basics and would not be prone to a hands in your face mistake every bloody game. Instead we had to take from the attack / CM and add another player into the backline. That's brilliant if you have two flying fullbacks who can provide you goals & assists. How many goals & assists have we ever got off our full / wingbacks in one season. Less than 5 combined maybe. Not enough to make up for a top 8 goals against stat.

How many goals and assists do we need from full back?

[fowlermagic]

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=321617.msg14031933#quickreply

How many goals and assists do we need from full back?

Always remember how we advocated the 3 central defenders with two wing back system as an attacking system. It would have been if one of the full backs at least got forward and created something. I don't think any of ours really did last season. Basically I don't expect much from our full backs as only want them to be able to do the basics, know how to defend and be comfy on the ball while in possession.

Play our best backline, hopefully it will be just 4 defenders and put the onus on our attacking players / midfield to get goals. We will never reproduce the 100 league goals again, hell if we get 75 I would be delighted but if we can keep more clean sheets with a backline of 4 then we will see a better balanced team.

[007.lankyguy]

It's why I wasn't as disapointed as many to see Rafa or indeed Kenny in the end to go. Both got too many draws because of a defence first preference. Of course both had cup success that Rogders for me will never replicate but the leagues the holy grail for us after so long without it.

Yeah what do Kenny and Rafa know about winning leagues?

[poopscoop]

Looking at the fixtures list, I think we have a really good run in. Admittedly I have my 3days-before-the-season-starts mania, and isn't necessarily based on developed thinking but I don't see us dropping many point from Christmas onwards.
If we can get through the tricky opening two months, I think this has the makings of a memorable season. I'm really interested to see how Rogers sets up the team and integrates the new arrivals, and also how and where he deploys Emre Can.
Firminio could take a while to settle but Benteke I want to see smash every centreback in the league - a week in, week out penalty box terrorist!
We're not going to win the league but we won't be anything like the gash that was played before christmas last year either. My prediction is not for this season rather for next, I think the nucleus of our next great team will cement itself this year and will take on all comers the season after.
 

[ShayGuevara]

Yeah what do Kenny and Rafa know about winning leagues?

Our style in the 80's or Blackburns style under Kenny was a lot different than the Tactics he used towards the end of his second reign in charge of us.

And that league win with Valencia Rafas league record is pretty poor..

Not getting into that debate anyhow but defensive tactics aren't as suited as attacking tactics to leagues.

[keyop]

/snip

That's a cracking read  - really enjoyed that.

As a fellow optimist I agree with pretty much all of it 

[downtown]

City didn't end last season in a slump. They won their last 6 matches in style and comfortably reclaimed that 2nd spot. They had an awful February-Early April, but their last few games was very good

[johnny74]

Yes, scoring goals wins leagues. 3pts for a win and 1 for a draw means going for the jugular is the most effective way to make your way up the league. 1 win and 2 losses being worth 3 0-0's. As a top side you have to fancy yourself to put away the smaller clubs when attacking them more than 1 in 3. Cup comps I'm contrast 1 loss and it's over so being cautious is key.

It's why I wasn't as disapointed as many to see Rafa or indeed Kenny in the end to go. Both got too many draws because of a defence first preference. Of course both had cup success that Rogders for me will never replicate but the leagues the holy grail for us after so long without it.

Yes, there is a thread on here somewhere by PhaseOfPlay showing that goals scored is key, not goals conceded, in terms of a correlation to league titles won. And not only that, if you draw 38 games (effectively unbeaten) you'd likely be relegated with 38pts.

 

[Fiasco]

Yes, there is a thread on here somewhere by PhaseOfPlay showing that goals scored is key, not goals conceded, in terms of a correlation to league titles won. And not only that, if you draw 38 games (effectively unbeaten) you'd likely be relegated with 38pts.

It depends on how much you want to interpret the numbers. Last season Chelsea won the league and conceded the least amount of goals. The season before when we lost out to City, they had the second best defence. When City did win it in 11/12, they had the best defence. When United won it in 10/11, they had the third best defence. A year before that in 09/10, Chelsea had the second best defence.


Just a few examples, and in fact I think the further back in time you go the more defence is important in title-winning teams (as football is ultimately evolving and more emphasis is on attack). But generally the team who wins the league either has the best defence or pretty close to it. People are very ignorant I think when it comes to the defensive side of things. It's still very fucking important.

[Mr_Shane]

The two full-backs in our team scored just as much or more than 3 of our 4 strikers from last season.   

[007.lankyguy]

Our style in the 80's or Blackburns style under Kenny was a lot different than the Tactics he used towards the end of his second reign in charge of us.

And that league win with Valencia Rafas league record is pretty poor..

Not getting into that debate anyhow but defensive tactics aren't as suited as attacking tactics to leagues.

A focus on defence and controlling space is a very well established way to win league titles. Even in recent years, you have Dortmund, Juventus, Atletico Madrid, Mourinho's Real Madrid to a certain extent, Chelsea; all teams who have based their game around being strong in defence, exerting match control through the managing of space and time for the opponent in possession. "Defensive tactics" are a very proven way to win trophies.

People unfortunately seem to struggle nowadays stopping the pendulum of their opinions swinging too far one way or another. They see that you have to score goals to win leagues, which is obviously true. But they then start thinking that any manager whose philosophy/style of play is based around defence or counter attacking is therefore immediately at a disadvantage in the league, which is demonstrably ridiculous given the wealth of league winning managers who base their game around controlling space/pressing/playing on the counter (Mourinho being the most obvious example of that).

Every single top manager puts clear emphasis on being compact and defensively in control. Even Guardiola's game has a firm defensive basis, with the aggressive pressing, high line to compress space etc. His emphasis on positional play in possession is actually heavily related to where he wants his players to be if they lose the ball (which is also related to his insistence that you have to play 15 passes in order to have a good transition defence).

I understand that we want to score more goals this season and I'm in agreement that our major problem last season was our lack of goals. But there's no need to go completely the other way and basically argue that the defence is irrelevant, which is what some on here are drifting close to saying, or that any manager with a defensive philosophy/mindset is automatically a deficient league manager. It's completely false.

[fowlermagic]

It depends on how much you want to interpret the numbers. Last season Chelsea won the league and conceded the least amount of goals. The season before when we lost out to City, they had the second best defence. When City did win it in 11/12, they had the best defence. When United won it in 10/11, they had the third best defence. A year before that in 09/10, Chelsea had the second best defence.


Just a few examples, and in fact I think the further back in time you go the more defence is important in title-winning teams (as football is ultimately evolving and more emphasis is on attack). But generally the team who wins the league either has the best defence or pretty close to it. People are very ignorant I think when it comes to the defensive side of things. It's still very fucking important.

Now that's worth repeating.

[Number 7]

Now, many readers here, even those who know that I can sometimes be exceptionally optimistic (perhaps bordering on deluded), may be shocked to find out that I’m predicting us to finish 3rd this season. And I’m seriously tempted to say 2nd, but I will stick to 3rd.

No, mate. You're not the only one.

A good start is imperative. I think if we come out of that tough away period reasonably well then I don't think 3rd or 4th is out of the question. You have to remember that until we played United at Anfield last summer we were heading towards the top 4. We kind of disintegrated after that for various reasons. There were many player hinderances occurring at the same time. We also spent an awfully long time getting over the Suarez hangover. Losing him was a crushing blow, and this summer we haven't suffered nowhere near a setback as that.

If you'd have told me before the summer that we'd sign Milner, Firmino, Clyne, and Benteke I'd have been really chuffed. Add that to improvements from last summer's signings (Can, Markovic, etc) and we should see an overall improvement in the teams fortunes.

3rd place finish.

And good post...by the way.

[Black Bull Nova]

Can't but disagree with the above:  Courtois (23) Azpilicueta (25) Cahill (29) Zouma (20) Terry (34) Ivanovic (31) Fabregas (28) Matic (27) Oscar (23) Hazard (24) Ramires (28) Cuadrado (27) Willian (26) Remy (28) Falcao (29)
and Costa is only 26 (believe it or not!).

Hardly a team of 'pensioners'. For me still the team to beat this season.

You'll never win anything without kids

[scouting for goals]

When I was looking at our fixture list trying to plot how many points we could realistically get, I noticed something quite interesting. After the 3 international breaks between September and the end of November, we have Man Utd away, Tottenham away and Man City away. I can't make mind up whether both teams having the majority/all of their starting eleven away on international duty before a big game will work in our favour or not.
I am waiting on Brenties prediction before I place a bet on Liverpool finishing in the top 4
My heart says we will but my head isn't convinced.
As it stands at the moment, I hope we play attractive attacking football ala 2 seasons ago. If we do that, I can go to the games, enjoy the ride and what will be will be.

[ShayGuevara]

A focus on defence and controlling space is a very well established way to win league titles. Even in recent years, you have Dortmund, Juventus, Atletico Madrid, Mourinho's Real Madrid to a certain extent, Chelsea; all teams who have based their game around being strong in defence, exerting match control through the managing of space and time for the opponent in possession. "Defensive tactics" are a very proven way to win trophies.

People unfortunately seem to struggle nowadays stopping the pendulum of their opinions swinging too far one way or another. They see that you have to score goals to win leagues, which is obviously true. But they then start thinking that any manager whose philosophy/style of play is based around defence or counter attacking is therefore immediately at a disadvantage in the league, which is demonstrably ridiculous given the wealth of league winning managers who base their game around controlling space/pressing/playing on the counter (Mourinho being the most obvious example of that).

Every single top manager puts clear emphasis on being compact and defensively in control. Even Guardiola's game has a firm defensive basis, with the aggressive pressing, high line to compress space etc. His emphasis on positional play in possession is actually heavily related to where he wants his players to be if they lose the ball (which is also related to his insistence that you have to play 15 passes in order to have a good transition defence).

I understand that we want to score more goals this season and I'm in agreement that our major problem last season was our lack of goals. But there's no need to go completely the other way and basically argue that the defence is irrelevant, which is what some on here are drifting close to saying, or that any manager with a defensive philosophy/mindset is automatically a deficient league manager. It's completely false.

Of course it's important, my point is being cautious in the league by limiting the attacking roles of your players is more suited to cup competitions and not as effective as an attacking system. By the way I'm not talking of clubs like Dortmund who press and throw several men forward taking a lot of risk, I'm talking about managers who restrict the roles of too many players in favour of keeping things tight over letting the shackles go in attack and getting players forwards. Sherwood over Lambert for example.

It's pretty simple to understand why really, teams more often than not will set up cautious against the top sides so 75% of the sides we play in the league will make it hard for us to break them down. If we to be cautious and sit back we'll draw each game where as going at these teams by throwing on extra strikers or getting midfielders more advanced more often than not will get you a win, if it only works one in 3 it's as effective as 3 draws.

Attack is the priority to win leagues, defence in cups. There is plenty of evidence out there to back that up. I'm not denying a strong well drilled defence is important like a couple seem to suggest, I'm just saying being cautious like we were under Rafa often will cost you in a league format.

[b_joseph]

A focus on defence and controlling space is a very well established way to win league titles. Even in recent years, you have Dortmund, Juventus, Atletico Madrid, Mourinho's Real Madrid to a certain extent, Chelsea; all teams who have based their game around being strong in defence, exerting match control through the managing of space and time for the opponent in possession. "Defensive tactics" are a very proven way to win trophies.

People unfortunately seem to struggle nowadays stopping the pendulum of their opinions swinging too far one way or another. They see that you have to score goals to win leagues, which is obviously true. But they then start thinking that any manager whose philosophy/style of play is based around defence or counter attacking is therefore immediately at a disadvantage in the league, which is demonstrably ridiculous given the wealth of league winning managers who base their game around controlling space/pressing/playing on the counter (Mourinho being the most obvious example of that).

Every single top manager puts clear emphasis on being compact and defensively in control. Even Guardiola's game has a firm defensive basis, with the aggressive pressing, high line to compress space etc. His emphasis on positional play in possession is actually heavily related to where he wants his players to be if they lose the ball (which is also related to his insistence that you have to play 15 passes in order to have a good transition defence).

I understand that we want to score more goals this season and I'm in agreement that our major problem last season was our lack of goals. But there's no need to go completely the other way and basically argue that the defence is irrelevant, which is what some on here are drifting close to saying, or that any manager with a defensive philosophy/mindset is automatically a deficient league manager. It's completely false.

To win the league..the premier league at least, you need a goal difference no worse than 40. At least thats the number since 2000...most years since 2000, you pretty much have to be above 50.
So from there, you figure out what is needed to win. Sure, you can score low 70's or high 60's but that would require a defensive effort that no Brendan Rodgers team has ever come close to achieving.
What would be more realistic defensively ( if we make improvements in that area of the game ) would require a goal scoring output around the mid to high 80's. So for us, the goal scoring is vastly more important. For Chelsea, less so because of how they are constructed and how their coach sees the game.


Expectations? I dont know. The away games in a bunch to start the season is going to put us in a hole..not because we might be bad but because  the realistic points total you could gain from those matches is low. So other teams will have an easier schedule and be ahead of us in the league, even though they wont be better than us...if that makes sense.
Mentally, how we deal with that, if it happens, will be interesting.
I just dont want to see us dragging out feet for 4 months to start the season again...win or lose, play on the front foot and be bold.

[007.lankyguy]

Of course it's important, my point is being cautious in the league by limiting the attacking roles of your players is more suited to cup competitions and not as effective as an attacking system. By the way I'm not talking of clubs like Dortmund who press and throw several men forward taking a lot of risk, I'm talking about managers who restrict the roles of too many players in favour of keeping things tight over letting the shackles go in attack and getting players forwards. Sherwood over Lambert for example.

It's pretty simple to understand why really, teams more often than not will set up cautious against the top sides so 75% of the sides we play in the league will make it hard for us to break them down. If we to be cautious and sit back we'll draw each game where as going at these teams by throwing on extra strikers or getting midfielders more advanced more often than not will get you a win, if it only works one in 3 it's as effective as 3 draws.

Attack is the priority to win leagues, defence in cups. There is plenty of evidence out there to back that up. I'm not denying a strong well drilled defence is important like a couple seem to suggest, I'm just saying being cautious like we were under Rafa often will cost you in a league format.

Agree to a certain extent but you simplified it as "defensive tactics", which, as I said, is completely not true. You can easily base your team around the defence and win leagues. It happens ALL THE TIME.

As for Rafa's league record, you're totally wrong to say it's poor. There's a couple of poor seasons in there but largely it's par or, generally, over par performances. Rafa's game is based around controlling space which can come across as defensive but it's not. It's a specific, valid way of controlling and winning matches.

[ShayGuevara]

Agree to a certain extent but you simplified it as "defensive tactics", which, as I said, is completely not true. You can easily base your team around the defence and win leagues. It happens ALL THE TIME.

As for Rafa's league record, you're totally wrong to say it's poor. There's a couple of poor seasons in there but largely it's par or, generally, over par performances. Rafa's game is based around controlling space which can come across as defensive but it's not. It's a specific, valid way of controlling and winning matches.

Yes of course they will from time to time, normally though they are by far and away the best teams in the league though like Chelsea under Mourinho.

All I'm saying is playing attacking football gives us a better chance of winning the league. I believe we can under Rodgers, on the flip side I don't predict much cup or certainly not European success unless he learns to tighten things up. Goals win leagues, defences win cups like I said.

Not getting into a Rafa debate. I disagree though.

[Narwin Dunez]

I think we'll finish 6th.

League Cup, knocked out away to Chelsea/Arsenal/Utd/City

Europa League, second in group, go out in last 16 to a Turkish or Eastern European Team

FA Cup, quarter final defeat at home to a Championship team.

We'll concede way too many set pieces against mid table teams, and lose by the odd goal in "gutsy" performances against the top 4.

Our midfield will do an average job, nothing bad, nothing exciting, and the over reliance on Coutinho will mean he won't hit top form.

Up front, Benteke will score 4 non penalty goals. 2 against a relegation threatened team, 1 consolation against the eventual champions and one on the second to last game of the season.
Sturridge will get fit by Xmas, score 3 goals over the festive period so we all get excited about running for top 4 again, then do his hamstring in England training and miss the rest of the season.

Brendan will lose his job.

Our fans will be ripped off week after week with high ticket prices.

There's my prediction

[alvaro]

Making predictions for the Europa League seems rather pointless. We can get Borussia Dortmund in the last 32 or we can get Malmo. A lot of our success in that competion will depend on the luck of the draw-

[alvaro]

Its preety obvious that having a strong defence is important but if we have to choose whether we are going to have an average defense and strong attack or viceversa its clear that its better to have a strong attack.

In 2011-12 before we collapsed after an Arsenal loss we had the following results at home.

Liverpool 1-1 Sunderland
Liverpool 3-1 Bolton
Liverpool 2-1 Wolves
Liverpool 1-1 Man United
Liverpool 1-1 Norwich
Liverpool 0-0 Swansea City
Liverpool 1-1 Manchester City
Liverpool 1-0 QPR
Liverpool 1-1 Blackburn Rovers
Liverpool 3-1 Newcastle
Liverpool 0-0 Stoke City
Liverpool 0-0 Tottenham

8 goals conceded in 12 games. Only 20 points achieved.  If you dont have a strong attack you are dead. Its too easy for teams to play for a point against you.  Once we are scoring enough goals to make top 4 then we can worry about the defence imo.

[Fiasco]

Its preety obvious that having a strong defence is important but if we have to choose whether we are going to have an average defense and strong attack or viceversa its clear that its better to have a strong attack.

In 2011-12 before we collapsed after an Arsenal loss we had the following results at home.

Liverpool 1-1 Sunderland
Liverpool 3-1 Bolton
Liverpool 2-1 Wolves
Liverpool 1-1 Man United
Liverpool 1-1 Norwich
Liverpool 0-0 Swansea City
Liverpool 1-1 Manchester City
Liverpool 1-0 QPR
Liverpool 1-1 Blackburn Rovers
Liverpool 3-1 Newcastle
Liverpool 0-0 Stoke City
Liverpool 0-0 Tottenham

8 goals conceded in 12 games. Only 20 points achieved.  If you dont have a strong attack you are dead. Its too easy for teams to play for a point against you.  Once we are scoring enough goals to make top 4 then we can worry about the defence imo.

The problem for Rodgers is that he struggles with balance quite a bit. Against poor opposition we can control some games by dominating the ball, scoring a few goals and keeping it tight at the back. It's not a common occurrence though and often we either sit way too deep and offer little in terms of offensive pressure, or we attack quite boldly and the defence is exposed quite badly. This year I wonder if Rodgers will, to use a boxing analogy, trade punches with teams in the hope that that particular tactic will be enough for us to get top 4. It was in 13/14, however some of that was down to the formation of a perfect storm: Suarez having a truly outstanding year, Sturridge staying fit for most of it and combining with him so well, Gerrard excelling in his deeper role, Sterling having a break out season and the fact our rivals were not in prime form. That's not to detract from Rodgers, and I'm not saying he had nothing to do with making those things happen, I'm just saying they all happened amazingly in the same season. Nothing either side of that has ever look like happening under him, so of course the question is whether the 13/14 season was a freak year or it is what happens when Rodgers gets it right.

If he goes down that road though it's quite the gamble. Benteke, Firmino, Ings, Origi, Sturridge. By and large it'll be up to those guys to score the goals, with Coutinho, Lallana playing key supporting roles (Ibe I'm not sure can be relied on yet to score a lot). There's a chance they'll all click together, and with that we'll score plenty and the defence won't be an issue over 38 games. However, so much depends on Benteke and Sturridge in particular. Can Sturridge get fit and play 20 or so games? Can Benteke be the bully he's so often been against us? Can they form a partnership together? If the answer to those questions is yes then I think we'll be OK. If it's an no, or only one of them score the goals we need, then we'll have to do something we haven't done in 3 years under Rodgers' stewardship: Stop the opposition from scoring regularly.

The problem we have is that we just don't look like keeping a clean sheet. Even when we switched to a 3-5-2 and had a bit more success I always felt that what we done was simply add a couple more sandbags to the lapping water. Sure, it'll hold it back for a while, but it'll get through eventually. And I know a clean sheet record was broken, but it was mostly against the weakest attacks in the league and the system ultimately failed again when the better opposition turned up. Teams do not need to do much to score against us. Isolate the defenders and force errors. Play for some corners and free-kicks around the box and get it in there. Play on the insecurity of the goalkeeper by firing in long shots and closing him down to put pressure on his average distribution. Once teams do a couple of those things then you know it's only a matter of time before we concede. It's not good enough. In the league you'll probably get away with it if the attack is much superior, but it won't win you a title and it certainly won't win you any silverware (unless you win every knockout game 6-5 on aggregate).

So, the key word is balance. Score some goals, play the best football possible but for the sake of every fan around the world restore some order in there. Get the defence, midfield and attack synchronized and don't make it so easy for the opposition. It sounds simple, but if we do that then 4th will be ours to throw away.

[redjed1]

The cups are fine and winning one will make an otherwise crap season appear much better. It is the league we should be prioritising, and not top 4, actually winning it.

We've got a good deal of catching up to do, so here's hoping Costa's hamstring remains a problem, and Arsenal, City and ManU start having problems and dropping points. Lets hope BR and his new backroom boys can weave some magic in our performances.

We need to keep it tight in games against the top sides and take our chances when they come along.
Win all our home games and pick up points (preferably 3) away against the middle teams.
Make sure we get 6 points off all the bottom teams.

I think our summer transfers this year may be the best in a while, and I'm optimistic.

Sounds easy. This time next year we'll be champions.

[Redcap]

As I've said in the stats thread, I think this season will be the final reckoning the way Brendan sets up his midfields, and for at least Lovren.

I think our attack is fine to score 70 goals, and our back 4 is actually pretty solid on an individual to individual basis.

But I think we will continue to leak plenty of goals, and we'll have a 5th best for and against ratio as a result. Unless of course, last season's troubles were all about Gerrard's limitations in the DM role, and any younger, more energetic player in the position will be able to galvanise the team to deliver the kind of performances - solid in defense and fluid in attack, that Brendan is looking for.

Maybe it's just because my generation of Liverpool support has been raised on Hamann, Alonso, Mascherano and Lucas, but I have my doubts about whether Brendan (or almost any manager) can deliver consistent CL football without a defensive midfielder.

[TheSoundLady]

Its preety obvious that having a strong defence is important but if we have to choose whether we are going to have an average defense and strong attack or viceversa its clear that its better to have a strong attack.

In 2011-12 before we collapsed after an Arsenal loss we had the following results at home.

Liverpool 1-1 Sunderland
Liverpool 3-1 Bolton
Liverpool 2-1 Wolves
Liverpool 1-1 Man United
Liverpool 1-1 Norwich
Liverpool 0-0 Swansea City
Liverpool 1-1 Manchester City
Liverpool 1-0 QPR
Liverpool 1-1 Blackburn Rovers
Liverpool 3-1 Newcastle
Liverpool 0-0 Stoke City
Liverpool 0-0 Tottenham

8 goals conceded in 12 games. Only 20 points achieved.  If you dont have a strong attack you are dead. Its too easy for teams to play for a point against you.  Once we are scoring enough goals to make top 4 then we can worry about the defence imo.

I was at the United, Norwich and Swans games.

[JJ Red]

Based on the statistics from the premier league website it appears that you need the following to get 4th place based on the stats of the last 7 years (basically since City became a problem);

Goals Scored: 68 (actual 67.86)
Conceded: 39 (39.57)
GD: 29 (28.29)
Pts: 72 (71.57)
Wins: 21
Draws: 9
Losses: 8

I can see us getting the goals required this season for a top 4 push but i'm not sure i see us with the defensive record to match unless we are going back to 4-2-3-1 and Milner and Hendo/Can can provide better cover for the back 4.

[Bunter]

Put a prime Sami or Carra in there next to Skrtel then I'd be saying 3rd/4th easily, maybe a title run, but the nagging doubts over a cohesive defensive unit and almost zero confidence in Lovren to behave like a normal, composed defender I feel we might come up ever so slightly short for 4th. If we're finishing top 4 then it'll be at United's expense, the other 3 are too good right now.

[elpistolero7]

Based on the statistics from the premier league website it appears that you need the following to get 4th place based on the stats of the last 7 years (basically since City became a problem);

Goals Scored: 68 (actual 67.86)
Conceded: 39 (39.57)
GD: 29 (28.29)
Pts: 72 (71.57)
Wins: 21
Draws: 9
Losses: 8

I can see us getting the goals required this season for a top 4 push but i'm not sure i see us with the defensive record to match unless we are going back to 4-2-3-1 and Milner and Hendo/Can can provide better cover for the back 4.

We're never going to win stuff under Rodgers unless he sorts stuff out defensively. Its his 4th year now, its high time we concede an average of less than one goal a game. Fucking Southampton can do it, why can't we. He's had a 100 million to spend on the defense ffs.

[JJ Red]

We're never going to win stuff under Rodgers unless he sorts stuff out defensively. Its his 4th year now, its high time we concede an average of less than one goal a game. Fucking Southampton can do it, why can't we. He's had a 100 million to spend on the defense ffs.

It will depend what we go with formation wise i think.

4-2-3-1 really hasn't worked under Rodgers but with the new influx of players and good options now at RB/LB ( i expect Moreno to be better this year) it could work a lot better with Can and Milner protecting the back 4 (or Henderson and Milner). In the past under Rodgers (although you do have to say that it was during a time when confidence was absolute zero) it has made us look toothless up front. Playing that way may minimise one of Rodgers' keys strengths as a coach (attack) and possibly isolate Benteke.

If we go the 4-3-3 route i just think it will be more of the same with Skrtel and Sakho being made to look worse than they are because teams just bypass our midfield and run at them with pace. On the flip side though it would allow Rodgers to play his preferred formation and give us loads of options going forward.

However, going by the stats above and if we concede another 45-50 goals i'm not sure i see us getting the required 80-85 to get us to 4th place unless Firminho has a complete Suarez like breakout year.