g3.7

I'm not talking about popularity. I'm saying this line of 'reasoning' is going to end up with no-one taking you seriously. It's just all a bit immature. Every word you write betrays a lack of perspective or empathy.

Yes. I'm saying it's completely impossible. It doesn't follow anything close to logic. Your theory falls under the dictionary definition of "crackpot". You're slipping from a poster who doesn't like mourinho, which is fine, to one who no-one will take seriously. Just think about what you are suggesting. It makes no sense whatsoever.

a genuinely ludicrous, credibility shredding theory. woeful stuff.

he's obviously got work to do. at the moment he's a very direct player, like an unpolished vieri or torres. but I'm all for us signing players who are still on an upward curve. I agree he's probably not a better player than costa at the moment, but I think he'd be a good long term investment (although the price quoted is a bit mad). from his point of view, when we let him go I don't think he was demanding he was first choice. I think he wanted reasonable game time, and competing with eto'o, torres and ba for one spot under jose was never likely to yield that. now he probably would want to know he'd be starting more than 50% of games and playing in 70% of them at least. if conte wants him then he surely has a plan on how to use him. I would like to see him back on that basis. as I say, I suspect we could see two strikers on the pitch at the same time quite a bit...

I think not being in the CL will probably stop us from getting the likes of aubamayang, griezemann and higuian. if that's the case I'd want us to look at good players with scope to improve. for me lukaku is a good fit in that case, so is lacazette. dkw, I'm not sure it is the last area we need to strengthen. at this point we can expect remy to be sold, and falcao and pato will probably also both end their loans. that leaves us with traore and a slightly prone to injury costa. I think that has us way too short. especially if conte wants to play two up. maybe he'll try hazard as a second forward...

that's fair enough- I suppose I think he'll prove to be a better player than you do. all i'm saying is that I don't think signing at him would be an example of "looking backwards". which strikers do you think we could sign this summer? I can't see many realistic targets for us.

9/10, one of wim wenders best.

don't think that's fair. we can argue about whether it was right to sell him or not, but he's a young player with his best days ahead of him. if conte wants him we should try to sign him- the fact he was here before is irrelevant. I think it is the same situation as we had with matic.

he is or was an intelligent, direct striker who can also play out wide. he might be relatively cheap in transfer fee and wages too, so those things are all pluses. I'm extremely concerned at how little he played though. I think it wasn't a bad punt, and I accept that conte will need more options up front than jose because of how he sets up, but I think he probably isn't the answer.

I can't comment on what he'd cost, but I'd like to see him back here. his best years are ahead of him, he has fantastic attributes and will probably continue to improve. I think he could play alongside costa as well as up front on his own. also I think conte will look to use two strikers at times, and if that is the case we will need more than what we have in that position currently. also, although it doesn't really mean much, it is a little sweetner that he is a chelsea supporter.

why? because he'll rub it in our faces? he sort of did after he won the league with inter I guess... I was more referring to the fans who probably, and this seems unbelievable to say, were too young to really remember the first title win under him (and its significance). so they really have no memory of us not beating arsenal or wenger for years etc etc. they might only know jose as a guy who won a title, which for them is par for the course, then had a big hand in our demise this season. you could be a grown adult supporting chelsea all your life and not remember jesper gronkjaer's season long assault on the matthew harding stand with his crosses for example!

barnay ronay has already described it as a marriage of convenience and matthew syed certainly hasn't changed his tune at the times. I don't see any evidence whatsoever that any journalist has changed their opinions of jose just because he's going to man united. personally I think this idea that there is a general anti-chelsea bias in the media is a complete myth. every set of supporters seems to think the media are against them- I think it is more likely that people focus on criticism more than praise.

Oh yeah the match thread people. That brains trust...

Spot on. For what it's worth I think he'd have preferred to go there than to us when moyes was appointed, but so what? It's football. I wish him luck so long as it isn't at our expense, like I would any club legend who has moved on. Don't understand people salivating at the possibility of him failing.

okay. I'm not interested in hyperbole, we'll agree to disagree.

personally I don't think football changes quickly at all. in general I think people see a trend and label it an evolution. I don't think guus is really interested in being a manager any more. He'll probably go back to be a sounding board for abramovich and I'd rather it be him than someone from outside of the game I suppose. in any case- you and I as fans can say "the first team players have been poor for half a season, time to put in the kids for the rest of the season", but a manager can't. I appreciate the sentiment- the players have been rubbish so think long term and give the people who would actually show some desire the games that the first team players have shown they don't deserve. but it isn't a sensible way to run a club. take a pragmatic, considered approach for a second. these choices don't happen in a vacuum. hiddink arrived with a dressing room that was demoralised and probably split. it is important to get the senior players onside at any club- especially in adverse circumstances- and you can't do that by cutting them off. imagine what it would've been like if seven first team players were annexed from the squad. you'd have non stop leaking in the press, their market value would be going down, agents would be warning their clients against moving to chelsea, the dressing room would remain split, the form of the team may have even got worse. I would've liked the kids to play a little more. but kenedy, traore and loftus cheek did all get some decent exposure in the first team. more than any kid since mceachran under ancelotti. tomori, abraham and clarke-salter all made their debuts. others got some increased involvement with the first team. jose said loftus cheek would get a run in the side and he ended up with 45 minutes against the bottom side in the league and that was that. hiddink did much more than that in his defence. bear in mind also that in the second half of the season many of the kids were in the latter stages of two big youth tournaments which probably stopped them featuring a bit more. he doesn't get a 10/10 for putting kids in, but he did put them in a fair bit.

nice bit of justice. shame about the second album though.

it was a really simple observation. a really, really simple observation...

is the bigger picture when judging hiddink's suitability to have an informal behind the scenes role at the club a) his entire career, where he has shown to know a thing or two about football and bringing through young players or b) the final few months of his career where he was brought in as a troubleshooter in a club with a split / demoralised dressing room? if it is the latter then yes, I'm not looking at the big picture. I would have liked him to play certain young players a bit more, but I'm realistic. he couldn't have done it LOADS more because it sends a bad message to the first team players and to prospective first team signings. my opinion is if you don't want him here because it could undermine the manager then that is fine. it is a legitimate concern. if you don't want him here because player x didn't start or play in every game once we were out of the running for all competitions then no, I don't accept that. I think it is a completely stupid, snide position to assume. In my opinion it is an excuse to moan and personally I'm a bit bored of it.

Scoring tap ins is a good thing though.

Yeah not like he has decades of experience working with young players. Oh no, wait, in his temporary spell he didn't play enough kids. More kids than the previous four managers combined, but not enough for my tastes. Waaa Waaa waa.

edit. don't want to get involved in the same arguments. no-one will change their mind on this.

I think clyne has been decent. he'd be my first choice. I think danny simpson is the worst regular starter to win the league I've ever seen. I think he's a terrible player. I guess we'll see- I don't think vardy will start but otherwise I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. I guess the squad numbers might be an indicator, england usually start 1-11 from what I can remember.

points to him taking an extra striker I think. I think he views dier as an emergency fourth central defender. I think I'd have left a RB out instead given milner and stones could both do a job there and neither will be starting.

I think alli and dier are certainties to start.. if wilshere shows he is fit he MAY start ahead of alli but I doubt it. lets not forget he picked alli very early in the season and got criticised heavily for it. I like hart, I think in him and forster we've got two good keepers but I agree, each of those three central defenders worries me and they don't seem natural partners. I bet hodgson asked JT or seriously considered asking him to come back. I think we'll see either a 4231: hart clyne/walker cahill smalling bertrand/rose dier henderson/ wilshere / other then he'll certainly be starting rooney in the front four whether you like it or not, plus kane, so it will be two from lallana, sterling, townshend and I suppose milner. I'm not sure he sees wilshere playing this far forward, but that is one way to accommodate him. as I say, I think alli starts. maybe he has his discipline in mind to not pick him, but I think he'll put him in. alternatively you have a diamond with dier at the base and then there is space for henderson, wilshere and alli in the same team plus rooney and kane up front with vardy off the bench (or indeed rooney behind those two). the defenders, compared to the previous generation, are rubbish. I think if you go five-ten years back you could probably name four seperate partnerships better than smalling/ cahill. sadly we don't have anything better at the moment.