Like every British manager that does well for a bit (eg Rodgers), we all got carried away with Graham Potter didn’t we? When he was at Brighton he was lauded as the next big thing. Every club outside of the top 2 wanted him. The media heralded his achievements at Brighton as some kind of miracle, he was the man everyone was talking about.
Except - we all forgot one thing. At Brighton he was a good coach at a VERY well run club. Unlike the real elite British managers (Fergie and Clough back in the day) - Potter wasn’t team building. He was benefitting from some of the best recruitment in the PL. He had to coach the players and did a decent job. Then he leaves and lo and behold, Brighton are continuing where they left off without him and Potter at a big club is being exposed as hopelessly out of his depth.
When will the media start to get it? Just because someone looks decent at a brilliantly run club, doesn’t mean they’re actually anything special. Potter will get sacked and do a good job at another well run club I’m sure but he isn’t and never was an elite manager
Graham Potter
posted on 26/2/23
Surprisingly his win % at Chelsea is slightly better than when he was at Brighton.
5 year contract any idea how much per year? Has to be a minimum of 2 mill possibly a good deal more.
posted on 26/2/23
When Ziyech got the red, he just sat there … he should be taking charge and owning the moment
posted on 26/2/23
I’d still take him over Rodgers and continue to rate him highly.
Clearly not going well at Chelsea though.
posted on 26/2/23
comment by RJC (U17308)
posted 3 hours, 24 minutes ago
Surprisingly his win % at Chelsea is slightly better than when he was at Brighton.
5 year contract any idea how much per year? Has to be a minimum of 2 mill possibly a good deal more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is around £10m per year. Conte is on £15m and Klopp I think is on around £18m per year.
posted on 26/2/23
Potter not being helped by Boehly’s recruitment strategy, which seems to be based on the old Monopoly plan of being in charge of the bank and buying every property you land on! Whether it’s any good or not.
😂
posted on 27/2/23
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 17 hours, 10 minutes ago
I’d still take him over Rodgers and continue to rate him highly.
Clearly not going well at Chelsea though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same. If we need to do a rebuild on a small budget, Potter would be a much better option than Rodgers.
posted on 27/2/23
comment by Foxello (U6985)
posted 6 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 17 hours, 10 minutes ago
I’d still take him over Rodgers and continue to rate him highly.
Clearly not going well at Chelsea though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Same. If we need to do a rebuild on a small budget, Potter would be a much better option than Rodgers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well you would both take anyone over Rodgers so probably not the best example!
You’re also making the classic mistake of thinking the modern day manager has a big hand in the recruitment. These days they really don’t. Potter was a success at Brighton because of the strength of their recruitment team in the same way the new manager at Brighton continues to enjoy the same success.
Rodgers didn’t sign Kristenson. He didn’t sign Fofana. He didn’t sign Bertrand. Leicester did
posted on 27/2/23
A fair point. It's also fair to point out that practically every player Brighton signed when Potter was manager improved under his management and coaching team. Players like Bissouma, Caicedo, Mac Allister, Trossard, Cucurella - all improved several fold under Potter and went from relative unknowns to highly rated, top flight quality players.
Not sure you could say many players have improved under Rodgers, certainly not those brought in during his tenure. Maddison, yes. KDH, Fofana, sure. Not many (if any) others. Also worth noting how many players have regressed - Castagne, Perez, Soumare, Daka, Soyuncu, Barnes. Again, if we're talking about who would be a better long term option for what we have now and the likelihood of needing to sign young, raw players with potential from abroad, Potter is the far superior option to Rodgers IMHO.
posted on 28/2/23
Yep that’s fair. I think with Rodgers what you have is a manager who makes an excellent short term impact but really isn’t the manager for the long term at all. In fact he’s become detrimental to Leicester.
So when he joined he massively improved Barnes (remember how good Barnes was a couple of seasons ago), massively improved Justin (ruined by injury), Fofana, KDH, Maddison and I would add Chilwell to that as well.
The difference between Rodgers and Puel in those first couple of years was enormous. We went from a boring dull underperforming team to one that was ripping teams to bits. The problem is - Rodgers can’t maintain it. At Celtic it began to turn. Same at Liverpool
The jury is out over whether Potter is any different. Had a couple of outstanding years at Brighton and improved the players. What would have happened if he’d have stayed 2 more years. What would have happened if Brighton made a couple of poor signings? Stopped investing in the squad? That’s where a managers mettle is really tested. Rodgers has failed that and Potter so far looks to be failing.
It’s great being a manager at a well run club when all is going well and you’re signing top players. Very different story when you have to do what Ten Hag has done - show your quality by turning a problem around
posted on 28/2/23
Barnes definitely improved initially under Rodgers but has gone backwards at an alarming rate since. I am hoping he doesn't become another Demarai Gray - lots of talent and promise but never delivers. Chilwell did improve under Rodgers but his upward trajectory was already apparent under Puel, and he improved significantly in his first year at Chelsea before his injury.
I think in general, most managers have a shelf life at a club of around 2-3 years before things go stale. It's been the case for Rodgers at every club he's been at and the last 18 months here have showed what happens when someone stays for too long and past their best.
In Potter's case, I do think there are some extenuating circumstances to why things have gone badly at Chelsea - mainly because he's a builder but has an owner who has spent half a billion on players without any clear strategy or method to the madness. Only the elite managers would strive under those circumstances and, sadly, Potter has looked out of his depth. I don't think he's a bad manager and I do think he would do well at a club aiming for top 8-12 with a limited budget and young players he can work with to improve. I would like to think that if he was sacked and Rodgers leaves us (a boy can dream), he would be a prime candidate and might fancy the challenge to rebuild both us and his own reputation.
I don't think Rodgers is a bad manager in every regard, but I do think he only works well under a particular set of circumstances for a limited period of time before things so stale and eventually comes crumbling down. He's not too dissimilar to Mourinho in that regard. He'd probably do quite well at Chelsea for a year or two, get them back into top 4 and win a trophy before things went bad. At Leicester, he has run his course and is out of ideas.