Who ever it is has to start playing the academy players. Mount, Hudson-Odoi, Mceachran, DaSilva and Sterling are all good enough to step up. 

11 hours ago, Spiller86 said:

Few have spent more time defending Conte than me. I'd prefer he stayed. But the odds are very short that he'll be going.

Couple of points on this:

I think it is a myth that a Pochettino and Sarri should be appointed because they have overachieved with a smaller budget. Pochettino and Sarri have not been working with nothing: At Spurs Vertonghen, Rose, Dembele, Eriksen and Kane would walk into our first eleven. All were there when Pochettino arrived. Similarly at Napoli,  Hamsik, Higuain, Jorginho, Albiol, Mertens, Ghoulam, Insigne and Callejon were all there. Most would walk into our eleven. 

Secondly a small budget doesn't mean you can't win. if we are looking for a manager who has overachieved with a much smaller budget we should only be looking at Simeone, who actually won La Liga. 

I don't want a winning manager because I'm spoiled and insist on trophies. I want a winning manager because that flows through our club culture. Culture is king and I don't want a club where 'putting the pressure on' is enough to make a DVD. 

Out of all the players you mentioned with Spurs three were bang average and two were inconsistent as when Poch came along. They would only walk in our team now thanks to the work he's done with them. Furthermore, if we are going to base our appointments on a trophy laden track record then it would be a two horse race between Carlo and Wenger. It's time to think outside the box.

1 hour ago, MasonMountXI said:

Who ever it is has to start playing the academy players. Mount, Hudson-Odoi, Mceachran, DaSilva and Sterling are all good enough to step up. 

Not sure we're ready for that. Look at the number of people who have been slating Christiansen lately, despite him having a pretty glorious first season. If you bring those kids in too early, there's a very real risk of their confidence being destroyed if they take time to settle in. Not to mention you could almost certainly kiss goodbye to the CL for 2-3 years if we move to a youth first approach. Not saying its necessarily a bad idea, but it would have ramifications.

3 minutes ago, Kentonio said:

Not sure we're ready for that. Look at the number of people who have been slating Christiansen lately, despite him having a pretty glorious first season. If you bring those kids in too early, there's a very real risk of their confidence being destroyed if they take time to settle in. Not to mention you could almost certainly kiss goodbye to the CL for 2-3 years if we move to a youth first approach. Not saying its necessarily a bad idea, but it would have ramifications.

We have the worlds best academy. They win everything for Chelsea. They win everything for England. It's about time they actually play. 

We have missed out on the champions league without playing them and buying players in 2 of the last 3 seasons. I'd rather play them then reap the rewards of them in their primes in 3-4 years. I'd hate to feel like City losing Sancho. 

Just now, MasonMountXI said:

We have the worlds best academy. They win everything for Chelsea. They win everything for England. It's about time they actually play. 

We have missed out on the champions league without playing them and buying players in 2 of the last 3 seasons. I'd rather play them then reap the rewards of them in their primes in 3-4 years. I'd hate to feel like City losing Sancho. 

I'm all for bringing them in, but for me it has to be gradual. Faster than we do now obviously, but they still need to be integrated one or two at a time into a squad with lots of experience to help them continue to learn. Look at Christiansen for example, he had 2 years playing Bundesliga and still has a fair way to go to really get to grips with the rigours of the PL. Bags of talent, but was clearly playing too much this season and getting tired and mistakes started to appear more frequently. You take a bunch of kids from the academy and drop them straight into the first team, and you're going to see those problems and a whole lot more. 

We can definitely do much better than we have been doing though. I'm still raging about KdB all these years later.

4 minutes ago, Kentonio said:

I'm all for bringing them in, but for me it has to be gradual. Faster than we do now obviously, but they still need to be integrated one or two at a time into a squad with lots of experience to help them continue to learn. Look at Christiansen for example, he had 2 years playing Bundesliga and still has a fair way to go to really get to grips with the rigours of the PL. Bags of talent, but was clearly playing too much this season and getting tired and mistakes started to appear more frequently. You take a bunch of kids from the academy and drop them straight into the first team, and you're going to see those problems and a whole lot more. 

We can definitely do much better than we have been doing though. I'm still raging about KdB all these years later.

You sound like Alan Hansen. 

If Contes departure is announced on Saturday or Sunday then I reckon that will be sign that Sarri is coming due to his release clause expiring soon  

Anyone agree or have I put 2+2 and come up with 5?

3 hours ago, Nibs said:

Both Liverpool & Spurs have proved that you can compete by playing more expansive football

But they only competed for the Arsenal cup.  To be fair, we didn't even do that, but 23 and 25 points behind don't really count as "competing"

3 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

But they only competed for the Arsenal cup.  To be fair, we didn't even do that, but 23 and 25 points behind don't really count as "competing"

True, but let's not forget that the dippers beat City 3 times this season by playing the way they did rather than sit back and sh*t themselves!

 

also true, but I think sometimes we get carried away with Spuds and the dippers and their amazing football style.  Might be exciting, but didn't they both lose to West Brom?   There is always a different viewpoint :)

 

Edited May 16, 20187 yr by yorkleyblue

16 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

But they only competed for the Arsenal cup.  To be fair, we didn't even do that, but 23 and 25 points behind don't really count as "competing"

Tottenham lost Kane for almost two months last season and were playing CL football, they still pushed us close. With an injury free Kane i reckon they would have pipped us to the title. Last season we were helped greatly by having no extra CL fixtures and zero injuries to key players. You've seen how we've coped this season since we've been injury hit and extra fixtures due to CL. We haven't coped. Conte's training methods have likely caught up to some of the players, most notably Luiz who has spent pretty much the whole season in the physio room. Pushing the body to the limit and leaving themselves on the pitch is generally what Conte and Mourinho like to see from players, whether it leaves the player with persistent injury or not. 

And we lost Costa for half a season according to some.

16 minutes ago, enigma said:

Tottenham lost Kane for almost two months last season and were playing CL football, they still pushed us close. With an injury free Kane i reckon they would have pipped us to the title. Last season we were helped greatly by having no extra CL fixtures and zero injuries to key players. You've seen how we've coped this season since we've been injury hit and extra fixtures due to CL. We haven't coped. Conte's training methods have likely caught up to some of the players, most notably Luiz who has spent pretty much the whole season in the physio room. Pushing the body to the limit and leaving themselves on the pitch is generally what Conte and Mourinho like to see from players, whether it leaves the player with persistent injury or not. 

No I meant not competing this year, 20-odd points behind the league winners.  I'm still not sure about being on a Chelsea forum where people are defending or making excuses for f**king Tottenham, of all teams.

1 hour ago, Argo said:

Out of all the players you mentioned with Spurs three were bang average and two were inconsistent as when Poch came along. They would only walk in our team now thanks to the work he's done with them. Furthermore, if we are going to base our appointments on a trophy laden track record then it would be a two horse race between Carlo and Wenger. It's time to think outside the box.

Bit of a reductive argument. My point wasn't that winning is the only criteria, but it's an important one. Certainly more important than style which is highly subjective. 

I made mention of Sampaoli earlier. He's a winner and plays very nice football. Would choose him over Sarri and Pochettino. 

22 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

also true, but I think sometimes we get carried away with Spuds and the dippers and their amazing football style.  Might be exciting, but didn't they both lose to West Brom?   There is always a different viewpoint :)

 

It's why City ended up running away with it. Too many of us dropped points when we shouldn't have against teams we should be beating all day long.

I would still have Conte stay and continue and despite the fact many criticise his football, I thought on the whole it was okay and more watchable and entertaining than Mourinho. I think many of us are the same. We put up with the "less entertaining / more defensive" football if we are picking up silverware but when we don't and are one of the "also-rans" you think you've been cheated a bit and may as well have played less cautious / more attacking football, so if Conte does go then I am all for someone less cautious and someone that WILL hopefully integrate a few of the youngsters too.

 

51 minutes ago, enigma said:

Tottenham lost Kane for almost two months last season and were playing CL football, they still pushed us close. With an injury free Kane i reckon they would have pipped us to the title. Last season we were helped greatly by having no extra CL fixtures and zero injuries to key players. You've seen how we've coped this season since we've been injury hit and extra fixtures due to CL. We haven't coped. Conte's training methods have likely caught up to some of the players, most notably Luiz who has spent pretty much the whole season in the physio room. Pushing the body to the limit and leaving themselves on the pitch is generally what Conte and Mourinho like to see from players, whether it leaves the player with persistent injury or not. 

Kane missed 8 league games last season. Spurs won 5 and drew 3 out of those games, so I don't think Kane being injured cost them the title. 

 

44 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

No I meant not competing this year, 20-odd points behind the league winners.  I'm still not sure about being on a Chelsea forum where people are defending or making excuses for f**king Tottenham, of all teams.

Well they are constantly mocked as bottlers and it's good fun to mock them sure, but credit where credit is due, they've improved a lot under Poch and they definitely had us sweating towards the end of last season. I'm just saying, I think had circumstances been different spurs could have won the league last season. I do think the last two seasons were their best chance to win the league though, now their rivals will only get stronger and the league will be tougher to win over us, Utd, City and Liverpool. 

42 minutes ago, Spiller86 said:

Bit of a reductive argument. My point wasn't that winning is the only criteria, but it's an important one. Certainly more important than style which is highly subjective. 

I made mention of Sampaoli earlier. He's a winner and plays very nice football. Would choose him over Sarri and Pochettino. 

I would actually say the demand for style is getting more and important in the modern game, even West Ham and Everton are sacking their managers despite decent results because of the style, sponsors are increasingly factoring it in aswell (United fans are seriously worried Jose's style will lose them lucrative deals). Furthermore, just like the 00's was the era for the solid shape and counter attack, this era is becoming increasingly an era for proactive, high energy attacking teams, so to put ourselves in contention for success in the medium to long term we need to get on that train.

11 minutes ago, enigma said:

Well they are constantly mocked as bottlers and it's good fun to mock them sure, but credit where credit is due, they've improved a lot under Poch and they definitely had us sweating towards the end of last season. I'm just saying, I think had circumstances been different spurs could have won the league last season. I do think the last two seasons were their best chance to win the league though, now their rivals will only get stronger and the league will be tougher to win over us, Utd, City and Liverpool. 

Fair enough.  I don't think they had us sweating last season, they were 7 points behind.   I thought we were fairly comfortable.  Same as they came third in a 2-horse race before that.

Had circumstances been different, we could have won the league this year.  Circumstances are what they are.  They may well have improved of late, after decades of nothingness, but I still don't see any reason to big the buggers up in any way, nor do I see anything special about Pochettino that would make me want him as a manager.  He has done OK, but only OK, with a settled squad of decent players, right up until the crunch time when it really mattered in the league and all three cups.

Edited May 16, 20187 yr by yorkleyblue

1 hour ago, Spiller86 said:

Bit of a reductive argument. My point wasn't that winning is the only criteria, but it's an important one. Certainly more important than style which is highly subjective. 

I made mention of Sampaoli earlier. He's a winner and plays very nice football. Would choose him over Sarri and Pochettino. 

What exactly has Sampaoli won at club level though? a few leagues in South America?

What's wrong with Eddie Howe? Players like a coach that improve them and Howe's done that numerous times with 'cast offs' from other, more vaunted clubs. He's kept Bournemouth in the Premier League three seasons in a row, on a shoestring budget, especially performing miracles in the first season, after having half his squad decimated with injuries, and plays good, attractive football. If he changed his name to Edwardo Howecellotti, he might get a look in.

Nothing wrong with him,  nothing great either.  If that's the level we aspire to these days, that's fine by me, but I'd recommend keeping clear of the  match day threads and the whole  forum really when we are cruising between 9th and 16th regularly.  @Davey Baby wrote a great summary of Howe's abilities recently, so I won't comment about that, other than to say being great in the third division isn't the same as being great or even good at a club like Chelsea, and managing to  keep an average team in an average position in the league for three seasons doesn't actually say much.

Edited May 16, 20187 yr by yorkleyblue

Rumours circulating that Mikel Arteta could be in line to become the next Arsenal manager. 

Patrick Viera has also been contacted about the role too apparently. 

Obviously you have no way of knowing how any managerial appointment will work out but I think it's interesting the Arsenal seem to be targeting someone who would (I assume) adopt a playing philosophy built on the foundation of Wenger's tenure rather than appointing someone based purely on their previous successes. 

That's why I think it would be interesting, were we to replace Conte, to appoint someone like Howe. Let them come in with a blueprint to how they envision the team playing long term and being given a brief that the likes Loftus-Cheek, Mason Mounth, Hudson-Odoi have to be nurtured into the squad/team over the next couple of seasons to give the team a certain identity. 

13 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

Nothing wrong with him,  nothing great either.  If that's the level we aspire to these days, that's fine by me, but I'd recommend keeping clear of the  match day threads and the whole  forum really when we are cruising between 9th and 16th regularly.  @Davey Baby wrote a great summary of Howe's abilities recently, so I won't comment about that, other than to say being great in the third division isn't the same as being great or even good at a club like Chelsea, and managing to  keep an average team in an average position in the league for three seasons doesn't actually say much.

Technically he is keeping a league 1 side in an average position. A lot of his team are players who he had when they were in league 1. Unless you believe he lucked out in having a team full of sleeper premier league level players who were just overlooked and waiting for their chance to succeed. In my opinion a big part of why those league one level players are now at a Premier League level is because of his coaching. Whether he can translate that to a bigger club is anybodies guess (And not one I'm interested in finding out). One area he does do poorly in is his transfers; most of them suck. However, he is severely punching above his weight with this Bournemouth side and the resources he has available to him.

Sampaoli would be great but he doesn't like club management.

I take your point.

On a pedantic point, isn't League 1 the third division?