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.

So Guus didn't play the youngsters more because it's bad on the first team players. The same first team players who have all mostly been rubbish all year.

Football changes very quickly and just because someone did well at one point in there career doesn't mean they always will. Hiddink has been poor for a while now.

Anyway I think Guus has just been brought in just incase things go wrong with Conte.

So Guus didn't play the youngsters more because it's bad on the first team players. The same first team players who have all mostly been rubbish all year.

Football changes very quickly and just because someone did well at one point in there career doesn't mean they always will. Hiddink has been poor for a while now.

Anyway I think Guus has just been brought in just incase things go wrong with Conte.

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.

I'm not talking about the whole of the second half of the season.

Around 10-12 games left of the season there was nothing for Chelsea FC to play for. At this point RLC should of been involved in every game.

Like I have said these opportunities don't come round often and Chelsea had the wrong man in charge to fully take advantage of it. All you got to say is your be involved in every game, show me, the fans and the club what you can do.

You don't sub players like Baba, Miazga, Kennedy at half time. Youth players need confidence and that probably shot them. It was the general use of players which was bad. Traore could of played a lot more mins but only got involved again once Costa was injured.

When the season is over for Chelsea and all Guus keeps picking is Mikel and Matic, Ivan and even some other players to some degree.

Yes Guus is a nice guy, yes he got mid table but his general use of youth players was terrible.

Of course no one expects 7 youngsters in a first team. Utd nearly got there but through injuries alone but LVG kept faith with Rashford.

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

Dutch managers always appear to have false pretences of attacking and exciting football. Van Gaal and Hiddink are both the most negative managers I can remember of any top tier team. They're utterly diabolical to watch.

Dutch managers always appear to have false pretences of attacking and exciting football. Van Gaal and Hiddink are both the most negative managers I can remember of any top tier team. They're utterly diabolical to watch.

 

Agreed along with Mourinho.

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

Yep because Hiddink never subbed youngsters at halftime, didn't play RLC at the end of the season or bring him on for 1min. Oh and only played Traore once Costa got injured.

Let's not forget he kept playing the same useless players who has been underachieving all season. I remember every match thread the amount of abuse that Hiddink got picking Mikel and Matic combo and Ivan all the time.

Must be just me then.

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

wait, people actually expected him to field 11 youngsters? i though you were all joking about that

The Dutch-born mentor has confirmed that he's staying with the Blues after leading the English Premier League giants to a 10th place finish.

Hiddink will stay put at Stamford Bridge as an adviser where he will focus his energy on promoting youngsters to the senior team.

The former PSV Eindhoven and Netherlands tactician was roped in by the Blues for a second stint following the departure of Jose Mourinho, during the worst title defence in Premier League history.

The 69-year-old revealed all to Fox Sports on Sunday, adding that he has talked to both Drogba and Cech.

“I have spoken with Didier Drogba. I spoke with Peter Cech. These are legends,” said Hiddink.

“They have had much impact here. Once they are really finished their playing career, they can be of great value to the club, such as assistant or scout.”

The 2014/15 EPL champions have been criticised for their lack of transformation in promoting youngsters coming through their youth system, but Hiddink credits himself with the emergence of Ruben Loftus-Cheek and Bertrand Traore this season.

I get a strong feeling that Steve Holland does not want that role. If he wanted to be a manager, I'm sure there would be teams in the lower leagues who would hire him. He had a brief job as head coach (not manager as they had a coach/director of football model) at Crewe Alexandra where his results were fine, but he decided it wasn't for him.

Keeping Guus as an advisor makes sense, but as an academy advisor? That's a head scratcher.

 

what role? caretaker? The only way was up that time, we were hovering near relegation zone so I can't see why he would turn down the chance to help kickstart his managerial career unless he's not an ambitious man.. Managing lower league and higher league are totally different ball games.. 

 

However, appointing hiddink  seemed like the best decision at that time so that's it but keeping him now? NO, it's pointless, as someone pointed out, a retirement-gift or maybe roman keeping him on the bench should he decide to sack conte lol, it's still pointless though because it's not like he's done a great job last time out..  

In reply to Konakai blue...

Well some of us clearly do disagree with it..and still do...I haven't even made my points re. Guus as a protest Jose should have stayed...I've just said he did a crap job...

For Those that are so willing to give him a free (bus?) pass and are content he just kept the club up as season was a write off..on Lge form alone, when chelsea beat Southampton in February, just four points separated the clubs...by the end, the gap was 13, Southampton finished fifth and qualified for Europe with a squad most will still see as inferior to ours despite our woeful start to the season...

Now, if Guus had allowed Southampton to race off into the distance because he was thinking of the bigger picture and picking Chelsea's kids week in and week out, it'd be understandable and few would have a problem...but he picked same players, same formation, no experimentation, no inspiration...a wasted opportunity

The last part is what bothers and disappoints me most. We had a golden chance to throw in at least one academy/U21 player every match with virtually zero repercussions and we've wasted it

wait, people actually expected him to field 11 youngsters? i though you were all joking about that

Has anyone actually said that?

Good to have an experienced man around the club but hopefully his role doesn't get in the way of Conte's management of the team.

Apparently Guus is interested in the England job:

 

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/next-england-manager-guus-hiddink-keen-talk-fa-about-three-lions-role-1568760

Apparently Guus is interested in the England job:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/next-england-manager-guus-hiddink-keen-talk-fa-about-three-lions-role-1568760

His international record has been abysmal the last few years. (Albeit not quite as bad as Ranieri whose Greece side lost to the Faroe Islands )

There would be the same problems as Hodgson of selecting the players first and the strategy second, when it should be the other way around.

In addition, I haven't heard of a dysfunctional dressing room with the England squad, so Guus's greatest strength would be useless.

I can see them hiring him as an interim, and perhaps that's what he has in mind too. It would be crazy for him to take the "poisoned chalice" at his age.

Guus should stay away from management now IMO.

His last two jobs have been pretty evident that he isn't the manager he once was.

England need something fresh, Guus for me isn't that.

I want someone who can firmly stick the boot up an ass, Guus doesn't strike me as that sort of manager, but that is what our princesses need.

I want someone who can firmly stick the boot up an ass, Guus doesn't strike me as that sort of manager, but that is what our princesses need.

Maybe a change of avatar can help you move on.

Maybe a change of avatar can help you move on.

 

We're talking about the England job, do keep up.

We're talking about the England job, do keep up.

Don't think so. You know perfectly what I posted about.

To be fair we had the 'boot up the arse' type with Capello and that didn't go especially well. I believe the words 'mentally fragile' were used.

 

My main motive for not wanting Guus to take the job is that I wouldn't want him to be exposed to the unadulterated vitriol he would receive from the English public and press in the [inevitable] event of failure.

 

Out of the named (I'm not going to say 'realistic') candidates I've heard so far, the best by light years is Wenger. He would be an absolute dream for the England setup, just get out of his way and let him completely reinvent the system. Not that he'll take it. Why on earth would he?

To be fair we had the 'boot up the arse' type with Capello and that didn't go especially well. I believe the words 'mentally fragile' were used.

 

My main motive for not wanting Guus to take the job is that I wouldn't want him to be exposed to the unadulterated vitriol he would receive from the English public and press in the [inevitable] event of failure.

 

Out of the named (I'm not going to say 'realistic') candidates I've heard so far, the best by light years is Wenger. He would be an absolute dream for the England setup, just get out of his way and let him completely reinvent the system. Not that he'll take it. Why on earth would he?

 

Well I must say Capello was certainly better than Roy or McClaren. Of the names seriously mentioned, I like the thought of Bilic the most. I think we'll end up with Pardew though.

Why on earth would he?

 

Maybe Wenger will look at the younger managers in the prem, Jose, Conte, Pep... and think, na f**k that. ??

To be fair we had the 'boot up the arse' type with Capello and that didn't go especially well. I believe the words 'mentally fragile' were used.

My main motive for not wanting Guus to take the job is that I wouldn't want him to be exposed to the unadulterated vitriol he would receive from the English public and press in the [inevitable] event of failure.

Out of the named (I'm not going to say 'realistic') candidates I've heard so far, the best by light years is Wenger. He would be an absolute dream for the England setup, just get out of his way and let him completely reinvent the system. Not that he'll take it. Why on earth would he?

Wenger is awful under pressure. When things are going well and there's no urgency, he's great. When crunch time comes, he crumbles. That's why Arsenal are so good every year when there's a sense of "this isn't crucial because there are so many more games left". Then when it becomes "OMG they've caught up, if we lose our title hopes are gone" they crumble.

In an international tournament, every game is crucial. Wenger can't handle those situations. I'm like that too by the way.

I don't accept the idea that England have to go foreign due to the lack of good English coaches. You can't tell me that Chris Coleman is better than anyone in England. The difference is that the Wales FA don't sabotage their coaches with their politics and meddling.

Allardyce seems the best choice. He won't get a title, but he'll get further than England have gotten unless they get a nightmare draw. I can guarantee that England will not be humiliated. His teams are hard to beat and frustrate the hell out of opponents.

The Big Sam style isn't pretty, but losing isn't pretty either, and you will only have to watch it a few times a year rather than week after week.