You are spot on, about us needing to have a strong defence. If we do not concede so many, we do not need to score so many. As I always harp on about, BALANCE IS KEY.
Your data suggests low to mid 30s, is what we need to be aiming for (goals against).
The problem is that Rodgers is solely focussed on attack. I imagine by the end of the window, we will have Moreno and Lovren.
The average across the entire PL era with Chelsea's freakish 15 goals taken out so it doesn't pull the average artificially low is 33.42 goals.
If we reduced our goals conceded by 25% it would give us a total of 37.5 goals conceded, which is still 4 above the historic average for the PL era. Using seasons where 30 or more were conceded (there were 6 seasons in addition to Chelsea's record 15 where 29 or less were conceded) as this was the case in 14 out of 22 seasons, then the average rises to 36.8, still nearly a goal less than if we reduce our concession by 25%.
I've done it this way to try and find a reasonable amount by which we would need to tighten up the defence, without painting an artificially bleak picture, hence leaving Chelsea's 15 goal season out to make the average more representative. Likewise looking at just 30+ seasons.
The target sensibly has to be less than 35, but a 25% reduction on last season to 37.5 goals wouldn't be a million miles away. There have been 4 seasons where more than 37.5 were conceded by the winners, and a further 3 where 37 were conceded by the winners.
Moreno is known more for his attack mindedness than his defensive abilities. Lovren, I do rate as a defender (meaningless as that is).
Of course there were individual defensive errors, but that's not unique to us, but the underlying problem was a systemic one, not 50 individual errors, though Skrtel did his best to prove otherwise.
Also it's easier to change the system somewhat than to try and integrate a pair of full backs and a centre half (for argument's sake). With the exception of Flanno, none of the other defenders we used were exactly rookies. There were two new centre halves, and occasionally (Cissoko) a new left back, so if anyone wants to use that as the explanation then doesn't that rather make my earlier point for me, and so we're back to systems again.
Changing personnel regularly? Well, Skrtel, Agger and Johnson are hardly strangers to each other, and they did play with Flanno also during Dalglish's time. So that leaves Sakho and Toure, and Flanno as neither played with him before. Just how many times did we see a defensive line up of Johnson, Toure, Sakho, Flanno? Not once.
The most 'unfamiliars' line up used was Flanno, Toure, Skrtel, Cissoko - used 4 times, 3 wins and a draw, 5 conceded, 1 clean sheet, 12 goals scored.
Whilst going through the line ups the most common combo used was Skrtel and Johnson. They played in more games together than any other duo or trio. Surprised? Thought not. The Skrtel Sakho duo suffered a few times, but not without Johnson also being in the team.
So why were we so bad when players who are familiar with each other played together so often?
Answers in an email to Mr B
Rodgers@lfc.fc 