11 hours ago, Slojo said:

That's literally the point I was making...

He complained last season about lack of depth, then he went on to talk about the traits of having a smaller squad this season. 

I don't think the point he was making was having a smaller squad. The point he was making was stop buying me average players for 30-40 mil each and get me 2-3 70 mil pound players that give me real options off the bench. 

You can have a bench full of average players as we do now and not have any real depth. Whereas I can have a bench of 5 players who can come on and make the difference.

18 hours ago, Saaladin said:

And this mentality is actually one I can get behind. 

Fine, Chelsea is a team that needs a re-tool. Not ready to compete for any titles this season and at the end of the day we finish probably 5th with an outside chance at 4th. 

For this squad it's a fair season. Which is why I don't blame Conte. 

In his mind, Chelsea were supposed to challenge for top trophies and the club was supposed to back him to do that. They didn't and to make it worse he gets questioned in the media constantly about his job security when the team falters. And if we're being realistic the Chelsea board + Abramovich have no patience for a down year and everyone knows it. If they did, they could have bit the bullet and come out to back their manager and let the fans know that they will re-build the team next summer. Case closed.

However they didn't want to admit their their transfer dealings were downright stupid and preferred to leave Conte out in front of the firing squad to answer questions about things he can't control.

I just can't see this as anything but bullsh*t. 

Only Man City spent more than us in the summer. 

Conte had a very public, very messy fall out with our star striker, and the club backed Conte and bought him a new £75M striker. 

Sure, we can question how good the signings were, and how they may have declined (under Conte's management it should be said), but to suggest the club hung him out to dry is just barmy. 

The club should be wary of getting rid of him, he will be very hard to replace. 

Give him some cash and the summer to get some players he actually wants. 

11 minutes ago, Zola said:

The club should be wary of getting rid of him, he will be very hard to replace. 

Give him some cash and the summer to get some players he actually wants. 

Players he wants like Morata? No thank you!

Morata has had one season, relax.

39 minutes ago, mclovin83 said:

I just can't see this as anything but bullsh*t. 

Only Man City spent more than us in the summer. 

Conte had a very public, very messy fall out with our star striker, and the club backed Conte and bought him a new £75M striker. 

Sure, we can question how good the signings were, and how they may have declined (under Conte's management it should be said), but to suggest the club hung him out to dry is just barmy. 

our starting 11 this season is weaker than last season. we sold 2 starters who played key role in the title run and  Luiz is out 

i think Conte was pissed how he was treated even after winning the league and they ignored everything he said, he has been moaning since pre season when started saying he just a head coach not a manager as he has no say whatsoever in anything

we spent money on average players  which he never wanted to do

Costa fell out with Mourinho, first day of Conte he told him that he wanted to leave and then moaned again in January. and what do u think Conte would have done after all that

is Conte blameless no not at all but it was coming given how bad things have to between the board and him that rather he and them sitting and sorting things out he went public to make his message clear. under Carlo we weakened the squad after winning the league same happened under Jose we didn't improve. there is a pattern here 

8 minutes ago, Zola said:

The club should be wary of getting rid of him, he will be very hard to replace. 

Give him some cash and the summer to get some players he actually wants. 

That would be my ideal scenario, I think the relationship might be too far gone though. 

People really need to consider the reason why we're in the current situation. It's not Conte's fault we only added numbers to the squad in the summer without actually strengthening. It also didn't help that we over-achieved last season, giving the impression our squad is stronger than it is. Swap Conte for somebody else and the problem still exists, and sooner or later the next guy's going to end up in the same boat. 

I think he has already burnt the bridges with the board, a FA cup or whatever miracle he could bring in the next few weeks won't change anything. He's a quality manager, but behaved poorly when things didn't go his way, not the first time and won't be the last. Had he shown a bit more wilingness to fight with what he got, he kept quiet, he might get another year.

The problem is Conte has essentially burned every bridge at Chelsea.  He had it out with Costa in the media, turned around and demoted luiz, has essentially said we don't have quality players, and moaned literally all year about the board.  Why on earth would we turn around and give him MORE time and MORE money.  

There is blame on both sides, but when a relationship has gone sour you have to cut it off.  He did not help himself with the results of 2018...

1 hour ago, mclovin83 said:

I just can't see this as anything but bullsh*t. 

Only Man City spent more than us in the summer. 

Conte had a very public, very messy fall out with our star striker, and the club backed Conte and bought him a new £75M striker. 

Sure, we can question how good the signings were, and how they may have declined (under Conte's management it should be said), but to suggest the club hung him out to dry is just barmy. 

You have to look at buys and sales not just overall spending, Chelsea had a Net Spend. 

Players In:

Morata --- Cost: £58 (Not 75. His transfer fee was 58 and with add-ons could rise to 70 if Chelsea had reached certain targets)

Rudiger -- Cost £30

Drinkwater --- Cost £35

Zappacosta --- Cost £23

Bakayoko --- Cost £35

Caballero -- Free

Total Spend -- £180

Players Out:

Costa -- £58

Cuadrado -- £17

Begovic -- £10

Solanke -- £3

Atsu -- £6

Ake -- £20

Traore - £10

Chalobah - £5

Matic - £40

Oscar -  £60 - Sold in January of 2017 so should have contributed to summer buys

Total Sales -- £205

So yeah, Chelsea spent a decent amount of money in the summer, but they also made a ton of money on player sales. And still it's not that simple, because I know some folks will just point to that being "good business sense" however, you have to evaluate what that overall business means to Conte and his ability to compete vs the best.

 

We brought in Bakayoko - High potential player and young

We lost Matic - maybe the second best midfielder in England --- So we lost on that deal and there is no way Conte sanctioned losing Matic to bring in Bakayoko. He wanted a signing to add to the squad not a signing to replace Matic.

We bought Morata - Again, young striker with potential. And no one can claim anything else. Morata was not a ready-made striker. He was a second option everywhere he has been and has never lead a team. Lukaku has. Costa has.

So again, we lost a top striker (and Conte had every right to want Costa out for unsettling the squad in the middle of a title run) and replaced him with an unproven one.

We brought in Rudiger - Decent buy - But not exactly bringing in a player who raises your level significantly beyond what we had in Cahill. 

We bring in Drinkwater - Again, decent buy to provide depth but not a player that will raise your starting 11 beyond what it was.

 

So Costa and Matic, considered top level EPL and european players are sold and lesser players brought in. We lost on those transfers.

No one else of note came in to improve the starting 11 and Conte WASN'T left out to dry? Yes he was, severely. 

But Chelsea fans can go on believing our board did Conte some great favors over the last 2 transfer windows (I won't even discuss January because it was worse) and he messed up the season by losing out to the current top 4 who simply are more talented. 

That's simply short-sighted and unrealistic. 

Edited April 19, 20188 yr by Saaladin

9 minutes ago, TheChelsRVA said:

The problem is Conte has essentially burned every bridge at Chelsea.  He had it out with Costa in the media, turned around and demoted luiz, has essentially said we don't have quality players, and moaned literally all year about the board.  Why on earth would we turn around and give him MORE time and MORE money.  

There is blame on both sides, but when a relationship has gone sour you have to cut it off.  He did not help himself with the results of 2018...

He didn't have it out with Costa in the media. He texted Costa privately to tell him he wasn't going to remain a Chelsea player. I have no issue with that after Costa caused a media circus around Chelsea in January about going to China. He could have waited yet he chose to allow those rumors and desires to cause a distraction in the middle of Conte's first season when he had us in 1st position.

You give him more time and more money because he gave Chelsea a title in 2017, he rallied the team, he clearly put his heart on the line and inspired a 10th place team to win a title.

Then when he thought he would have the support of the club to build a long-term winner he was shunned and the club did as they always do and destroy any hopes of repeating as champions or actually building something special with a ridiculously stupid transfer window.

48 minutes ago, Saaladin said:

You have to look at buys and sales not just overall spending, Chelsea had a Net Spend. 

Players In:

Morata --- Cost: £58 (Not 75. His transfer fee was 58 and with add-ons could rise to 70 if Chelsea had reached certain targets)

Rudiger -- Cost £30

Drinkwater --- Cost £35

Zappacosta --- Cost £23

Bakayoko --- Cost £35

Caballero -- Free

Total Spend -- £180

Players Out:

Costa -- £58

Cuadrado -- £17

Begovic -- £10

Solanke -- £3

Atsu -- £6

Ake -- £20

Traore - £10

Chalobah - £5

Matic - £40

Oscar -  £60 - Sold in January of 2017 so should have contributed to summer buys

Total Sales -- £205

So yeah, Chelsea spent a decent amount of money in the summer, but they also made a ton of money on player sales. And still it's not that simple, because I know some folks will just point to that being "good business sense" however, you have to evaluate what that overall business means to Conte and his ability to compete vs the best.

 

We brought in Bakayoko - High potential player and young

We lost Matic - maybe the second best midfielder in England --- So we lost on that deal and there is no way Conte sanctioned losing Matic to bring in Bakayoko. He wanted a signing to add to the squad not a signing to replace Matic.

We bought Morata - Again, young striker with potential. And no one can claim anything else. Morata was not a ready-made striker. He was a second option everywhere he has been and has never lead a team. Lukaku has. Costa has.

So again, we lost a top striker (and Conte had every right to want Costa out for unsettling the squad in the middle of a title run) and replaced him with an unproven one.

We brought in Rudiger - Decent buy - But not exactly bringing in a player who raises your level significantly beyond what we had in Cahill. 

We bring in Drinkwater - Again, decent buy to provide depth but not a player that will raise your starting 11 beyond what it was.

 

So Costa and Matic, considered top level EPL and european players are sold and lesser players brought in. We lost on those transfers.

No one else of note came in to improve the starting 11 and Conte WASN'T left out to dry? Yes he was, severely. 

But Chelsea fans can go on believing our board did Conte some great favors over the last 2 transfer windows (I won't even discuss January because it was worse) and he messed up the season by losing out to the current top 4 who simply are more talented. 

That's simply short-sighted and unrealistic. 

You're making numbers up, check here:

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-chelsea/alletransfers/verein/631

 

We've had a negative net spend every year since Conte has arrived. 

 

Tottenham and 'Pool both have better Net Spend than us, both are also above us. 

 

Argument null and void. 

Edited April 19, 20188 yr by RIP Mourinho

quick edit needed mate

1 minute ago, RIP Mourinho said:

You're making numbers up, check here:

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-chelsea/alletransfers/verein/631

 

We've had a negative net spend every year since Conte has arrived. 

 

Tottenham and Spurs both have better Net Spend than us, both are also above us. 

 

Argument null and void. 

I didn't make up any numbers. Apparently you can't read because those numbers you posted only support my findings.... But well done!

 

And as for us Tottenham and I'm guessing you mean Liverpool, are we in that same category now? Tottenham ended up with a strong team built over a few seasons and have not had high expectations, at least not as high as Chelsea. That allows a manager flexibility. The whole finish 2nd in the league and you're fired (Ancelotti) thing doesn't happen at Tottenham. They already had a ready made team for this season and didn't need a lot of transfers. Chelsea needed to improve and did the opposite. You're comparing apples to oranges.

10 minutes ago, Saaladin said:

I didn't make up any numbers. Apparently you can't read because those numbers you posted only support my findings.... But well done!

 

And as for us Tottenham and I'm guessing you mean Liverpool, are we in that same category now? Tottenham ended up with a strong team built over a few seasons and have not had high expectations, at least not as high as Chelsea. That allows a manager flexibility. The whole finish 2nd in the league and you're fired (Ancelotti) thing doesn't happen at Tottenham. They already had a ready made team for this season and didn't need a lot of transfers. Chelsea needed to improve and did the opposite. You're comparing apples to oranges.

Conte spent £230m (-£51.48m NET) on a title winning squad and took us into the Europa league. Chelsea won the league and needed to improve but Spurs didn't didn't need to improve? Makes sense.

Poch spent £109m (-£15.93 NET) after losing starting players (Walker and pretty much Rose + Alderweireld) and got them Champions league football.

Klopp spent £151.23 (+£1.32m NET) after losing their world class talent in Coutinho and got Champions league football (could also win the Champions league). 

1 hour ago, RIP Mourinho said:

Conte spent £230m (-£51.48m NET) on a title winning squad and took us into the Europa league. Chelsea won the league and needed to improve but Spurs didn't didn't need to improve? Makes sense.

Poch spent £109m (-£15.93 NET) after losing starting players (Walker and pretty much Rose + Alderweireld) and got them Champions league football.

Klopp spent £151.23 (+£1.32m NET) after losing their world class talent in Coutinho and got Champions league football (could also win the Champions league). 

Conte lost Costa and Matic and got Bakayoko and Morata -- Starting eleven downgraded. Stop creating a mirage with your inflated £230 number. That doesn't tell the story of our transfer window and you know it but are just forcing it to make your point valid.

Poch sold Walker for an insane price for his ability and Tottenham had a replacement (Trippier) not to mention purchasing Aurier. When did they lose Alderweireld and Rose? He got them CL football because he had the golden boot winner Kane, Dele Alli, Eriksen, a top notch backline, Dembele, Sassoko, Wanyama and a world class GK.

Klopp sold a player who didn't fit his system in Coutinho, a top player yes, but he also bought Mohammed Salah, Wijnaldum, Ox-Chamberlain, Milner, and Virgil Van Dijk who is arguably the best central defender in the EPL.

Again, don't confuse people with a cover-all statement like "Conte got £230m to spend and lost out on CL" that is not the story. The real story is that Chelsea spent money on mid-level players and replaced stars with players who were not ready.

@Saaladin that's some revisionist history regarding our transfers.  Morata and Bakayoko were thought to be upgrades at the start of the season.  Most people thought Bakayoko would oust Matic even before he played a single second.  Morata was arguably the top striker on the market and we got him and people were ecstatic. The prices were the going market rate; if anything we sold Costa and Matic at a discount.  

15 minutes ago, TheChelsRVA said:

@Saaladin that's some revisionist history regarding our transfers.  Morata and Bakayoko were thought to be upgrades at the start of the season.  Most people thought Bakayoko would oust Matic even before he played a single second.  Morata was arguably the top striker on the market and we got him and people were ecstatic. The prices were the going market rate; if anything we sold Costa and Matic at a discount.  

I can see how it could be perceived as revisionist but realistically, there is no way Conte was all happy about losing Matic to get Bakayoko. Matic was a star for Chelsea why would Conte have been happy about that? 

As for Morata, sure he was a striker that had some suiters but largely it was United and Juve. No one else really went that hard for him which is why Chelsea got him for £58. Everyone also knew that Morata was coming off the bench in Madrid and pretty much worked mop up duty for Benzema and Bale and never really made a first eleven appearance against any notable teams. How could that be a realistic replacement of Costa who was a feared EPL and European striker?

And yes, we sold Matic and Costa at a discount, another great aspect of our board's business dealings.

So Conte is stubborn, fighting with the board, telling new signings there basically not good enough, fell out with Costa and Luiz who are big personalities in the changing room, plays unfit players, plays players well out of form, hasn't given other players a fair chance, can't adjust to other team's tactics during a match, sticks to 5 at the back, gets outfitted by Wenger, this can all be blamed on the board. I bet everyone in a job could just blame all their mistakes on their employers, we would all the the perfect employees.

4 hours ago, Zola said:

The club should be wary of getting rid of him, he will be very hard to replace. 

Give him some cash and the summer to get some players he actually wants. 

Exactly.....back the f**king manager.....especially when he is a class one......but this is Chels afterall, if its not the media or refs f**king us up, then we will ourselves do it.......we have mastered this ability.

3 hours ago, Saaladin said:

You have to look at buys and sales not just overall spending, Chelsea had a Net Spend. 

Players In:

Morata --- Cost: £58 (Not 75. His transfer fee was 58 and with add-ons could rise to 70 if Chelsea had reached certain targets)

Rudiger -- Cost £30

Drinkwater --- Cost £35

Zappacosta --- Cost £23

Bakayoko --- Cost £35

Caballero -- Free

Total Spend -- £180

Players Out:

Costa -- £58

Cuadrado -- £17

Begovic -- £10

Solanke -- £3

Atsu -- £6

Ake -- £20

Traore - £10

Chalobah - £5

Matic - £40

Oscar -  £60 - Sold in January of 2017 so should have contributed to summer buys

Total Sales -- £205

So yeah, Chelsea spent a decent amount of money in the summer, but they also made a ton of money on player sales. And still it's not that simple, because I know some folks will just point to that being "good business sense" however, you have to evaluate what that overall business means to Conte and his ability to compete vs the best.

 

We brought in Bakayoko - High potential player and young

We lost Matic - maybe the second best midfielder in England --- So we lost on that deal and there is no way Conte sanctioned losing Matic to bring in Bakayoko. He wanted a signing to add to the squad not a signing to replace Matic.

We bought Morata - Again, young striker with potential. And no one can claim anything else. Morata was not a ready-made striker. He was a second option everywhere he has been and has never lead a team. Lukaku has. Costa has.

So again, we lost a top striker (and Conte had every right to want Costa out for unsettling the squad in the middle of a title run) and replaced him with an unproven one.

We brought in Rudiger - Decent buy - But not exactly bringing in a player who raises your level significantly beyond what we had in Cahill. 

We bring in Drinkwater - Again, decent buy to provide depth but not a player that will raise your starting 11 beyond what it was.

 

So Costa and Matic, considered top level EPL and european players are sold and lesser players brought in. We lost on those transfers.

No one else of note came in to improve the starting 11 and Conte WASN'T left out to dry? Yes he was, severely. 

But Chelsea fans can go on believing our board did Conte some great favors over the last 2 transfer windows (I won't even discuss January because it was worse) and he messed up the season by losing out to the current top 4 who simply are more talented. 

That's simply short-sighted and unrealistic. 

Conte got f**ked its that simple......could he do better despite all this? Yes he could......but ohh man we once Again show the World how to not back a winning manager. We got him crap....either average or long from reaching their potential. In this climate? Pure suicide..........they all have issues, but maybe its time to remove the tumor instead of cutting our arms and legs first.

On April 18, 2018 at 16:48, Saaladin said:

We're obviously not going to agree which is fine, this is a forum for discussion and inevitably disagreement. 

You clearly feel like those players you are mentioning are Chelsea caliber players who could have helped us win the CL and claim a second successive league title and I simply don't agree especially in a season with 4 competitions.

 

Man City 

GKs - Ederson - Claudio Bravo (starting GK for Barca last season) 

CBs - Otamendi - Kompany - Stones - Laporte

FBs - Mendy - Danilo - Walker

CM - Gundogan - KDB - Delph - David Silva - Bernardo Silva - Fernandinho - Yaya Toure

Forwards - Sterling - Gabriel Jesus - Leroy Sane - Sergio Aguero

 

Man United

GKs - De Gea - Romero (Argentina Starting GK)

CBs - Lindelof - Bailly - Jones - Smalling

FBs - Rojo - Shaw - Valencia - Darmian - Blind

CMs - Pogba - Herrera - Matic - Carrick - Mata - Fellaini - McTominay

Forwards - Lukaku - Lingard - Sanchez - Rashford - Martial - Young

 

Liverpool

GKs - Karius - Mignolet

CBs - Van Dijk - Lovren - Matip - Klavan

FBs - Clyne - Robertson - Alexander Arnold - Moreno

CM - Milner - Henderson - Can - Chamberlain - Lallana - Wijnaldum

Forwards - Salah - Firmino - Mane - Ings 

 

Tottenham

GKs - Hugo Loris - Michel Vorm

CBs - Alderweireld - Sanchez - Vertonghen - 

FBs - Rose - Trippier - Aurier - Davies

CMs - Dembele - Eriksen - Wanyama - Dier - Sissoko - Winks

Forwards - Kane - Alli - Moura - Lamela - Son

 

Chelsea

GKs - Courtois - Caballero 

CBs - Christensen - Cahill - Rudiger - Luiz - Ampadu

FBs - Alonso - Moses - Azpi - Zappa - Emerson

CMs - Fabregas - Kante - Bakayoko - Drinkwater

Forwards - Hazard - Willian - Morata - Batshuayi - Giroud - Pedro

 

Please rank the squads - In your honest opinions which teams would you have finishing 1st - 5th?

 

For me it is:

1. City - Star power in starting 11 better than Chelsea - Quality on the bench is far and away above Chelsea. Only starter from Chelsea would be Hazard and Azpi.
2. Tottenham - Greater start power. Defense and midfield lines are stronger in both quality and experience for Tottenaham. Kante, Hazard, Azpi and maybe Willian would be in their 11. Alonso would compete with Rose.
3. United - Greater star power. Their defense is experienced and strong - Again Azpi starts. Kante would displace Herrera. Hazard in front three with Lukaku and Sanchez. Alonso also for anything they have.
4. Liverpool - Greater start power. Kante and Azpi again, maybe Christensen over Lovren but not always. Mane - Firmino - Salah untouchable. Hazard would be depth. Alonso would compete with Robertson.
5. Chelsea - Players that would be replaced in starting 11 by every team in top 4: Rudiger, Christensen, Cahill, Fabregas, Morata, Moses. 

So in summary and in my opnion - Chelsea have 5 players in their typical starting 11 that wouldn't start in any of the top 4 teams. And that is our spine plus Moses. Willian wouldn't start for Liverpool or City and would be in a weekly battle at Tottenham and United. He walks into Chelsea starting 11 however without a doubt.

 

It's funny that you big up Spurs and Liverpool yet you would probably hate about 80% of them players if they played for us and use it as an excuse to defend Conte. As for Hazard on the bench at Liverpool 

4 hours ago, Zola said:

The club should be wary of getting rid of him, he will be very hard to replace. 

Give him some cash and the summer to get some players he actually wants. 

Same was said with Jose in 15 /16. There's more than enough options out there.

1 hour ago, Saaladin said:

Conte lost Costa and Matic and got Bakayoko and Morata -- Starting eleven downgraded. Stop creating a mirage with your inflated £230 number. That doesn't tell the story of our transfer window and you know it but are just forcing it to make your point valid.

Poch sold Walker for an insane price for his ability and Tottenham had a replacement (Trippier) not to mention purchasing Aurier. When did they lose Alderweireld and Rose? He got them CL football because he had the golden boot winner Kane, Dele Alli, Eriksen, a top notch backline, Dembele, Sassoko, Wanyama and a world class GK.

Klopp sold a player who didn't fit his system in Coutinho, a top player yes, but he also bought Mohammed Salah, Wijnaldum, Ox-Chamberlain, Milner, and Virgil Van Dijk who is arguably the best central defender in the EPL.

Again, don't confuse people with a cover-all statement like "Conte got £230m to spend and lost out on CL" that is not the story. The real story is that Chelsea spent money on mid-level players and replaced stars with players who were not ready.

So you are saying we downgraded with signings but then claim Aurier and Trippier are good replacements for Walker? Whatever suits the narrative hey.

6 minutes ago, Argo said:

It's funny that you big up Spurs and Liverpool yet you would probably hate about 80% of them players if they played for us and use it as an excuse to defend Conte. As for Hazard on the bench at Liverpool 

I'm not bigging up Liverpool players. I'm stating a fact. We have only a few players who would start for Liverpool. 

And Hazard would not start for Liverpool. Mane and Salah are playing far better than Hazard.

1 minute ago, Argo said:

So you are saying we downgraded with signings but then claim Aurier and Trippier are good replacements for Walker? Whatever suits the narrative hey.

Walker is not exactly Azpi. City threw crazy money to buy Walker and although he is a solid player he's not worth 50. Aurier and Trippier are fine replacements.