Jump to content

Manuel Pellegrini for Chelsea!


chemcint

Recommended Posts

Two things. One, there was no need to say it in public. The rumour could have been shot down in a polite way. He wanted a sound bite and used the opportunity - and thus Chelsea - to get it, so f**k him. The other thing is that I do not remember a single manager whose career Chelsea destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


he's had to deal with injuries to his best players, i.e. silva, aguero, kompany etc. a manager can only work with what he has with injuries to their best players. without the aforementioned city are very average. imagine us losing hazard last season, costa and terry. we would have struggled immensely and most likely wouldn't have come close to winning the league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two things. One, there was no need to say it in public. The rumour could have been shot down in a polite way. He wanted a sound bite and used the opportunity - and thus Chelsea - to get it, so f**k him. The other thing is that I do not remember a single manager whose career Chelsea destroyed.

 

I agree with you on the first one. 

 

On the second one, While we do not destroy careers , We simply do not give any managers enough time to build anything - thereby destroying something they are trying to create. No self respecting manager will want to work in a club like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he's had to deal with injuries to his best players, i.e. silva, aguero, kompany etc. a manager can only work with what he has with injuries to their best players. without the aforementioned city are very average. imagine us losing hazard last season, costa and terry. we would have struggled immensely and most likely wouldn't have come close to winning the league. 

 

Aguera gets injured just about every season, no there is no surprise in the fact that he got injured again - And they had Dzeko/ Jovetic/ Negredo and did not get jack-squat out of them. Dzeko when he joined City was such a good player, HE would have gotten into any team, But they benched him and screwed him. The few games that he played too he was good. Ditto for Silva - They had Fernandinho, Navas, Nasri, Toure, Milner - Again not a crappy mid field.  Kompany was a loss I give you that.

 

Again if you cant inspire such a strong squad to challenge for the title then it shows that you are not a good inspire-er of people.

 

 

If all we crave is aesthetically pleasing football then by all means bring him but if you think bringing him guarantees challenging for trophies, Then dont. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I agree with you on the first one.

On the second one, While we do not destroy careers , We simply do not give any managers enough time to build anything - thereby destroying something they are trying to create. No self respecting manager will want to work in a club like that.

On the other hand, a manager who likes to fill his bank account would be very interested. Same with new players: in our present situation no big name with ambition will want to sign for us, only the ones wanting a nice pay check. That may not be the ones to get us out of this pickle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you on the first one. 

 

On the second one, While we do not destroy careers , We simply do not give any managers enough time to build anything - thereby destroying something they are trying to create. No self respecting manager will want to work in a club like that. 

 

Not necessarily (we built upon the existing team almost every time) and that's not the point. Rodgers was explicitly talking about careers. Also it would appear that the world is full of top managers with no self respect as it never seems as we have issues finding a willing candidate. The offered money and the chances to win trophies work wonders every time.

Chelsea is not special in this regard at all, other clubs are also frequently changing their managers. Look at the PL, Wenger is the only exception and he's a relic from the '90s. José was actually the 4th longest serving manager before his sacking and Sparky was ahead of him by 3 days only. About three years seems to be the average life expectancy. Chelsea has been doing this since Dave Sexton, only two managers got 4 seasons since then, the rest was sent packing earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Not sure how I feel about pelligrini. Wouldn't be as bad as rodgers or benitez, but would be far from 1st choice.

As his teams have been pretty good to watch, and if it was enough to tempt isco to play for his former boss, then it might be an interesting one.

I think the most interesting things about the summer, will be how much we can compete financially, and whether we can attract the players we target with no champions league football.

I was all for Pogba in the summer, but there seems to be so many areas of the team that need improving, i'd rather we spent the £80m odd on 2/3 players that would lift the team. We could get ricardo rodriguez, witsel, and Gundogan for not much more than 1 paul pogba.

If we do good buisness in the transfer market, then I think pelligrini would do well here. If we start the season with similar quality as we do now, and the board want him to use the youth, I can see it being a bit of a car crash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not necessarily (we built upon the existing team almost every time) and that's not the point. Rodgers was explicitly talking about careers. Also it would appear that the world is full of top managers with no self respect as it never seems as we have issues finding a willing candidate. The offered money and the chances to win trophies work wonders every time.

Chelsea is not special in this regard at all, other clubs are also frequently changing their managers. Look at the PL, Wenger is the only exception and he's a relic from the '90s. José was actually the 4th longest serving manager before his sacking and Sparky was ahead of him by 3 days only. About three years seems to be the average life expectancy. Chelsea has been doing this since Dave Sexton, only two managers got 4 seasons since then, the rest was sent packing earlier.

 

After Jose, Carlo was the only world class club manager that we attracted and sacked. The rest of the interims were

- Hiddink: Doing a favor to Roman, did not want to be here long term

- RDM: Unproven coach

- Scolari, AVB - Unproven coaches @ a big club level

- Rafa: Proven in Liverpool, but unemployed and was using the Chelsea job as a pad to relaunch his career. 

 

If you look at the top clubs in England: Mancini was given time to build something, Rafa in Liverpool was given time to build something, LVG is also being given time to build something. Was Ancelotti ? People have that perception on us and we are not doing anything to cull it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from Hiddink, nobody was given time to build anything. Which in effect means that we destroyed their work.

 

No, it does not mean that necessarily. Someone else can build on their work. Which actually happened in most of the cases. But you're misdirecting again, this is still not the point. Chelsea did not destroy any manager's career, Rodgers was talking out of his arse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


No, it does not mean that necessarily. Someone else can build on their work. Which actually happened in most of the cases. But you're misdirecting again, this is still not the point. Chelsea did not destroy any manager's career, Rodgers was talking out of his arse.

 

It only happens in cases where there does not need to be any fixing (Barcelona, And to a lesser extent the high pressing style of Liverpool). In cases like United where there needs time to develop from an attack philosophy to a total football philosophy and also @ Chelsea where the owner wants to go from a more defensive and counterattacking philosophy to an attack based philosophy, It wil take time to build. AVB/Scolari is a perfect example - He was brought in to provide the 'Entertaining' brand of football that Roman craves and it cant be build in half a term. 

 

You are getting hung over the term "Destroy" that is used by Rogers and he is dumb for using that word - But I am sure that when he used the word he meant in terms of a long term job security. There is a reason that even Pep and Simeone are being touted by the owner but are not showing keen interest in coming here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After Jose, Carlo was the only world class club manager that we attracted and sacked. The rest of the interims were

- Hiddink: Doing a favor to Roman, did not want to be here long term

- RDM: Unproven coach

- Scolari, AVB - Unproven coaches @ a big club level

- Rafa: Proven in Liverpool, but unemployed and was using the Chelsea job as a pad to relaunch his career. 

 

If you look at the top clubs in England: Mancini was given time to build something, Rafa in Liverpool was given time to build something, LVG is also being given time to build something. Was Ancelotti ? People have that perception on us and we are not doing anything to cull it.  

 

A lot of nonsense in this post to be honest; let's look at this again.

 

Hiddink: You say he was doing a "favour" to Roman? Maybe so, but he was under no obligation to do so. You also ay he "did not want to be here long term"? Ignoring the fact that you have presumably arrived at this conclusion by guesswork as opposed to having spoken to him, the key fact is that he was under contract with the Russian national team at the time and honoured his contract. It was a temporary position which he accepted and that was the arrangement. The fact he has now chosen to come back a second time and is, once again, our interim Manager would cast further doubt that had circumstances been different the first time around he could not have been persuaded to stay long term.

 

RDM: Yes, he was promoted from within on a short term basis- the circumstances surrounding his entire tenure are quite remarkable in every sense but had he not won the Champions League I do not believe the intention was ever for him to be anything more than an interim until the sumer after the sacking of AVB.

 

Scolari: Rather dismissive to say he was "unproven at big club level". His most notable achievements may well have for country as opposed to club but a quick check of his honours achieved as a Manager, both for the team as individually shows he was decorated and that is why he was wanted by the FA for the England position prior to his appointment at Chelsea. Winning a world cup is not bad on his CV either. For the record I don't actually rate him and in hindsight it was an awful appointment but to try and suggest he was not a sought after Manager at the time is far from the mark.

 

AVB: Same as above but to a lesser extent. Yes, he was a young up and coming manager and I believe that's what attracted Chelsea to him at the time. He was likened to a "young Mourinho" at the time for obvious reasons and there were incredibly high expectations on him. Due to his age he was obviously not going to be able to boast a CV rivalling the most experienced managers in Europe but what he had done in his short managerial career prior to his appointment was very impressive- to quote Wikipedia:

 

Villas-Boas went on to immense success with Porto, leading them to an undefeated season in the Primeira Liga—only the second time this had ever been achieved—and winning the title by more than 20 points, having conceded only 13 goals all season. Villas-Boas went on to follow up this success by leading Porto to win both the Portuguese Cup and the UEFA Europa League, thus completing a treble in his first season in charge. By doing so, Villas-Boas became the third-youngest coach ever to win the Primeira Liga (behind Mihály Siska in 1939 and Juca in 1962) and the youngest manager ever to win a European competition, at the age of 33 years and 213 days

 

I think it's easier to forget what he achieved at Porto and remember the mess he left at Chelsea but, whatever yo think of his managerial ability, his record at Porto was nothing short of outstanding and that he why he was appointed. 

 

Benitez: Being an interim appointment, like RDM at the time, I do not believe this one to be particularly relevant as it was undoubtably born in part from the fact it was convenient for both parties at the time. Never the less, and as much as I personally do not like Benitez as a manager, it is once again incredibly dismissive to suggest that whilst he was "proven at Liverpool" that we were someone lucky to get him to agree to come here. If we are comparing Managers by their CV in some art of 'top trumps' way of comparison, then you would group Benitez in the top bracket which is why he is now Manager of Real Mardrid. Furthermore, had circumstances been different and he had been offered the job full time there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he would have taken it. On that basis I am not really sure what your point is with this one.

 

I am also surprised to see you say LVG is being allowed to build something at United. he is 18 months into a 3 year contract and is one of the hot favourites to be sacked next due to their current plight. His fans are also singing Jose Mourinho's name and I would bet money he is not the manager of Manchester United this time next season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was amazed that the club offered RDM the chance as interim. AVB was sacked in February and CL was only just starting up. RDM won very little and got a WBA side promoted and was then sacked a few months in.

Quite shocking really. Obviously it worked out better than the club could ever have imagined...but it was a risky and surprising appointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


A lot of nonsense in this post to be honest; let's look at this again.

 

Hiddink: You say he was doing a "favour" to Roman? Maybe so, but he was under no obligation to do so. You also ay he "did not want to be here long term"? Ignoring the fact that you have presumably arrived at this conclusion by guesswork as opposed to having spoken to him, the key fact is that he was under contract with the Russian national team at the time and honoured his contract. It was a temporary position which he accepted and that was the arrangement. The fact he has now chosen to come back a second time and is, once again, our interim Manager would cast further doubt that had circumstances been different the first time around he could not have been persuaded to stay long term.

 

RDM: Yes, he was promoted from within on a short term basis- the circumstances surrounding his entire tenure are quite remarkable in every sense but had he not won the Champions League I do not believe the intention was ever for him to be anything more than an interim until the sumer after the sacking of AVB.

 

Scolari: Rather dismissive to say he was "unproven at big club level". His most notable achievements may well have for country as opposed to club but a quick check of his honours achieved as a Manager, both for the team as individually shows he was decorated and that is why he was wanted by the FA for the England position prior to his appointment at Chelsea. Winning a world cup is not bad on his CV either. For the record I don't actually rate him and in hindsight it was an awful appointment but to try and suggest he was not a sought after Manager at the time is far from the mark.

 

AVB: Same as above but to a lesser extent. Yes, he was a young up and coming manager and I believe that's what attracted Chelsea to him at the time. He was likened to a "young Mourinho" at the time for obvious reasons and there were incredibly high expectations on him. Due to his age he was obviously not going to be able to boast a CV rivalling the most experienced managers in Europe but what he had done in his short managerial career prior to his appointment was very impressive- to quote Wikipedia:

 

Villas-Boas went on to immense success with Porto, leading them to an undefeated season in the Primeira Liga—only the second time this had ever been achieved—and winning the title by more than 20 points, having conceded only 13 goals all season. Villas-Boas went on to follow up this success by leading Porto to win both the Portuguese Cup and the UEFA Europa League, thus completing a treble in his first season in charge. By doing so, Villas-Boas became the third-youngest coach ever to win the Primeira Liga (behind Mihály Siska in 1939 and Juca in 1962) and the youngest manager ever to win a European competition, at the age of 33 years and 213 days

 

I think it's easier to forget what he achieved at Porto and remember the mess he left at Chelsea but, whatever yo think of his managerial ability, his record at Porto was nothing short of outstanding and that he why he was appointed. 

 

Benitez: Being an interim appointment, like RDM at the time, I do not believe this one to be particularly relevant as it was undoubtably born in part from the fact it was convenient for both parties at the time. Never the less, and as much as I personally do not like Benitez as a manager, it is once again incredibly dismissive to suggest that whilst he was "proven at Liverpool" that we were someone lucky to get him to agree to come here. If we are comparing Managers by their CV in some art of 'top trumps' way of comparison, then you would group Benitez in the top bracket which is why he is now Manager of Real Mardrid. Furthermore, had circumstances been different and he had been offered the job full time there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he would have taken it. On that basis I am not really sure what your point is with this one.

 

I am also surprised to see you say LVG is being allowed to build something at United. he is 18 months into a 3 year contract and is one of the hot favourites to be sacked next due to their current plight. His fans are also singing Jose Mourinho's name and I would bet money he is not the manager of Manchester United this time next season. 

 

Off the list, who was given time to build anything in Chelsea ? That is what the whole primary argument is about - Or is it your assumption that what ever time those managers were given was good enough and it is their fault that they did not build anything with that time ?

 

And yes, LVG is being given time:

- Was he sacked before his tenure is up ? 

- Did the board provide him with money to buy "his" players ?

- Do you see LVG talking about his "philosophy" and trying to build it ?

- What plight are you talking about ? They are 5th and close to top 4th with the season not over yet. Sure, they are out of champions league but It is not like they were the finalists every year in the Champions League. I wish Chelsea was in their plight this year instead of being in 14th.

- And I dont think I get your point about the fans singing Jose Mourinho's name in LVG's games. Our own fans were singing Jose Mourinho's name during our games. Sure as heck did not help Jose Mourinho not get fired. I dont know why fans singing would make the board reach a decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I wasn't actually trying to argue that any of the Managers listed had been given time to build anything; my post was in reply to your suggestion that we were (and will be) unable to attract world class "proven" Managers.

 

With regards to LVG I think it is fruitless to argue the toss with this as nobody knows what the future will hold; currently he is halfway through a 3 year contract as I said.... time will tell if he is given time to build anything but as it stands it looks highly unlikely he will see out the rest of his contract.

 

He is looking no more likely to win anything than David Moyes (who was coincidently sacked by Manchester United without being given time to build anything) and by all accounts his own "supporters" want rid of him. They are not making "par for the course" in the league (top 4 minimum), are playing a mind numbingly boring brand of football and are out of the Champions League already as you say. Ask Manchester United fans if they are happy and you will get a better insight into the "plight" if you are still unsure.

 

Are they better off than us? Perhaps (give it a few weeks and they might not be) but as we are having the worst campaign for a quarter of a century or so I would not say it is much of a yardstick to measure success by, would you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I wasn't actually trying to argue that any of the Managers listed had been given time to build anything; my post was in reply to your suggestion that we were (and will be) unable to attract world class "proven" Managers.

 

With regards to LVG I think it is fruitless to argue the toss with this as nobody knows what the future will hold; currently he is halfway through a 3 year contract as I said.... time will tell if he is given time to build anything but as it stands it looks highly unlikely he will see out the rest of his contract.

 

He is looking no more likely to win anything than David Moyes (who was coincidently sacked by Manchester United without being given time to build anything) and by all accounts his own "supporters" want rid of him. They are not making "par for the course" in the league (top 4 minimum), are playing a mind numbingly boring brand of football and are out of the Champions League already as you say. Ask Manchester United fans if they are happy and you will get a better insight into the "plight" if you are still unsure.

 

Are they better off than us? Perhaps (give it a few weeks and they might not be) but as we are having the worst campaign for a quarter of a century or so I would not say it is much of a yardstick to measure success by, would you?

 

So in your opinion- has Chelsea given its ex-managers (In the Roman Era) enough time to build something? I would like your opinion on that first please because that is the main argument. 
 
 
And with regards to LVG: In his first season he took United back into the champions League. This year they are currently 5th and I dont see why they cant finish top 4 again. The turnover in their squad is much more unlike Arsenal or City  who have been adding vital pieces. Man Utd are making significant squad changes. 
 
Also, this year the league is much more difficult to win than back in the hey days. A look at the table should be proof enough. This is something that stupid Manchester United fans who are used to winning trophies during the Fergie days will never understand and hence the stupid backlash. There is truth  that the brand of football is boring and turgid, but so was Arsenals a few years back when all they did was tiki taka style with not enough goals (The pre OZil/ Sanchez days). But they are more crisp now thanks to the philosophy sinking in and Arsenal adding vital pieces. Manchester United too has the potential to do just that.
 
And are they better than us? Again, You are not paying attention to what I am saying. The real question is, Is our plight worse than theirs ? Is 5th worse than 14th ? 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up

Well, this is awkward!

awkward the office GIF

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

Alright already, It's off!