1 hour ago, Scott Harris said:

You have to believe that Pulisic will live up to some people's expectations to buy into that though, and I'm far from convinced that Pulisic is going to be as good as some people make him out to be. Hudson-Odoi is all potential at the moment, it's hard to say which way he will go. Hazard isn't easy to replace, I actually don't think a player of his quality can be replaced, you can't replace one of the best in the game. So when people say "sell Hazard" it seems foolish too me. 

Regardless of how Pulisic will go, we have money to invest. Give him and CHO the platform to succeed, just how Bayern were willing to do for CHO. The Hazard money can be utilized to rebuild the team. 

17 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

It's already happened. 2015-16, Hazard scored 4 league goals and got 3 assists, we finished 10th. It would be the same again this season if we didn't have his goals and assists. You take Hazard out of this team now and I think we are battling for a top 10 finish, the other players just don't have enough goals in them.

The difference being hazard played and didn't contribute

At the moment, he plays and he sometimes contributes. But when he doesn't contribute the team suffers.

My view is that without hazard we may start to play football as a team and not with a mind of "give it to hazard and see what he does".

I'd be interested to see how the team changes, but I anticipate it won't be to make us worse. Funnily enough, Liverpool lost their best player 2 years ago and look what happened to them. 

Edited February 3, 20197 yr by bisright1

The difference being hazard played and didn't contribute
At the moment, he plays and he sometimes contributes. But when he doesn't contribute the team suffers.
My view is that without hazard we may start to play football as a team and not with a mind of "give it to hazard and see what he does".
I'd be interested to see how the team changes, but I anticipate it won't be to make us worse. Funnily enough, Liverpool lost their best player 2 years ago and look what happened to them. 

Yip. People disregard the fact that the team has to sacrifice some defensive solidity if he's playing. If he doesn't contribute in attack it's akin to Mesut Ozil on most days.

23 hours ago, Semper Fi said:

 

Hazard has been flirting with Madrid forever now and it really is unacceptable, its disloyal and a slap on the face to the fans and our club. No player is bigger then Chelsea FC. I am 100% sure he will do the same as Courtois come next year. Quote me on this. 

 

We will rebuild the team, theres not a more obvious explanation. We have CHO and Pulisic as our future now and we can invest the money on the Hazard sale to reinforce the squad and bring in new talent who have more hunger and desire then Hazard. Players that will listen to the coach, not undermine them. 

He's an amazing player who could pretty much get in any team, Madrid have shown interest and in today's football climate what do you expect? Football agents are the ones that have done this and plagued the game, players want the best deal they can get and agents tell them what to do and how to do it. It's really not like the days of Matt Le Tissier at Southampton anymore. 

Hazard might want to stay, he might not, but his attitude right now is nothing new and there hasn't been anything bad about what he has said. He's playing under his contract and all he's doing is answering questions... With responses such as maybe he might go to Madrid and maybe he'll stay at Chelsea, what's wrong with that? Compare that to the way Suarez behaved when he desperately wanted to go to Spain, need I even mention Costa? 

Do you want him to sit still silently when he'll be 29 coming up 30 when his contract ends when this final contract will be the last lucrative deal he'll get in his career? If he says "No, I'm staying I'm loyal to Chelsea" what contract do you think that'll land him exactly? He wants us to give him a really big deal if he stays and who can f**king blame him. Nobody in their right minds would go against that if you were in his position, some perspective please, this isn't the 80's anymore. 

Edited February 3, 20197 yr by Slojo

1 hour ago, bisright1 said:

The difference being hazard played and didn't contribute

At the moment, he plays and he sometimes contributes. But when he doesn't contribute the team suffers.

My view is that without hazard we may start to play football as a team and not with a mind of "give it to hazard and see what he does".

I'd be interested to see how the team changes, but I anticipate it won't be to make us worse. Funnily enough, Liverpool lost their best player 2 years ago and look what happened to them. 

All I can say to this is, be careful what you wish for. 

More often than not it does not work like that, a team lose their best player they're a worse team, that's 9/10 the case and I'm probably being nice with that figure. 

There is a great piece in the Mirror about this, certainly says what a lot of us think, but won't utter, Hazard is the enigma though, does he want us, or should we sell him regardless?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/eden-hazard-wonderful-talent-part-13946290

Yes we do. You dont lose 4-0 to flippin Bournemouth otherwise.

20 hours ago, Ballack & Blu said:

There is a great piece in the Mirror about this, certainly says what a lot of us think, but won't utter, Hazard is the enigma though, does he want us, or should we sell him regardless?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/eden-hazard-wonderful-talent-part-13946290

Oh, come on, FFS, Stan Collymore?  Really?  I've had sh*ts with more insight than him.

Edited February 4, 20197 yr by yorkleyblue

1 hour ago, yorkleyblue said:

Oh, come on, FFS, Stan Collymore?  Really?  I've had sh*ts with more insight than him.

Ad hominem or not with the stuff Collymore has been involved with how the f**k can anyone trust that psycho's opinion on anything? It's bewildering how he's still employed. 

I think the virus word is abit strong. I don’t think there is anything like that, although the mentality clearly is a big issue.

Personally I think it’s more to do with Hazard being the best player, and he hasn’t got the right mindset to take us out of trouble when we’re in a rut.

A leader like Drogba, Terry, Lampard can lead us and get us out of a hole, Hazard isn’t that kind of person. He just wants to enjoy his football and when we struggle, we look to Hazard, and he’s not enjoying his football. Stuck in a rut.

I don’t believe there is a ‘virus’ in the dressing room. We just haven’t got the right mentality.

2 hours ago, yorkleyblue said:

Oh, come on, FFS, Stan Collymore?  Really?  I've had sh*ts with more insight than him.

I was pretty disappointed in myself after reading the article, agreeing with it all and then finding out who wrote it. 

I just think we have very laid back group of players, the dressing room is probably too nice, too relaxed. 

I don't see enough players that I would describe as hungry,  there isn't the desire that the great teams have to not just win it once, but then go back and win it again next season, city had the same issue, maybe it is the modern footballer, and why no team has retained the title for 10 years. 

I think a few of our players easily drop into the comfort zone aswell, because they know that if results go array, the manager will get potted, they will get an extension. 

I remember conte saying after we won the league that we had to make some cold decisions in the transfer market, and I don't think we have been cut throat enough with players that have under performed under previous managers.

Hopefully sarri can turn a corner, even if we finish outside the top 4, I would like him to be given another year, get rid of some of the under performers, and back him again in the summer, as I think that is the only way to break the cycle, and keep players motivated to play for their futures.

28 minutes ago, big blue said:

I just think we have very laid back group of players, the dressing room is probably too nice, too relaxed. 

I don't see enough players that I would describe as hungry,  there isn't the desire that the great teams have to not just win it once, but then go back and win it again next season, city had the same issue, maybe it is the modern footballer, and why no team has retained the title for 10 years. 

I think a few of our players easily drop into the comfort zone aswell, because they know that if results go array, the manager will get potted, they will get an extension. 

I remember conte saying after we won the league that we had to make some cold decisions in the transfer market, and I don't think we have been cut throat enough with players that have under performed under previous managers.

Hopefully sarri can turn a corner, even if we finish outside the top 4, I would like him to be given another year, get rid of some of the under performers, and back him again in the summer, as I think that is the only way to break the cycle, and keep players motivated to play for their futures.

Some good points. I think the lack of natural leaders is a general characteristic of modern day footballers.

I get the impression that if they receive criticism for underperforming, they perceive that they are “ picked on” , and with prompting from their agents are looking for pastures new.

They require molly coddling in a way that was unthinkable maybe even ten years ago.

1 hour ago, bisright1 said:

I was pretty disappointed in myself after reading the article, agreeing with it all and then finding out who wrote it. 

redact the authors name, and then see if you agree. 

21 minutes ago, M.M.B said:

redact the authors name, and then see if you agree. 

Redacting Collymore makes no difference.  It's a lazy,cliche-ridden rehash of all of Collymore's previous rants about the inner working of the club that he has no idea at all about, but it panders to that sort of reader who  takes their information from the likes of Collymore and the Mirror.

If you want to believe that there is a crisis within the club, you'll be happy with Collymore and all the other vermin  who punt this narrative.  Me, I prefer to wait for evidence, rather than the bigoted made-up bollocks usually spread about our club by the press and ex-scouse/manc pundits.

34 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

Redacting Collymore makes no difference.  It's a lazy,cliche-ridden rehash of all of Collymore's previous rants about the inner working of the club that he has no idea at all ?about, but it panders to that sort of reader who  takes their information from the likes of Collymore and the Mirror.??

If you want to believe that there is a crisis within the club, you'll be happy with Collymore and all the other vermin  who punt this narrative.  Me, I prefer to wait for evidence, rather than the bigoted made-up bollocks usually spread about our club by the press and ex-scouse/manc pundits.

      Ive not read the article but it appears you have, so you do read the daily mirror.

      I dont like collymore.... i can only agree with you he's  vermin.

     my point was( bisright1) found himself agreeing with it until he found out who wrote it. 

Clicked on it and read through - glad we agree on collymore's vermin status.

Used to read the Mirror when I was a lad and it was still a proper journalistic newspaper.  Not for many a year now, though.

And I can't be held responsible for any other poster's (hopefully temporary) lack of judgement now, can I?

Edited February 4, 20197 yr by yorkleyblue

1 hour ago, yorkleyblue said:

Redacting Collymore makes no difference.  It's a lazy,cliche-ridden rehash of all of Collymore's previous rants about the inner working of the club that he has no idea at all about, but it panders to that sort of reader who  takes their information from the likes of Collymore and the Mirror.

If you want to believe that there is a crisis within the club, you'll be happy with Collymore and all the other vermin  who punt this narrative.  Me, I prefer to wait for evidence, rather than the bigoted made-up bollocks usually spread about our club by the press and ex-scouse/manc pundits.

You think that's bad you should watch ESPN, the likes of Craig Burley and Stevie Nicol who pretend to know what managing a big side is and that there's a crises within Chelsea and Sarri is in the wrong. 

They were all shouting off "You don't ever leave your staff aside or outside the dressing room! Ever!" Says the panel of people who haven't managed any football clubs. Now that Mourinho is gone they're looking for a new scapegoat, it'll now be Sarri of course...  

Quite funny when the only person who's making sense on the full panel is the yank. 

 

Edited February 4, 20197 yr by Slojo

1 hour ago, yorkleyblue said:

Clicked on it and read through - glad we agree on collymore's vermin status.

Used to read the Mirror when I was a lad and it was still a proper journalistic newspaper.  Not for many a year now, though.

And I can't be held responsible for any other poster's (hopefully temporary) lack of judgement now, can I?

Eden Hazard needs to leave Stamford Bridge – to rid Chelsea of its toxic ­dressing room. Nothing against the Belgian, who I rate one of the best in the world, but it’s time for the club to cash in. Losing a player like Hazard would leave a massive hole. But £150million is good business for a 27-year-old. He’s a wonderful talent but I’ve got a nagging feeling he’s part of the problems at the club. Jose Mourinho was lukewarm towards him, Antonio Conte wasn’t overly keen, and now he is part of a crew whose bottle Maurizio Sarri has questioned in the last few weeks. Chelsea followed victory over Spurs with a performance that hit new lows at Bournemouth. I watched that whole game and I was simply staggered by the lack of desire, bottle, heart, and commitment. And I have to say that while Hazard would be the stand-out name, I could see Chelsea ridding themselves of a few more so-called big-hitters.

David Luiz is a case in point. When he’s good, he’s very good. When he looks like he would rather be anywhere else other than on a football pitch –as was the case at the Vitality Stadium – he is an absolute liability. There is no way you could build a successful team around him. You couldn’t trust him in the same way that Liverpool boss Jurgen Klopp could trust Virgil van Dijk. And Willian is another who looks like he could benefit from a move. There are some big-time Charlies who believe they are on the same level as Chelsea legends such as Didier Drogba, John Terry and Frank Lampard. Well, I’ve got news for them – they are nowhere near. Chelsea have stressed the need to keep players who have the mentality to push the club upwards again while bringing in academy youngsters.

Well, that has been the plan – so time now to speed it up. Chelsea fans would be prepared to wait a couple of seasons for results if five or six of the big names were replaced by the likes of Callum Hudson-Odoi. Bayern Munich have been looking for replacements for Arjen Robben and Franck Ribery for some time – and they have absolutely nailed their colours to the mast with the teenager. If Chelsea promoted the likes of Ruben Loftus-Cheek, kept hold of several good senior professionals such as N’Golo Kante and Cesar Azpilicueta, and removed some of the dead wood, the team would have a fresh look about it. I’m talking about selling the likes of Danny Drinkwater, Pedro, Willian, Luiz and Hazard. And French international striker Olivier Giroud, who manager Sarri clearly doesn’t fancy. That would free up plenty of cash for four top-quality signings and enable the club to be competitive again.

They have signed one in Christian Pulisic anyway – and I wouldn’t be surprised at all if others were on the wanted list. Clearing out four or five is the only option for Chelsea now. And they need to do it quickly. A few weeks ago I wondered in this column if the managers were the problem. Now I’ve come to the conclusion that the fault lies deep in the dressing room. It’s like cutting out a tumour. It’s got to be done swiftly and it’s got to be done effectively. It pains me to say it but, if Chelsea want to move on and start afresh, then Eden Hazard and several of his big-name pals have to go.

So that people don't need to click on it, 

I agree with him that Hazard isn't consistent enough and that in my opinion, I'd happily see him go if we can invest in the squad with more balance. 

I agree that Luiz isn't consistent enough to be classed a top level Defender. He never has been. 

I would be happy to wait a couple of seasons if we replaced the "big names" with talent that was up and coming. 

I am not really sure what he's written that is that controversial to a Chelsea fan. 

2 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

to rid Chelsea of its toxic ­dressing room.

for a start.  neither that smug prick collymore, you nor me knows what the the dressing room atmosphere is like.

Selling Hazard isn't a way to get the team to fight more. That's ridiculous. What the team needs is a leader. Someone to whip the boys into shape and coral them keep them headed forward. We were absolutely spoiled with JT, Lamps and Drogba. They never let the energy or the focus falter. This team doesn't have that type of player in the side that will give the team a swift kick in the gonads to wake everyone up. Eden isn't that type of player or leader. It doesn't mean he needs to be freaking sold!  Come the hell on. I'm surprised they don't bring Terry in to be an assistant coach, to remind them what being Chelsea really means, that we don't lose to Bournemouth 4 freaking nil. We don't piss down our leg to spurs or arsenal. This team needs someone to keep that focus -- to fight for 90+ regardless of the opponent.

12 minutes ago, chiefBlueCFC said:

Selling Hazard isn't a way to get the team to fight more. That's ridiculous. What the team needs is a leader. Someone to whip the boys into shape and coral them keep them headed forward. We were absolutely spoiled with JT, Lamps and Drogba. They never let the energy or the focus falter. This team doesn't have that type of player in the side that will give the team a swift kick in the gonads to wake everyone up. Eden isn't that type of player or leader. It doesn't mean he needs to be freaking sold!  Come the hell on. I'm surprised they don't bring Terry in to be an assistant coach, to remind them what being Chelsea really means, that we don't lose to Bournemouth 4 freaking nil. We don't piss down our leg to spurs or arsenal. This team needs someone to keep that focus -- to fight for 90+ regardless of the opponent.

I'm actually hoping Higuain can be that kind of leader for us in the next few months. He seems vocal on the pitch, plays with passion and toughness. Presses hard, and doesn't seem to give up on plays. Letting Willian take the penalty against Sheff Wed was also a smart move and should've endeared him to the dressing room. Bang in a few more goals and he might just become the fighter/leader we need for the final run-in. 

31 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

for a start.  neither that smug prick collymore, you nor me knows what the the dressing room atmosphere is like.

But history tells us that Chelsea have problems with players downing tools.

Mourinho and Conte’s last seasons are testament to that.

Throughout Roman’s stay “player power” has been a point of contention, more so than any other top six Premier League side.

The team capitulating to successive away defeats to Arsenal and Bournemouth with embarrassing performances shows that there’s a mental fragility to this group of players and that they can switch it off when they want.

Collymore’s general point is to move on players with a high status in the squad but aren’t as consistent as they should be/need to be.

Sell Willian and Luiz and you’re rid of two big dressing room personalities replace them in the team with CHO, Ampadu, Christensen and you could potentially have a more harmonious dressing room with less ego.

Right or wrong Collymore makes a fair point.

52 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

for a start.  neither that smug prick collymore, you nor me knows what the the dressing room atmosphere is like.

But having said that the theory of Chelsea having a toxic dress room and player power is pretty plausible given our history. 

We keep going through managers and every single manager seems to leave in catastrophic fashion with a complete fallout with the board/players, I think it's pretty fair to estimate some players can get too comfortable here and can drop their performance levels entirely when they feel like it. 

Look at United, I know Mourinho's way of playing was a large factor but you look at how good Pogba has been since Mourinho has left and it's like he's a brand new player, I think it's fair to say he was half arsed when Mourinho was there. 

i thought the article made sense but i never noticed that collymore wrote it !! he may be a twat but he has been a pro footballer so knows a bit about dressing rooms, and is maybe talking from experience