Squad Strengthening
- Thread starter tommyhcfc
- Start date
- Status
G
Guest
Guest
I couldn't give a rats what we are accused of by bitter and jealous oppostion fans. If we really are going to not spend and find results suffer for the sake of winning an argument, then we are giving those fans exactly what they want.
I think you'll find they can be.
SWP, Sidwell and Ben Haim were all at the very least above average, regular, consistant performers for premiership sides prior to joining Chelsea. SWP was probably the form winger in the league in his last season or two at Man City, Sidwell was one of Readings best players and Ben Haim was a nailed on starter and important member of one of the tighested defences in the Premiership. Pizzaro was a regular performer and kept Roque Santa Cruz out of the Bayern Munich team.
The alternatives like Sinclair, Woods and Sahar have no premiership experience outside the odd appearance off the bench Chelsea (Woods none at all). Why should these players be fast tracked into the first team when others with better and more consistant records are deemed not good enough?. Seriously, I really want to know why coming through the youth system means the bar should be lowered. Why shouldn't these players have to go out on loan and prove that they are Premiership ready before making the very big step up to one of the best sides in the world?.
- Messages
- 22,720
- Reaction score
- 6,605
It is a fair point Qaz however there comes a point where we have to start to blood youngsters in our first team rather than someone elses as whoever we send these players on loan to is not going to be anywhere near the standard of our side. Blooding them in our team allows us to see whether they really do have the potential (and I mean potential rather than ability right now) but also sends a message to other youngsters that being at Chelsea isn't a waste of time.
If my kid was currently 17 and a great prospect and he was offered a contract at Chelsea and one at Arsenal my heart would be telling him Chelsea but if I was thinking entirely of his career my head would say Arsenal.
We need to find a balance. Just now I am not all that concerned about it as I think we neglected our youth policy for so long that we need to give it time to develop however if in a further 2-3 years time we are still looking like we will always just spend big money to fill gaps I will start to be very disappointed in the way the club is progressing.
If my kid was currently 17 and a great prospect and he was offered a contract at Chelsea and one at Arsenal my heart would be telling him Chelsea but if I was thinking entirely of his career my head would say Arsenal.
We need to find a balance. Just now I am not all that concerned about it as I think we neglected our youth policy for so long that we need to give it time to develop however if in a further 2-3 years time we are still looking like we will always just spend big money to fill gaps I will start to be very disappointed in the way the club is progressing.
As far as squad strengthening goes - the glaringly obvious hole in our squad is the lack of pace and lack of creativity. If we are going to spend big money, please let it be to address these two issues.
We haven't played with pace since the Robben and Duff days, and this season, Joe Cole has been our only truely creative something-out-of-nothing player - and as much as we like him, he is not in the same league as a Ronaldo, a Ronaldinho, a Kaka or a Messi.
If the squad stayed exactly as is, with no departures, I would be quite happy for this to be the only signing.
But, the reality is that in all probably Drogba will go, and will need to be replaced - by a new striker and a new system of playing, which will mean a rethink of our squad from the ground up.
We haven't played with pace since the Robben and Duff days, and this season, Joe Cole has been our only truely creative something-out-of-nothing player - and as much as we like him, he is not in the same league as a Ronaldo, a Ronaldinho, a Kaka or a Messi.
If the squad stayed exactly as is, with no departures, I would be quite happy for this to be the only signing.
But, the reality is that in all probably Drogba will go, and will need to be replaced - by a new striker and a new system of playing, which will mean a rethink of our squad from the ground up.
o and this in, Cech's leaving us now
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/article1155569.ecehttp://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sp ... 155569.ece
is the Sun getting that bored.....
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/article1155569.ecehttp://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sp ... 155569.ece
is the Sun getting that bored.....
SydneyChelsea
A Touchable
- Messages
- 6,636
- Reaction score
- 4,816
Please, for the love of God, get Eto'o.
He has a phenomenal goal-scoring record.
He has a phenomenal goal-scoring record.
ethicalstrategy
First Team Regular
- Messages
- 4,907
- Reaction score
- 31
Arsenal are well known for bringing through promising young English talent!
rahul
Daddy's home
- Messages
- 2,940
- Reaction score
- 15
It'll be advisable to listen to your head....once he's broken into Arsenal first team at 20 or 21, you can always ask him to snub contract extension with Arse and have him come to us. I'm sure then that both your mind and heart would say Chelsea!
This topic is really all about the type of football we are going to play in the future and, if you believe that entertainment is the current buzz word for Roman, where this fits in with the more tangible work in progress, such as development of the Academy to provide future talent. The need to keep winning silverware during this year on year process might once have been thought of as essential, but clearly, in the light of Avram’s appointment and the general recognition that it was a risky thing to do, it is not as important to the hierarchy this season as it was, say, under Jose, when it was more a case of 'starting' to win trophies and therefore imperative.
That’s why confusion reigns when it comes to working out our priorities right now, whether it be managerially off the pitch or conceptually on it. I’ve already had my say on both here, but, on the assumption that Roman has always wanted to see us play more attractive football [and is in the midst of doing something about it] let me put this question forward for starters…
What links all of these current Chelsea players - Ivanovic, Ferreira, Essien (seems easy enough so far), Mancienne, Cummings, Smith, Cork (not so simple now, is it?), Bruma, Mellis, van Aanholt, Mikel, Cole (J), Kakuta, Kalou, Stoch and Sinclair?
The answer, if you haven’t already got it, is that all of those named have played in more than one position for either Chelsea (at any one of three levels) or their loaned club this season. That is a remarkable number of versatile players spread over a wide age group and whilst I’m not for one moment suggesting that they will all be at the club next year, or that the youngest ones will all make the grade, I put the numbers forward as evidence that we are making strides towards the total football nirvana the owner may well be looking for.
We may not have the versatility of a Rudi Krol in our ranks, sweeping and swooping from central defence [although Bruma might get close in the next few years], but Riccy has his moments and JT makes up for any perceived deficiency in other ways. Nor do we lack the goals of a Johann Neeskens [if Frank stays] but what is missing is a Dennis Bergkamp type to both score goals and create for others and that’s glaringly obvious. Even if he stays, Didier does not fit the bill in terms of the way he plays, neither does Anelka and, in my opinion, neither would Huntelaar, despite his impressive work ethic.
Personally, I’d go back to that buzz word when looking for the right man for this job and I’m encouraged by a leak in the Times this morning which quotes Fergie as saying he is an admirer of my top candidate, but he is said to be “unsure about his workrate and his ability to perform against top-class opponents.” For me, this equates to either a smoke screen that badly misjudges what lights a player’s fire or an admission that a certain Bulgarian might have already chosen to go elsewhere for his introduction to Champions League football. Granted, he doesn’t provide an answer when it comes down to the issue of pace and the lack of it in our play, but total football is not all about pace, it’s about movement and flair - and plenty of it. Blimey, if you wanted pace up front as well, you’d pair Dimitar Berbatov in a 4-4-2 with someone like Franco di Santo….hmmm.
That’s why confusion reigns when it comes to working out our priorities right now, whether it be managerially off the pitch or conceptually on it. I’ve already had my say on both here, but, on the assumption that Roman has always wanted to see us play more attractive football [and is in the midst of doing something about it] let me put this question forward for starters…
What links all of these current Chelsea players - Ivanovic, Ferreira, Essien (seems easy enough so far), Mancienne, Cummings, Smith, Cork (not so simple now, is it?), Bruma, Mellis, van Aanholt, Mikel, Cole (J), Kakuta, Kalou, Stoch and Sinclair?
The answer, if you haven’t already got it, is that all of those named have played in more than one position for either Chelsea (at any one of three levels) or their loaned club this season. That is a remarkable number of versatile players spread over a wide age group and whilst I’m not for one moment suggesting that they will all be at the club next year, or that the youngest ones will all make the grade, I put the numbers forward as evidence that we are making strides towards the total football nirvana the owner may well be looking for.
We may not have the versatility of a Rudi Krol in our ranks, sweeping and swooping from central defence [although Bruma might get close in the next few years], but Riccy has his moments and JT makes up for any perceived deficiency in other ways. Nor do we lack the goals of a Johann Neeskens [if Frank stays] but what is missing is a Dennis Bergkamp type to both score goals and create for others and that’s glaringly obvious. Even if he stays, Didier does not fit the bill in terms of the way he plays, neither does Anelka and, in my opinion, neither would Huntelaar, despite his impressive work ethic.
Personally, I’d go back to that buzz word when looking for the right man for this job and I’m encouraged by a leak in the Times this morning which quotes Fergie as saying he is an admirer of my top candidate, but he is said to be “unsure about his workrate and his ability to perform against top-class opponents.” For me, this equates to either a smoke screen that badly misjudges what lights a player’s fire or an admission that a certain Bulgarian might have already chosen to go elsewhere for his introduction to Champions League football. Granted, he doesn’t provide an answer when it comes down to the issue of pace and the lack of it in our play, but total football is not all about pace, it’s about movement and flair - and plenty of it. Blimey, if you wanted pace up front as well, you’d pair Dimitar Berbatov in a 4-4-2 with someone like Franco di Santo….hmmm.
I agree with what most of you have said about pace, it has been lacking in the team since robben left and we seem to have more flair players such as Joey Cole. We will definitely get someone with pace in the Summer. Messi seems unlikely now but apparently Kaka could be sold at the right price. Ribery or Qursema would also fit the bill.
Defensively we are looking secure, Ivanovic and Alex are good enough for back up assuming Ben Haim's on his way. Bosingwa is a good signing and Ash and wayne (if he stay) assure that we are covered defensively.
I believe that with a goalscoring striker such as villa or huntelaar and a paceman would add to the team greatly. If we also make sure we have strong subs we can get our title back next year.
Defensively we are looking secure, Ivanovic and Alex are good enough for back up assuming Ben Haim's on his way. Bosingwa is a good signing and Ash and wayne (if he stay) assure that we are covered defensively.
I believe that with a goalscoring striker such as villa or huntelaar and a paceman would add to the team greatly. If we also make sure we have strong subs we can get our title back next year.
I take it you are still annoyed we didn't snap up Tevez when he was on offer this time last year. I know I am. He would have fitted the bill perfectly for this.
I think regardless, we need to seriously think about playing 2 up front more often than not next season, reverting to the 4-3-3/4-5-1 for the big matches only.
If we lose Drogba, I think this will be a necessity. Sure there are a lot of good strikers who can play up front alone, but there is only one man in the world that can dominate playing up front on his own.
I think if we lose Drogs and stick Anelka, Huntellaar, Berbatov or whoever up front on their own and play the same system, we will be in the same position next season as where we are now. Second or third place after a season of lots of 1-0 wins but too many 1-1 or 0-0 draws (hopefully no more 4-4's). Playing one up front is an inherently negative system - its only because of Drogba (and Lampard's goals from midfield) that we have managed to get away with it, and achieve the success that we have had. If either of these two go, I just can't see the system working.
If the last two seasons have taught us anything, it is that we need to play much more positively and start putting teams away after we go a goal up, rather than sitting back and defending.
g3.7
deluded elitist
- Messages
- 5,780
- Reaction score
- 1,311
barcelona played with "one" up front, and so have holland for years.
there are endless ways to approach the same formation.
arsenal played 442 under wenger and graham for example, but the style of play is different.
the thing is what happens to our central midfielders if we go for a system which only uses 2?
my other... um, thought, is that we can't really have a ronaldo, messi or ronaldinho playing wide in a 442 (or even a kalou), but we cannot have a second striker in a 433.
my inclination would be to have a fluid 433 with a lot of movement from a proper front 3, and a non-rigid midfield 3.
to some extent I feel we haven't often taken full advantage of what maka offers us, and now he is used more sparingly.
there are endless ways to approach the same formation.
arsenal played 442 under wenger and graham for example, but the style of play is different.
the thing is what happens to our central midfielders if we go for a system which only uses 2?
my other... um, thought, is that we can't really have a ronaldo, messi or ronaldinho playing wide in a 442 (or even a kalou), but we cannot have a second striker in a 433.
my inclination would be to have a fluid 433 with a lot of movement from a proper front 3, and a non-rigid midfield 3.
to some extent I feel we haven't often taken full advantage of what maka offers us, and now he is used more sparingly.
- Messages
- 22,720
- Reaction score
- 6,605
I think the 'playing one up front' is often a misnomer which leads people to imagine it is a Kevin Davies centre forward that everyone humps the ball to hoping he can out muscle a few defenders and either turn and shoot or hold the ball up until the midfield trundle up to support the play.
I don't think the one up front is inherently negative at all as long as it is played correctly and, most importantly, there is pace to support that striker. When I say pace I mean physical and mental pace. i.e players who can take the ball on the run and stretch defences but also have the awareness to move the ball on quickly. Our problem is that we play with one up front with very little pace on the flank, even less through the middle and we tend to move the ball around very deliberately.
Having said all that I actually think in the past 6-8 weeks we have finally started to look like a team that can pass the ball quickly, and do press teams high up the pitch. Unfortunately it all stops as soon as we go ahead.
I don't think the one up front is inherently negative at all as long as it is played correctly and, most importantly, there is pace to support that striker. When I say pace I mean physical and mental pace. i.e players who can take the ball on the run and stretch defences but also have the awareness to move the ball on quickly. Our problem is that we play with one up front with very little pace on the flank, even less through the middle and we tend to move the ball around very deliberately.
Having said all that I actually think in the past 6-8 weeks we have finally started to look like a team that can pass the ball quickly, and do press teams high up the pitch. Unfortunately it all stops as soon as we go ahead.
I probably should have said "our" (Mourinho's) one up front system is inherently negative - mainly because the striker gets no support.
If we played a Barcelona-style 1 up front then things would be different. At the height of their powers 2 years ago, they played with Eto "alone" up front. But he was never really alone. He had the likes of Ronaldinho, Messi, Deco, Inesta and Xavi all really pushing up and supporting him. In every attack, one or two of these "midfielders" would basically be playing as a support striker.
In general, our central midfield three consist of Maka/Mikel staying back all the time, and the other two playing as true central midfielders - ie. back at the edge of the box when we are defending. When we get the ball, it is Drogba on his own most of the time. No other options - pump the ball up to him, and hope he can keep posession so that our midfield can run up the pitch to support him.
This works with Drogba, but I can't see it working all that well with anyone else. It worked ok with Guddy in our first season under Mourinho, but only because of the pace of Robben and Duff, who were quick enough to get forward and support him as soon as we got the ball.
Against the Boltons of this world (which is where we lost the title, this season and last), I think we need two things to change next season.
1. A true link-man playing through the middle (call him an attacking central midfielder or an 2nd in-the-hole striker, either way), instead of playing with 3 proper central midfielders.
2. More quality (and probably more importantly) more pace on the flanks.
If we played a Barcelona-style 1 up front then things would be different. At the height of their powers 2 years ago, they played with Eto "alone" up front. But he was never really alone. He had the likes of Ronaldinho, Messi, Deco, Inesta and Xavi all really pushing up and supporting him. In every attack, one or two of these "midfielders" would basically be playing as a support striker.
In general, our central midfield three consist of Maka/Mikel staying back all the time, and the other two playing as true central midfielders - ie. back at the edge of the box when we are defending. When we get the ball, it is Drogba on his own most of the time. No other options - pump the ball up to him, and hope he can keep posession so that our midfield can run up the pitch to support him.
This works with Drogba, but I can't see it working all that well with anyone else. It worked ok with Guddy in our first season under Mourinho, but only because of the pace of Robben and Duff, who were quick enough to get forward and support him as soon as we got the ball.
Against the Boltons of this world (which is where we lost the title, this season and last), I think we need two things to change next season.
1. A true link-man playing through the middle (call him an attacking central midfielder or an 2nd in-the-hole striker, either way), instead of playing with 3 proper central midfielders.
2. More quality (and probably more importantly) more pace on the flanks.
ethicalstrategy
First Team Regular
- Messages
- 4,907
- Reaction score
- 31
I would like us to play 2 up front next season but I don't think you can say 1 up is necessarily a defensive ploy. We scored plenty of goals playing 4-3-3 in Jose's first 2 years. In fact, last year when the goals dried up a bit we were mostly playing a 4-4-2 Diamond. The problem this year has more to do with the personnel that we have in the wide positions.
However, if you are going to play 4-4-2 then why switch to something different for big matches? That would be a very negative approach.
- Status