Chelsea Management Megathread: Mourinho out soon?

[cgf]

What is with this board and absolutes? Mourinho is a bottom table manager using garbage tactics with big clubs. You give a guy a massive budget, with huge resources, and he'll win something. It's pretty freaking easy to piece all of that together, no?

How did Chelsea fair after Mourinho left? How are they going to look when he gets fired? I guess that results trump longevity, consistency, professionalism, etc?

Neither of us have to even do research to know that the highest spending clubs have always won domestically and in Europe for a while now. Mourinho has constantly been in that tier of clubs, Wenger hasn't.

It's insanity. Wenger could've left Arsenal for greener pastures and won plenty of titles. It wouldn't, or shouldn't, have changed his legacy at all.

 

[NHL Dude 120]

I'd bet if mourinho gets canned Abramovich will target Pep as his replacement. It's also interesting to note that Chelsea fans aren't calling for his head.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I don't think any other league places as big an emphasis on managers, their personalities and utterances as the Premier League. It's all just a grand spectacle, part of selling the game.

 

[les Habs]

I'd bet if mourinho gets canned Abramovich will target Pep as his replacement. It's also interesting to note that Chelsea fans aren't calling for his head.

Well he won't get Pep either way. Perhaps if he left Bayern, but I would think Pep would take the City post before Chelsea and he probably wouldn't be too keen on working for Abramovich. He's surely easily do a much better job with the same players though. Anyway, as regards Pep, I didn't think he'd stay at Bayern just a couple of months ago, but now I get the feeling he's going to sign a short extension.

It's not interesting, it's mind-boggling. The support he gets from supporters is laughable. It's just as bad as when he was at Madrid.

 

[Virtanen18]

I might take the City job before Chelsea too, but wasn't the word that Pep wanted to manage in London?

 

[Edo]

Well he won't get Pep either way. Perhaps if he left Bayern, but I would think Pep would take the City post before Chelsea and he probably wouldn't be too keen on working for Abramovich. He's surely easily do a much better job with the same players though. Anyway, as regards Pep, I didn't think he'd stay at Bayern just a couple of months ago, but now I get the feeling he's going to sign a short extension.

It's not interesting, it's mind-boggling. The support he gets from supporters is laughable. It's just as bad as when he was at Madrid.

How much money would it take for Pep to get his guys into Chelsea though? Abramovich has money, but is he going to pay Mourinho 30 million to leave, and then probably the same amount if not more to get Pep aboard. And then the insane amount of money it'll take to revamp them?

Chelsea is probably the unmost Pep team you can find. City makes sense, United make sense, and Arsenal make sense, but Chelsea?

 

[les Habs]

I might take the City job before Chelsea too, but wasn't the word that Pep wanted to manage in London?

I'm sure he would prefer London to Manchester just as he'd probably prefer Berlin to Munich. That doesn't mean that he'd choose Chelsea over City though. Like I said, I don't think he'd want to manage Chelsea simply down to Abramovich. On top of that City have Txiki (not sure if Soriano is still there) along with a squad that I think he would prefer.

How much money would it take for Pep to get his guys into Chelsea though? Abramovich has money, but is he going to pay Mourinho 30 million to leave, and then probably the same amount if not more to get Pep aboard. And then the insane amount of money it'll take to revamp them?

Chelsea is probably the unmost Pep team you can find. City makes sense, United make sense, and Arsenal make sense, but Chelsea?

What guys? Players? Pep would surely want to make signings over time, but wouldn't need any immediately to improve on Chelsea's performances. Like I said, he'd do a better job with the same players that Mourinho already has at his disposal. Chelsea makes sense as much as the other sides do as a result. Pep would simply employ different tactics the likes of which the current Chelsea squad could generally handle with ease.

Pep would only cost whatever his wages would be if he were to come as that would have to be either after his contract was up with Bayern or he was fired. Pep wouldn't leave Bayern while he's under contract for anybody.

 

[Edo]

Les Habs, this Chelsea team isn't anywhere close to being a contender. You can't look at their starting XI + bench and come away with that conclusion. They're trash.

 

[Jussi]

I think Guardiola will extend with Bayern but 2-3 years max.

 

[Chimaera]

Les Habs, this Chelsea team isn't anywhere close to being a contender. You can't look at their starting XI + bench and come away with that conclusion. They're trash.

This post is typical ignorance.

With a better start, a few different bounces and some better health, and they're in the top 4 anyhow.

Sure, they need to sort some players out, but it's more mental than them not being good players. Most of their lineup can play for any top 4 side.

I'm not saying they're a league winning bunch, but they also have the money and resolve to spend to do so.

 

[Plato]

This post is typical ignorance.

With a better start, a few different bounces and some better health, and they're in the top 4 anyhow.

This.
If Chelsea doesn't suffer that shock 3-0 defeat at the hands of City early on, I think they'd be top 4 right now.

 

[cgf]

So looking at the lineup that won the EPL last year should make it clear that they can't contend?

 

[Plato]

So looking at the lineup that won the EPL last year should make it clear that they can't contend?

Duh.

 

[Evilo]

Don't feed guys. Obvious is obvious.

Chelsea's squad is, on paper, just as good as any EPL team, saved maybe City.

However, they underachieve, which is usually the coach's responsability.

 

[Cassano]

So looking at the lineup that won the EPL last year should make it clear that they can't contend?

How about Man United's 2013-14 lineup? Fresh off of winning the league without breaking a sweat. That team didn't have much talent, despite being the defending champions.

Not saying Chelsea is Man Utd 2013-14 bad, but their roster still looks pretty flawed IMO, but still easily top 3 in England.

 

[S E P H]

To call Wenger's marriage with Arsenal happy would be a gross overstatement. People have been asking for his head on and off for 7 or 8 years now. You had a great marriage for 9 years, then you guys stopped having sex. Had it one day a year the last two years but it's nothing like it used to be. Been looking at other women for a few years but just can't part with your wife because she's the mother of your kids. I think that's the best analogy.

That is true LITN, you said it perfectly, BUT we must also understand that EVERY manager and coach in ANY sport has a shelf life. I am wanting Wenger out because I think Arsenal needs something fresh, it has been too stale at this club over the marriage, he got boring, he never wants to travel, go to museums, or go to carnivals, just wants to sit home and watch TV everyday. I can also describe it as a restaurant analogy....if you start losing customers out of sudden, you don't keep the restaurant the same except if you're beyond arrogant. You change it up, you dismiss dishes that were in the 80s as retro and create more upbeat modern dishes. Its what Gordan Ramsey does on every Kitchen Nightmare.

So looking at the lineup that won the EPL last year should make it clear that they can't contend?

They should be contending, BUT they have a ton of overrated pieces on the team. Fabregas hasn't been the same under any manager not named Wenger. Willian, though acceptable last year, isn't a starting XI on a EPL title squad. Matic, people were calling him world class last year, isn't even close to that. Hazard, though their best most talented player has disappeared. Costa, I won't even go there. Pedro though has been good, isn't a main piece to winning games. Oscar can only score off free kicks he dives on. And their defensive line has been putrid (but also regressed by quite a lot).

Not all of it is on Moaninho, but the record speaks for his inability to consistently win. Just go look at his coaching record, the longest he's been at a club has been Porto for four years. FOUR. And as I mentioned some time ago, Chelsea has the talent, but they don't have the creativity to go out there and score goals. They get a lot of their goals from free kicks around the box and if that's the only way you can score, you WILL lose games. Just look at their last CL fixture, they had to get a stunning free kick goal from Willian to win the game. If not, it would have been a 1v1 draw and Chelsea would be sitting third in the CL as well.

 

[Power Man]

How about Man United's 2013-14 lineup? Fresh off of winning the league without breaking a sweat. That team didn't have much talent, despite being the defending champions.

Not saying Chelsea is Man Utd 2013-14 bad, but their roster still looks pretty flawed IMO, but still easily top 3 in England.

RVP was healthy when they won the title

He wasnt the following season

 

[Cassano]

RVP was healthy when they won the title

He wasnt the following season

And Chelsea are missing Courtois, the best GK in the league. I would say he was THE main reason for Chelsea's great defensive record last season.

Also John Terry went from being the best CB in the league last year to being a sieve this season. Some players just can't fight age. That's what happened to Ferdinand/Vidic as well.

I agree with S E P H's post for the most part on his analysis of Chelsea players. It's like people arguing the likes of Cleverly, Nani, Rafael, Fletcher etc were also great players.

 

[Power Man]

And Chelsea are missing Courtois, the best GK in the league. I would say he was THE main reason for Chelsea's great defensive record last season. .

True, but Matic was also important that season

 

[cgf]

His struggles this season aside, Matic has been exceptional at the 6 for a lot more than just last season. He's not world class this year, but that doesn't mean he hasn't been in the past and won't be back at that level in the future. And Cesc was as good as he's ever been during the first half of last season; he got complacent and has lost his form, but the special one got even more out of him than Wenger ever did in getting Chelsea to run away with the EPL like they did. I agree Chelsea lack creativity to their play, Hazard's dreaful season lends credence to Evilo's speculation that Eden has quit on his coach, and I agree that Mourinho has a shorter shelf-life than most coaches of his caliber; just don't agree with your assessment of Matic in general, or Cesc's play last season before the league was secured. On paper this chelsea squad shouldn't be competing with either Barca, Bayern or Real; but they certainly should be competing with Citeh, Arsenal and United.

 

[Chimaera]

Matic's issue is the defense as much as anything else.

Terry has fallen off the face of the earth. Cahill had never been that great, but his form is obviously suffering. They're not being helped out by good fullback play. The typical Jose bunker, bunker, anti-football where you'll steal a match 1-0 isn't working when there are leaks at the foundation.

For all Begovic's shot stopping abilities, he doesn't command the box like Courtois. There's also a mystique that's gone. They expect to screw up. Players do not have the same faith in having a clear goal being stolen by the best keeper in the league.

Offensively, they're good enough to get it done. They just don't have players to fit what they're doing. Costa is a form player, and he's not getting support. Hazard is a square peg in a round hole who has quit on the manager.

But for what it's worth, they're not this bad. They're having a lot of things fall apart at the same time, but the biggest issue is the central defense.


They have the talent (and if they didn't, they could go out and buy it) to compete with the top 4, though I think winning the league is a difficult ask. The trouble is they need 2 top level players to add to their roster, and I don't know that they will get it.

 

[Edo]

This post is typical ignorance.

With a better start, a few different bounces and some better health, and they're in the top 4 anyhow.

Sure, they need to sort some players out, but it's more mental than them not being good players. Most of their lineup can play for any top 4 side.

I'm not saying they're a league winning bunch, but they also have the money and resolve to spend to do so.

So, luck? Stars aligned for Chelsea last year. It's impossible for it to happen in consecutive years and line up so perfectly.

Ok guys, what's so fantastic about Chelsea?

Their defenders?

Terry, Cahill, Zouma, Az, Rahman, and Ivanovic. Pretty average run of the mill EPL defense. It's part too old, and part too inexperienced.

Their midfield?

Matic, Ramires, Mikel, Oscar, Fabregas, Matic, Loftus, Hazard, Willian. What stands out here for everybody? Willian and Hazard are great, everybody else is meh. Ramires/Mikel/Oscar/Cesc are pedestrian.

Attackers?

Costa, Remy, Pedro, and Falcao. Costa has been garbage, and his suspensions are directly leading to points lost. Remy/Pedro/Falcao are crap.

People praise Chelsea because they somehow won the EPL last year. They didn't have a good squad last year, and miraculously walking away with a title doesn't somehow change any of that. Chelsea always stay healthy, and their tactics gets them wins.

I cannot look at that squad and call them anything but good. They are very good at staying healthy, and managing games. Cool.

 

[Peen]

Lucky was the 2012 CL win, or Greece in the euros of 2004. Last year we were the best.

You weren't. Happy 4th place to you.

 

[Edo]

Lucky was the 2012 CL win, or Greece in the euros of 2004. Last year we were the best.

You weren't. Happy 4th place to you.

Sports fans refuse to account for luck helping their teams win, and we've gone over this before. Chelsea literally had their entire starting XI healthy with zero squad rotation for the entire year. It's unheard of. City lost Toure, Aguero, Kompany, Nasri, Zabaleta, etc, for large periods. Arsenal lost Ozil, Ramsay, Giroud, Walcott, Ox, Koscileny, etc.

Why all know what a quality footballer is like. Chelsea doesn't have many of them.

 

[Blender]

Sports fans refuse to account for luck helping their teams win, and we've gone over this before. Chelsea literally had their entire starting XI healthy with zero squad rotation for the entire year. It's unheard of. City lost Toure, Aguero, Kompany, Nasri, Zabaleta, etc, for large periods. Arsenal lost Ozil, Ramsay, Giroud, Walcott, Ox, Koscileny, etc.

Why all know what a quality footballer is like. Chelsea doesn't have many of them.

So you're saying none of Arsenal, Man City, and Chelsea had what should be proper squad depth to win the title, but Chelsea stayed healthy out of them and won it?

Chelsea won the title last season, and deservedly so. Their record speaks for itself, they were the best team last year. Every single team in every single sport has to contend with the possibility of injuries, Chelsea aren't some special exception to that.