fiel

Plus, a good showing in the CL, not the top 4 battle, is what the likes of Courtois and Hazard desire. If we want to keep our best players, make the best competitions priority

Agree with every word. Logically we should give our all for a top 4 spot and forget Barcelona; but it's the reverse which gets my balls tingling and heart racing. Barcelona will be a moment. A special moment, regardless of outcome - but if we win - this goes on to become a special season. There's no other way of transforming this season into one worth remembering. We should do all it takes to win the CL - it's possible.

Napoli play brilliant football to the eye but Sarri is not a brilliant manager in my opinion, unless he had choices which went unfulfilled by the club in which case we haven't seen the best of him. He lacks a rotation policy which you just can't be inexperienced with in England. You think Jose and his small squads were nervy? Sarri will play his best striker against Juventus, then 2 days later again in small cup game against nobody, and then a few days later again in a European tie - that he plans to throw anyway, since he doesn't believe his squad & philosophy can compete for multiple titles. His striker ends up injured or tired, and instead of bringing out his back up striker for a few games (like a Giroud), he moves Insigne into Mertens' position (like moving Hazard into the striker position, but slightly less blasphemous.) Napoli play pretty football - but so do Monaco, Dortmund, Liverpool and others. I hardly think that's enough reason to consider their managers to be good enough for us though; merely for playing attractive football as 2nd-in-the-league while winning 0 trophies. He has Pochettino written all over him - plenty of beautiful traits to gag over, but the main trait you want in a manager - totally missing - that instinct to put winning before style, and even implementing both to a degree. Pus, you can't bring Lewis Hamilton in to your Vauxhall Astra and expect to keep up with the McLaren's on the course. If we bring in a guy because we like how he drives, we'll still need to spend millions getting the tyres, engine, breaks etc. that he wants. Our current set up would underperform and simply fail if the expectation was to take players who can hardly pass, to replicating the most attractive style in Europe. And to buy that many new players and change our identity that much, to fit a manager who'd be here no longer than 3 season - it's not something i can see happening. Either we'd entirely change our team and who knows what would happen; or he'd come in and manage who we currently have, and people would call for his head when Drinkwater and Willian aren't performing like Xavi and Ronaldinho. Is Sarri a manager to rebuild under? Does he have the credentials? (Keeping in mind that this brilliant Napoli side was put together by none other than Benitez.) My thought is no. The manager we need, needs to be more in line with the hoof-ball philosophy we've maintained for a long time, so that we can retain somewhat our winning ways while slowly evolving. Sarri is too much evolution all at once, and there's no guarantee that his type of evolution would work over here; the footballing climate may totally suffocate his philosophy. At the end of the day though who gives a sh*t when they won't be here in 3 years, deemed 'not good enough':face_palm:

Re: Liverpool. They're better than us, but they're not better than us. It's like we're the pure-bred stallion who everyone should be betting on to win the race, but the Liverpool horse continues to be neck and neck despite living in a poo-covered barn, while ours lives in a mansion. Now; why is it that a horse in rag can compete with a horse in jewels? Simple. Repetition. Take a great horse/great team (Chelsea) - fine, quality to start with. Take a decent horse/team (Liverpool) - eh, we'll see what happens. Now - have the great horse change running routines, running partners, and running courses consistently. Then also, have the not-so-good horse actually running consistent routines, with the same partners, running the same courses until he knows every blade. That's us summed up quickly. We're ill-prepared and 'entitled' as some would put it, compared to a team that's put in grit and determination for 5+ seasons now; and in those 5 seasons regardless of manager, maintained similar drills, pairings, philosophies and such. We don't have that consistency; our team grows in all sorts of directions, but Liverpool grow in a focused direction, maximising traits of their choice, not just leaving the universe to decide what their team will look like in 3 years. They have a plan. And that long term plan - the faith in that plan - can be used as fuel in the short term vs. the likes of City. It's like, who's the more talented striker - Robinho or Defoe? But, if you could only choose one to lead your team for a Premier League campaign, who would you pick? - Probably the vastly shorter, technically inferior Defoe - simply because he's practiced more, and thus, makes a lot more use of the little he has, vs. the 'more talented' option who squanders massive amount of potential, because it's so easy to get complacent when you have it all. Liverpool are simply a unit. We aren't. A small platoon of 50 men will take down 100 men if they're organised correctly and going to war with the right mindset. It doesn't matter if those other 100 have been in training twice as long, with twice as expensive guns.

You don't actually believe donations from forum users are even a slither of what keeps a forum going do you? (We all probably think so at some point so hey ho.) There's a reason online newspapers write wacky headlines instead of asking for donations. Interaction on a website equals money for the website. This forum makes money because people post, not because people donate. The original poster was right - the forum owners are privileged, not the users who have plenty of websites to choose from, including starting their own. Great forum though. Don't see why there's a need for a handful of already established members to paint themselves as snobs who can't handle new thoughts (not yourself)

Watching this Arsenal game and my main take away so far - American commentators totally outshine the current English & Scottish. We get redundant facts and non stories throughout games - but the Americans far more often offer genuine insight or fresh perspective. They feel like real people as opposed to robots.

It really is worth considering that all footballing reasons aside, he could just be tired of London (many would be), and seeking his way out of his contract ASAP - he could be utterly depressed for all we know, in which case there can't be much negativity towards him IMO, just disappointed understanding.

You could cherry pick players from each of those categories and turn us into CL contenders. We could totally transform, or just freshen ourselves, with barely any transfer fees spent.; and I have absolutely no idea why the club don't do it (obviously not as a long term strategy for the rest of time ) For the set up we have I'd eagerly take - Kepa, Vrij, Asamoah as the 'can play everywhere and do everything' squad player, Ribery, Robben. Beyond that, simply invest in 1 striker, balanced but technically marvellous midfielders, and simple full backs who are dependable and productive. Kepa; Azpilicueta, Christensen, Vrij, Whoever's good going forward(£); Kante; Whoever's defensively adept, but with incredible passing(£); Robben/Willian/Hazard/Ribery/Odoi/Musonda (whichever 3); Morata/Whoever's actually worth the tens of millions we'd get for Courtois. We'd have a flair team, an attacking team, a dominant team, a shrewd team, a balanced team. Not the finished article - but a foundation in which we could replace a superbly functional Ribery/Hazard/Robben combo - which is just lunacy to not consider when you know how talented those 2 old Bayern guys are. They couldn't play every game, but they wouldn't need to.

It's no good that a non-productive, personal debate has been started between members so soon after new arrivals. I'll simply say this, with a harsh tone, to keep things fair and wrap up. If you're confused as to why some people post critical points, where yours are all bright blue, it may be this. It may be because, while some drink beer before a game, others read books or articles. Repeat that process for 300 or more games, and who's more likely to bring balanced perspective to the table for the post-match discussion? That isn't the sum of what I want to say; put so bluntly it just sounds offensive, but it gets across somewhat of the point. I'm not going to join a fighter forum as a book-reader, and tell them all about how to shoulder barge someone. And I'm not going to be a very vocal voice on a forum which requires discussion re: finance, strategy, and foresight, if I can't talk about any of those things. So, if you don't yourself grasp the intricacies of board leadership, delegation, recruitment, motivation, any of these nuances - you're really lacking scope over the club, and attacking points you don't understand, making us who do understand look like utter arseholes just for doing the basics right. A complete mole hill in here because a user knows we could do well without Roman, and expects Chelsea to win plenty of trophies. Upset, over that. Upset, over new people having new ideas That last line sums this up perfectly. Hopefully we can go forward now without calling eachother stupid, troll, or fake fan for disagreeing.

It's too easy to forget that less than 5 high profile players use Hazard's style. Less than 3 do. I can't even name the second one beyond Hazard; the only name is Ribery, but from years ago, though. You don't replace Messi, because his qualities will not be found again. Similarly, you don't replace Hazard, because his qualities will not be found again. Just like we won't replace Lampard, and won't replace Drogba. What's next, is a new 'style' entirely. One that i think will resemble 2005 Chelsea, just based on the players we have now and the way we'd have to set up if we lost Hazard.

I usually don't like it when names come out of nowhere as the next big thing, but my god Bailey seems fantastic. He's very similar to Hazard before we bought him in terms of, already ready to win the biggest games, but still so much refinement to come. We may be surprised. If we sign a more prolific player than Hazard, like a Bailey who goes on to score like Salah does for Liverpool, will we be appeased? Or will we genuinely miss specifically Hazard's touches, smiles, celebrations, etc? (I think so.) Ultimately i think... he can't be replaced. So instead, we have to change once he's gone, and not even think about replacing him. It'd be sad going from worshipping a god, to going to finding a random person to mould into that god's image once the god is gone. Though in terms of 'replace' as in who do we buy with the money and the gaping hole - then I think the next step is a 4-2-3-1 with prolific, balanced players.

The consensus so far in this thread is - You're not a Chelsea supporter if you have anything critical to say! How dare you be rational! How dare you write many words! How dare you speak against me! Grow up people. Cough up some responses to our points, please. Not just stating your original points in a more pushy tone (Unless this is a case if a case of, "They disagree with me. They're wrong. Why would I waste time trying to fix something wrong?" Thankfully we won't be 16 forever!)

God you're dull. Multiple new users and all you want to do is critisise them for having different points to you instead of saying 'Welcome, fellow Chelsea fans - I may not agree with you, but i look forward to bolstering how many ideas we have to pick from in here.' Anyway, apparently what forums are all about is reserving the right to critisise anything posted - so with all due respect, with the day or so I've been on here, you've posted absolute tosh. And if that's in 'response' to the new users, you need to get a grip of yourself. PS - More likely, some upset mods on other forums brought out the ban-hammer for little reason due to the emotional loss, so we emigrated here. I was literally banned from TalkChelsea a few hours before signing up to here; 13k posts, one of the highest post-reputations; because I asked a mod if he was sure he should be posting a shallow headline without any context re: the sudden death of Astori; it seemed insensitive. No warning - instant ban, by the least mature mod 'Special'Juan he's called.

Can we stop saying this as if we didn't just spend over 100m+ on squad players who don't even play? Money isn't the issue, so it isn't a good retort. Hardly any teams can go out and spunk the fees we do. It's a matter of misorganised priorities and a mismanaged club.

Apparently if someone gives you a lot of money you're never allowed to stand up to them again Apparently you become their bitch and do whatever they say. Well, some live that way, some don't.

1 FA Cup, 2 league titles, and 1 league cup, isn't a successful 6 years for one of the richest teams the sport will ever see. Where are these European cups + Champions League trophies coming from? (Oh wow, I just remembered we won the Europa League in the past 6 years!!!!!Success.) But Champions League..? I said in the last 6 years we've had terrible form. 2012 season; 2013 season; 2014 season; 2015 season; 2016 season; 2017 season; 6 seasons, none of which did we win the Champions League in; all of which seasons we employed terrible recruitment, terrible loan strategies, terrible contract strategies, with terrible football on the pitch for more than half of it. In the past 6 years, we've hit Europa League twice, sold our best players more than twice, recruited terrible players more than twice, haven't won the league more than twice. An absolutely watered down 6 years. Trying to debate otherwise is an absolute waste of time. + Don't slip an extra season in there so that your point seems more valid; it changes the entire point for those not willing enough to think for themselves while reading this back and forth. If we pretend to extent my original point beyond the 6 years to include our greatest moment ever, sure, Roman doesn't seem half bad. If you actually stick to what I said, which is the past half decade (actually 6 years), you can't debate that the amount of trophies pales in comparison to what is expected from a club of our and many others stature; yet trophies aren't even half of it. That is considered underperforming. If you underperform for 6 years in a row, your head roles - not your buddies.

Any post can be made to look foolish if someone's motivated by their inability to comprehend points.

And - for these past 6 years in a row, our club (and Roman's performance) has either stagnated or dropped in quality. In stats, those 6 years, amount to roughly 33.33% of Roman's time here; and every percent of that 33.33% time in these past 6 years, has been squandered potential - consecutively. Making his form terrible.

People assume that we need someone of Roman's equivalent wealth to compete or continue attracting & rewarding top players. But, haven't Bayern / Barcelona / Juventus / Atletico / managed to do just that, compete while attracting the best players, without spending massive fees and spending massive wages? (I'm not suggesting Bayern/Barcelona/Juve aren't very rich - but their riches are not what keep them at the top. They can attract anyone they want, put them on 35k a week, and those players will be enamoured.) What about the brilliant Dortmund team which kept spanking Bayern, and kept spanking teams in the Champions League? If Gotze hadn't betrayed them, and they'd had our youth system in place (something which will remain beyond Roman's departure), they wouldn't have had to sell their few stars like they did, and may in another universe still be a top 5 team. There's many workarounds in terms of financially competing with a fraction of the finance. You can buy a 280k house while you only have 20k in your account, then start a road to profit if you know what you're doing. But most people don't, and our board don't. Our owner doesn't. Most people aren't very strategic, which is why it can't be overemphasised how essential it is to build a healthy boardroom who communicate with a healthy leader. In doing just that - creating great background staff - you ensure success, for you're paying attention to an edge most people neglect. Whenever a 'small' team wins the league, there is only 1 thing in common - the bond shared between staff, players, management. That transcends the £50m more talented players at other clubs. How you pass or shoot the ball doesn't win you titles; it's how you communicate with your teammates; which you won't do well if you can't communicate with your club. Pt 2: You don't need to be in the top 5 wealthiest teams in Europe to be in the top 5 best teams in Europe. Atletico, Dortmund, Liverpool, and more, are all fine examples. To sum up a bit more. Wolfsburg - one of the wealthiest teams of the past 15 years - where in the hell are they? I say the same for Leverkusen. Where are essentially-broke-as-chips Atletico, though? Which stage did no-money-Napoli reach in the Champions League, 2012, and with what style of football? Where are they today, and what style of football? Who's the dominant force in La Liga? The team who spends more money on transfers, wages & misc - or the team who spends less? We don't need Roman's money. Roman needs Chelsea. We're his boss; we keep his project here in the green; and we can pull his project in a moment if we want to - if only we knew it - & I can't wait for fans to know. Most essentially - we need strategy, vision, trust, communication, patience, quality, and proof that people are capable of their jobs. Most of which we lack. Most of which embodies Barcelona, Bayern, Juventus, Man City. If you gathered the 100 smartest minds in history and got them up to date with modern football, there's no doubt that the majority would agree, that if inconsistencies and problems have been going on for 10+ years, it's not down to the people who're only around for 2 years at a time. The responsibility falls on the head of the director of the project. And that directors head should roll if they again, and again, and again, fail to put together a team of personnel who can lead his really crummy vision. Roman isn't entitled to us. Chelsea are 100+ years old. Roman's been here for a fraction of that. He isn't our dad; he isn't our brother; he was our caregiver at a really important time, who has unfortunately, lost his wits, lost his charm, lost his career status - so I don't understand how it can be rationalised that it's smart to continue allowing him to oversee our progression. Actually, we've not made any progress in 6 years.

Which somewhat sums you up quite quickly unfortunately. Did you think about any of what you did read? Or did it just instantly create cognitive dissonance since you disagree, causing you to throw your toys out the pram... I think we're going to get along.

If we can't bare 3 weeks of a moody manager and 1 underwhelming season when it's clear as day that the squad is short-changed, then we don't deserve - any - top managers in the future.

I'm living in a time where my own fellow fans want to sign an Algerian Joe Cole for 60m without even a smirk on the face or a hint of irony or caution. We all have our tastes; maybe i'm crazier for wanting to bring Robben or Ribery here on a free instead, while waiting for the perfect player so we can actually integrate a long term plan. Ribery - Hazard - Robben for 2 seasons would win more than Hazard - Whoever - Mahrez would in 5. There's equal if not better potential in signing some select players for peanuts, as opposed to going all crazy over a player just because their name is always in the media (like the people who wanted Bakayoko.) 100m on Bakayoko and Mahrez when Bayern have spent around £10 on 5 elite midfielders; Juventus peanuts on quality midfielders; Man City, yeah maybe 100m or so like us, but actually on good quality players. Awful transfer targets these days

Until signing Arsenal's 4th-choice striker, we had 0 players who're known to be consistent finishers. Yet, we hardly concede any goals. So, something's set up correctly; we're not failing to get to the other end, and we're not letting goals in for fun. Italy and Juventus's best manager of the past 10 years does seem to know something. To blame Conte and not either the players (who aren't natural finishers, not a single one!) or the board, who went ahead for multiple seasons without any foresight, is a lack of foresight. We've had plenty of games - like vs. United, and small teams - where the difference has been lack of output; not being tactically out mastered, not at all. And Conte can't score for the players. He's made pretty much the best of the hand he's been given, up until just a couple weeks ago. From the way people are talking about him you'd think he played Hazard as a defensive winger, had us around 10th, gave no minutes to youth players, gouged people in the eye and constantly moaned about refs.

His literal words a couple weeks ago were: 'I don't think Bakayoko is ready to play against Barcelona.' He was fit enough to play 90 minutes of football, or his type of football anyway. It was clear that if Conte wanted to play him, he would've. But he knew Bakayoko vs. Barcelona would be a slaughter. Just like moments throughout Luiz's 'injury', when really, Conte had just fallen out with Luiz, Conte's absolutely a read-between-the-lines guy.