33 minutes ago, Victor90 said:

That's two players, Mata had creativity but he wasn't the quickest, I don't think he even fit AVB's style but he still did well. Outside of that look at his defence, Alex and John Terry, that's why he kept sticking with David Luiz despite his horrendous form. No fast wingbacks either, Cole was starting to show his age, Ivanovic has never been the quickest, Bosingwa was Bosingwa. 

Then Lampard, Mikel, and Meireles in midfield, none of them were particularly fast were they, except for Ramires of course. 

Then for his wingers he had Malouda and Anelka, that's why he put Sturridge in the hulk role and he actually did really well.

We spent the summer chasing Hulk and Perreira and didn't get neither, then chased Modric all summer to end up with Raul Meireles a couple of hours before the deadline. So I don't think he really got the resources to play the style he wanted to play. However, like I said, AVB probably wouldn't have been a success anyway, it doesn't look like his style has flourished since, but hindsight is a wonderful thing.  

It appears this job mentally scared him as he played sh*t on a stick at Spurs and especially Zenit after that.

The cruel irony is AVB straight out of Porto with this squad would have probably done really well. 

2 hours ago, Argo said:

It appears this job mentally scared him as he played sh*t on a stick at Spurs and especially Zenit after that.

The cruel irony is AVB straight out of Porto with this squad would have probably done really well. 

Probably, I can't lie I wanted him at the time, he did a great job at Porto.

But I think he would've been found out eventually, he had Plan A and that was it. Like you said as soon as he started to change it up it became his downfall, and unfortunately for him he had to change it up because the highline with our players was suicidal, teams just cut us open constantly. 

I remember we absolutely smashed United at Old Trafford and should've been about 3-0 up before HT (when Torres missed an open goal), instead United were 3-0 up and had 3 chances all game because they just sliced us open on the break. 

Plus I think with him being so young and never been a professional footballer it was always going to be difficult for him at big clubs, he never had the respect from the players as far as JT, Mikel and Lampard have said about it in interviews. I personally think there was a lot of unprofessionalism by our senior players, but again, hey hoo, hindsight is a bitch and it worked well for us in the end. I doubt we would've won the CL if we kept him.

It sort of reminds me of Potter in a way, he never got the respect from the players. He didn't get completely ousted like AVB did, but you do have to command some form of respect otherwise you'll never get the best out of the players. 

One big positive that comes out of Lampard's return with Cole as a coach is this will once and for all put an end to this ludicrous conspiracy theory that the new ownership are trying to cleanse the club of anything Roman era.

The appointment of Frank only leaves me more uncertain about where this club is going under this ownership.

Edited April 6, 20233 yr by Jezz

5 hours ago, Argo said:

One big positive that comes out of Lampard's return with Cole as a coach is this will once and for all put an end to this ludicrous conspiracy theory that the new ownership are trying to cleanse the club of anything Roman era.

Maybe that's exactly what they wanted but it's massively backfired and they've been forced to reevaluate. Just a thought.

I'm not complaining though. If they've finally realized they're going about changing too much too quickly then I'm all for it.

Edited April 6, 20233 yr by Amputechture

5 hours ago, Jezz said:

The appointment of Frank only leaves me more uncertain about where this club is going under this ownership.

I personally like to see them having the patience to search for a candidate and not appointing in a 5 years deal some random coach

8 hours ago, Jezz said:

The appointment of Frank only leaves me more uncertain about where this club is going under this ownership.

I'm about as confused as Crespo looks in your profile picture.

I'm really struggling to understand what is going on these days. If somebody came from the future and told us at the end of last season that we would spend upto £600m, sit 11th in the table, sack Tuchel and bring in Potter and then sack Potter and return to Lampard who was just sacked by Everton, nobody would believe it.

This past year has been a complete mess and I do worry about where we are going. With Lampard's return, I am almost stunned and struggling to find the right words. I don't know if I do have the words to describe what is going on anymore, because I haven't got a clue. It's not just us fans, everybody that is watching football seems to be confused. It's just been complete chaos for too long and I don't see how this can go on much longer without seriously hurting the club in the long run. 

Edited April 6, 20233 yr by Scott Harris

3 hours ago, Amputechture said:

Maybe that's exactly what they wanted but it's massively backfired and they've been forced to reevaluate. Just a thought.

I'm not complaining though. If they've finally realized they're going about changing too much too quickly then I'm all for it.

I'm not convinced, why did they get James new contract done so quick? Why are they trying to renew Kante? Why has JT been allowed to knock around the place all season? Why haven't they changed Emma Hayes?

Despite us still winning cups a lot of things did need to change from the later parts of the Roman era, how long has the average fan been calling for more 'footballing people' in the board? And out of the players that have gone since last summer how many wouldn't have most fans had on their out lists anyway? The one probable exception (Rudi) was on Marina not Clearlake.

Edited April 6, 20233 yr by Argo

4 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

I'm about as confused as Crespo looks in your profile picture.

I'm really struggling to understand what is going on these days. If somebody came from the future and told us at the end of last season that we would spend upto £600m, sit 11th in the table, sack Tuchel and bring in Potter and then sack Potter and return to Lampard who was just sacked by Everton, nobody would believe it.

This past year has been a complete mess and I do worry about where we are going. With Lampard's return, I am almost stunned and struggling to find the right words. I don't know if I do have the words to describe what is going on anymore, because I haven't got a clue. It's not just us fans, everybody that is watching football seems to be consfused. It's just been complete chaos for too long and I don't see how this can go on much longer without seriously hurting the club in the long run. 

We sacked a manager who didn't gel with the owners

We hired a manager who was very in fashion and was a good gel with the owners

We sacked that manager as he oversaw a historically bad performance in his time (I believe also triggered by Nagelsmann becoming available)

We have decided against appointing a new manager immediately so they can start in pre season fresh.

We decided to appoint a caretaker and picked a man who has managed us before, is popular with the fans, and is available. 

Potter appointment was a clear mistake. It's been fixed, in what I think was the right amount of time. 

I really don't know what on earth is concerning anyone, pundits or yourself. It's very straight forward. Did you want Potter sacked? Did you want Bruno to manage the club for the rest of the season? What is the alternative decision you wish the club would have done?

 

23 minutes ago, Argo said:

I'm not convinced, why did they get James new contract done so quick? Why are they trying to renew Kante? Why has JT been allowed to knock around the place all season? Why haven't they changed Emma Hayes?

Despite us still winning cups a lot of things did need to change from the later parts of the Roman era, how long has the average fan been calling for more 'footballing people' in the board? And out of the players that have gone since last summer how many wouldn't have most fans had on their out lists anyway? The one probable exception (Rudi) was on Marina not Clearlake.

Was referring more to coaching staff rather than player contracts. Cech for example was let go at a time the club could have really used his presence. And while Emma Hayes has been brilliant, her being at Chelsea doesn't really affect what goes on in the men's team. Not disputing things needed to change, just that it could've and should've been done in a less chaotic manner IMO.

Here's hoping having Super Frank back gives the club the lift it sorely needs.

12 hours ago, bisright1 said:

We sacked a manager who didn't gel with the owners

We hired a manager who was very in fashion and was a good gel with the owners

We sacked that manager as he oversaw a historically bad performance in his time (I believe also triggered by Nagelsmann becoming available)

We have decided against appointing a new manager immediately so they can start in pre season fresh.

We decided to appoint a caretaker and picked a man who has managed us before, is popular with the fans, and is available. 

Potter appointment was a clear mistake. It's been fixed, in what I think was the right amount of time. 

I really don't know what on earth is concerning anyone, pundits or yourself. It's very straight forward. Did you want Potter sacked? Did you want Bruno to manage the club for the rest of the season? What is the alternative decision you wish the club would have done?

 

I can see why many are confused when you look at how it's all panned out.

Lampard being hired was a logical decision, but it's only logical because we've made it so, as there are no other alternatives right now who will join as an interim. We should've sacked Potter ages ago, even better he shouldn't have been hired in the first place. Hiring a manager because it's "in fashion" is laughable, I don't even know what that means, but I can only assume it's that we hired a media hype job who was far from capable at the job. 

So yes it is a logical decision, for all the wrong reasons. I think what Scott and myself would argue is, it's not that we wanted Potter sacked, we didn't want him in the first place and it was a complete waste of 7 months. I can only hope the owners hire someone suitable next season, but I wouldn't be shocked if they didn't going by their recent track record. 

8 minutes ago, Victor90 said:

I can see why many are confused when you look at how it's all panned out.

Lampard being hired was a logical decision, but it's only logical because we've made it so, as there are no other alternatives right now who will join as an interim. We should've sacked Potter ages ago, even better he shouldn't have been hired in the first place. Hiring a manager because it's "in fashion" is laughable, I don't even know what that means, but I can only assume it's that we hired a media hype job who was far from capable at the job. 

So yes it is a logical decision, for all the wrong reasons. I think what Scott and myself would argue is, it's not that we wanted Potter sacked, we didn't want him in the first place and it was a complete waste of 7 months. I can only hope the owners hire someone suitable next season, but I wouldn't be shocked if they didn't going by their recent track record. 

Yes I agree it was a mistake. It's a mistake I would have made as well. And it was a mistake made by owners who have no experience in running a football club. 

Some people think Potter should have been sacked ages ago, some pundits act like we are fools for sacking him now. I can't agree that there was one right answer for when he should have gone. I believe we sacked him because Nagelsmann was available and every rumour we read now is just spin to pretend we haven't already made our mind up on who is next. 

In short, sacking Potter was 7 months ago. We have football people effectively making decisions now. Let's look forward not back. 

And as to whether the person appoint is right, it's not an exact science. Nagelsmann could be great or sh*t, same with Enrique. Let's just back who we hire. 

2 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Yes I agree it was a mistake. It's a mistake I would have made as well. And it was a mistake made by owners who have no experience in running a football club. 

Some people think Potter should have been sacked ages ago, some pundits act like we are fools for sacking him now. I can't agree that there was one right answer for when he should have gone. I believe we sacked him because Nagelsmann was available and every rumour we read now is just spin to pretend we haven't already made our mind up on who is next. 

In short, sacking Potter was 7 months ago. We have football people effectively making decisions now. Let's look forward not back. 

And as to whether the person appoint is right, it's not an exact science. Nagelsmann could be great or sh*t, same with Enrique. Let's just back who we hire. 

That might be the case, but if we did sack him for Nagelsmann, why didn't we get him? Surely we would've gone all out and given him a permanent contract? I don't know I think the board just said enough is enough. 

I'm fine with Lampard for the rest of the season, a bit conflicted but at the same time I think it could be a good decision given we've got so much attacking talent in the team.

One thing I don't subscribe to though is the theory that we should back whoever we hire, none of the of supporters who say that backed Rafa. And people will not back a manager who they don't like, and that for me is fine. Obviously, we want them to do well for the sake of the club, the club comes first. But if I don't rate a manager, as I didn't rate Potter, then I'm not backing him as I believe I would be doing more harm than good. 

I'm actually still rooting for Zidane to come, but I don't think that will happen we've heard no rumours about it. The likely case is Nagelsmann, and I'm okay with that, I'm willing to back him and see how it goes although I think we're all a bit iffy on that appointment given his recent Bayern spell. But at the same time, Tuchel wasn't doing well with PSG before he came here, and look how that turned out. 

3 minutes ago, Victor90 said:

That might be the case, but if we did sack him for Nagelsmann, why didn't we get him? Surely we would've gone all out and given him a permanent contract? I don't know I think the board just said enough is enough. 

I'm fine with Lampard for the rest of the season, a bit conflicted but at the same time I think it could be a good decision given we've got so much attacking talent in the team.

One thing I don't subscribe to though is the theory that we should back whoever we hire, none of the of supporters who say that backed Rafa. And people will not back a manager who they don't like, and that for me is fine. Obviously, we want them to do well for the sake of the club, the club comes first. But if I don't rate a manager, as I didn't rate Potter, then I'm not backing him as I believe I would be doing more harm than good. 

I'm actually still rooting for Zidane to come, but I don't think that will happen we've heard no rumours about it. The likely case is Nagelsmann, and I'm okay with that, I'm willing to back him and see how it goes although I think we're all a bit iffy on that appointment given his recent Bayern spell. But at the same time, Tuchel wasn't doing well with PSG before he came here, and look how that turned out. 

Well in this case we are going to get a manager that is pretty uncontroversial, so we should just back them. Football fans love to slag off owners for making decisions in hindsight, right now I can't disagree with Enrique or Nagelsmann and so I'm just going to accept it and back them. But if Nagelsmann comes in and fails, we are going to get scores of supporters slagging off the board for hiring him. Makes no sense to me.

Why don't we have Nagelsmann if that's (one of) the reasons we sacked Potter? My theory is that Nagelsmann doesn't want to start mid season and they don't want to make the decision seem rushed like it did with Potter

But who knows! 

Edited April 7, 20233 yr by bisright1

11 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Well in this case we are going to get a manager that is pretty uncontroversial, so we should just back them. Football fans love to slag off owners for making decisions in hindsight, right now I can't disagree with Enrique or Nagelsmann and so I'm just going to accept it and back them. But if Nagelsmann comes in and fails, we are going to get scores of supporters slagging off the board for hiring him. Makes no sense to me.

Why don't we have Nagelsmann if that's (one of) the reasons we sacked Potter? My theory is that Nagelsmann doesn't want to start mid season and they don't want to make the decision seem rushed like it did with Potter

But who knows! 

I agree there, I wouldn't bash the board whatsoever for Nagelsmann even if it doesn't work out. Because it is a logical appointment, and truth be told we haven't got a lot of options sadly. 

When it comes to hindsight, well I can speak for myself and my posts, I never wanted Potter in the first place or Tuchel sacked. So unfortunately, I was correct that Potter would be a bad appointment, although I didn't expect him to be that bad in fairness. So I think I can say my piece about it without being a hypocrite, however, I can acknowledge football fans are fickle and I'm sure plenty blamed the owners when they themselves wanted Potter. 

But you won't hear any moaning from me toward the board if Nagelsmann doesn't work out, which I'm sure will be a big change. 

as always, hope I’m wrong. 

The way I increasingly see things:

These owners have got themselves into a blunder doom-loop whereby each error can only be undone with another error.
 

They are making far more mistakes than the previous owner, but with far less margin for error (btw in case anyone gets the wrong end of the stick - though I think Roman was a v able and shrewd operator, I’m not one of those who think it was unfair to sanction him, given his complicity in an abhorrent regime.)
 

Anyway, to make this a successful venture, which first requires getting out of this mess, these new owners are going to need luck. 

1 hour ago, Victor90 said:

That might be the case, but if we did sack him for Nagelsmann, why didn't we get him? Surely we would've gone all out and given him a permanent contract? I don't know I think the board just said enough is enough. 

I imagine/hope the case is they didn't want to come into this situation.

I know the argument is they'll have the last 2 months to access the squad but looking at our fixtures there's a very big chance they will have a huge baptism of fire which will lead to them losing the feel good factor/hope a pre season appointment would bring and have question marks hanging over their head instead.

Look at Ten Hag at United for example, had he took over even mid season let alone at this point last season I don't think he would have done any better than Rangnick (their results and performances without Casemiro as good as confirm that) and instead of the buzz and feeling of hope his appointment brought the doubt and question marks due to the previous performances would be the dominant discussion.

It's easy to say that we'd put that to one side and say it was a no lose situation but that's easy to say before the event, for example look how quickly the vow of patience towards the 2019 'academy eight' was broken by many and that was when they were exceeding immediate expectations. Given even now there's a significant amount of people doubting both Nagelsmann and Enrique that feeling would only grow if they arrive to 4/5 defeats and a passive elimination vs Madrid (plausible worst case scenario) straight off the bat.

1 hour ago, Argo said:

I imagine/hope the case is they didn't want to come into this situation.

I know the argument is they'll have the last 2 months to access the squad but looking at our fixtures there's a very big chance they will have a huge baptism of fire which will lead to them losing the feel good factor/hope a pre season appointment would bring and have question marks hanging over their head instead.

Look at Ten Hag at United for example, had he took over even mid season let alone at this point last season I don't think he would have done any better than Rangnick (their results and performances without Casemiro as good as confirm that) and instead of the buzz and feeling of hope his appointment brought the doubt and question marks due to the previous performances would be the dominant discussion.

It's easy to say that we'd put that to one side and say it was a no lose situation but that's easy to say before the event, for example look how quickly the vow of patience towards the 2019 'academy eight' was broken by many and that was when they were exceeding immediate expectations. Given even now there's a significant amount of people doubting both Nagelsmann and Enrique that feeling would only grow if they arrive to 4/5 defeats and a passive elimination vs Madrid (plausible worst case scenario) straight off the bat.

Obviously all of us are speculating here, and I can see your point. But who knows how long Nagelsman will be free for? That could be risky. 

I'm not really big on Enrique, my first choice would be Zidane but I doubt it's even close to being in the pipeline. I haven't heard any reports about Zidane. 

I wouldn't say no to Pochettino either, I know that's very unpopular on here. I don't think Pochettino is as bad as some make him out to be, but having said that I would still pick Nagelsmann over Pochettino if I had the choice. 

5 hours ago, Dean said:

as always, hope I’m wrong. 

The way I increasingly see things:

These owners have got themselves into a blunder doom-loop whereby each error can only be undone with another error.
 

They are making far more mistakes than the previous owner, but with far less margin for error (btw in case anyone gets the wrong end of the stick - though I think Roman was a v able and shrewd operator, I’m not one of those who think it was unfair to sanction him, given his complicity in an abhorrent regime.)
 

Anyway, to make this a successful venture, which first requires getting out of this mess, these new owners are going to need luck. 

From day one I had zero confidence in these new owners, and that has not changed.

Would not surprise me at all if the do a Leeds or Derby too us.

5 hours ago, axman2526 said:

From day one I had zero confidence in these new owners, and that has not changed.

Would not surprise me at all if the do a Leeds or Derby too us.

What?

4 minutes ago, Mário César said:

What?

As in ruin us how Leeds owners, and Mel Morris at Derby, did their clubs.

5 hours ago, axman2526 said:

From day one I had zero confidence in these new owners, and that has not changed.

Would not surprise me at all if the do a Leeds or Derby too us.

1 hour ago, Munkworth said:

Boehly and Clearlake have been an utter disaster so far. This season is all but over, beyond having to watch the painful performances in our remaining games. Now we have to hope they learn from their mistakes and make the right appointment for our next long term manager. Unfortunately I have little confidence in them at this point.

I despise the LA Dodgers largely because of Boehly.

 

I hated the fact he bought the club, but Im trying so hard to stomach it. He's turned this club into a joke.