Jump to content


coco

Sarri - In or Out?


Sarri - In or Out?  

183 members have voted

  1. 1. Sarri - In or Out?

    • In
      120
    • Out
      63


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Boston Blue said:

Unless some other team playing in the league gets at least one more point than you.

Literally just arguing against the point Conte got lucky because the other teams were sh*t. 

We won 30 games. That's usually good enough to win the league regardless of other teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Literally just arguing against the point Conte got lucky because the other teams were sh*t. 

We won 30 games. That's usually good enough to win the league regardless of other teams. 

What is "usual" these days?  Nothing.

The Premier League is tough.  Every week.  Every game, you are just looking to score one more goal than the ream you're playing.  And every season, you're looking to finish with at least one more point than everyone else.  You can never predict what other teams are going to do.  You worry about yourself.  You try to win every match, and at the end of the season, you see where you are.  

I've never been a fan of thinking you need 40 points to avoid relegation, or you need 90 points to win a title.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Strider6003 said:

I think the European matches are a big factor through team fatigue and less preparation time for the manager against the next opposition.

I don't think Spurs are a good comparison as they have won nothing as people here say, 'serial bottlers.'

I think Conte remains as an enigma, he might have succeeded again had we got Alex Sandro and another decent striker, we will never know.

I would like to see him at another EPL club to see how good he might be, for me the jury is still out.

He deserves respect though for the League title.

 

While it's true what you're saying, that fatigue and more matches do come into play and preparation time as well...Fact is that if our team had finished at 4th place before Conte came, it would have been even easier for him to make a winning team, or if you really want a counter argument, had we finished 4th and not 10th Conte wouldn't have ever been our manager. I'm really convinced that the sentence:
"Chelsea won the title because they didn't play in Europe" was first said by either a Spuds fan or Manure fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gol15 said:

The weakest argument of all is probably the fact that we didn't play European football during Conte's first season.
Spuds used to never play in Europe and that didn't really help them to win the title now didn't it? We used to win league titles while playing in Europe and without playing in Europe that's not an argument, Conte took over a lost squad and adapted his tactics to the strenghts of the players he had, if that was done by anyone else that man would be the special-genius-amazing-master of the game but I feel sad to see other Chelsea fans buying the trashtalk from the regular haters that invented that excuse...

Conte came to us as a winner and left as a winner, his second season was bad but he never really got the full support from the board, not even after he won the league because the board thought that the squad by winning the league is obviously good enough...Even before the second season started Pedro got injured then Hazard was injured as well for example, then one of the first games we lost due to some stupid Cahill or was it David Luiz red card that was super exaggerated by the ref at the time ( don't even remember who we played ), point is a lot of things just went wrong.

Spurs is a bad example. Although conte inherited a squad with problems, there was still the core of a league winning team in their prime, and we added Kante. What sort of squad did spurs have when they we regularly not in Europe? 

Conte did a fantastic job, but I dont think theres any question his job was made easier being able to have more training sessions with the team. Especially for a coach like conte who is known for believing heavily in repetition to install tactics into his sides. He used to time well, and we were as well drilled as we were under Mourinho 05/06. 

I dont think the opposition being poor or in transition is real excuse, Guardiola and Mourinho have won plenty of league titles in their 1st seasons at a club, both spent significantly more than us going into that season aswell. 

I really liked conte, loved his passion, hated 3 at the back though, but it worked a treat, and if we had given him top quality players to work with, he would probably still be here now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, big blue said:

Conte did a fantastic job, but I dont think theres any question his job was made easier being able to have more training sessions with the team. Especially for a coach like conte who is known for believing heavily in repetition to install tactics into his sides. He used to time well, and we were as well drilled as we were under Mourinho 05/06. 

I dont think the opposition being poor or in transition is real excuse, Guardiola and Mourinho have won plenty of league titles in their 1st seasons at a club, both spent significantly more than us going into that season aswell. 

I really liked conte, loved his passion, hated 3 at the back though, but it worked a treat, and if we had given him top quality players to work with, he would probably still be here now.

 

Good point about the extra training sessions.

Of course in the second season in Europe, besides the Costa situation it broke down with the players and Cahill going to Conte asking for reduced training while they had so many matches coming thick and fast.

I was really disappointed we did not get into at least the top 4 and felt the players were not fighting for Conte the relationship had broken down and won the final perhaps instead of him rather than due to his guidance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, big blue said:

Spurs is a bad example. Although conte inherited a squad with problems, there was still the core of a league winning team in their prime, and we added Kante. What sort of squad did spurs have when they we regularly not in Europe? 

 

 

True it's a bad example but tell me did anyone ever create a popular opinion that Leicester City only won the league because they didn't play in Europe? I think that stuff is only there to undermine Chelsea as a club, that's my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gol15 said:

True it's a bad example but tell me did anyone ever create a popular opinion that Leicester City only won the league because they didn't play in Europe? I think that stuff is only there to undermine Chelsea as a club, that's my opinion.

I'm sure that was a factor in Leicester winning the league too and thought about mentioning though we bought Kante the following season so thought it was not a fair comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Strider6003 said:

I'm sure that was a factor in Leicester winning the league too and thought about mentioning though we bought Kante the following season so thought it was not a fair comparison.

If that was such a big factor we would have many more teams like Leicester poping out and getting league titles but that's not the case. Buying Kante was a factor that last time when we won the title no question about it, but that's a different discussion.

We have been winning the league in the past 10 years multiple times, and so did just a few other teams and it has very little to do with playing in Europe or not, winning makes you play in Europe, being the best team makes you play in Europe so it's about having quality, even Pep said that winning the league is harder than winning in Europe and his argument is that you play more matches and need to be good for a longer period of time, when Conte won the league he didn't win it because he wasn't playing in Europe, he won it because he made the best team that season and made the 3-4-3 and 3-5-2 tactic that nobody knew how to play against and that other teams tried to copy. 

Edited by Gol15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gol15 said:

If that was such a big factor we would have many more teams like Leicester poping out and getting league titles but that's not the case. Buying Kante was a factor that last time we won the title no question about it, but that's a different discussion.

We have been winning the league in the past 10 years multiple times, and so did just a few other teams and it has very little to do with playing in Europe or not, winning makes you play in Europe, being the best team makes you play in Europe so it's about having quality, even Pep said that winning the league is harder than winning in Europe and his argument is that you play more matches and need to be good for a longer period of time, when Conte won the league he didn't win it because he wasn't playing in Europe, he won it because he made the best team that season and made the 3-4-3 and 3-5-2 tactic that nobody knew how to play against and that other teams tried to copy. 

I think it is a little more than that come January when you have League, League Cup, FA Cup and Europe with little recovery time it takes it toll normally one avenue closes. When teams go far in the competitions attrition sets in.  City have probably been the best equipped team this season going for 4 trophies. They might make three yet I don't think many of us can compete with their squad strength of replacements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Strider6003 said:

I think it is a little more than that come January when you have League, League Cup, FA Cup and Europe with little recovery time it takes it toll normally one avenue closes. When teams go far in the competitions attrition sets in.  City have probably been the best equipped team this season going for 4 trophies. They might make three yet I don't think many of us can compete with their squad strength of replacements.

True, but Conte warned of this in the summer begging for additions to face the additional CL games.  The board did not take his request seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Strider6003 said:

I think it is a little more than that come January when you have League, League Cup, FA Cup and Europe with little recovery time it takes it toll normally one avenue closes. When teams go far in the competitions attrition sets in.  City have probably been the best equipped team this season going for 4 trophies. They might make three yet I don't think many of us can compete with their squad strength of replacements.

True, but Conte warned of this in the summer begging for additions to face the additional CL games.  The board did not take his request seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Nibs said:

So it was Conte's first cup win. How about the league? How about how well he did with a very average Italy side?

You're surely NOT contesting that Conte is a superior manager to Sarri? If you are I'd be curious to know what you're basing it on.

"How about the league?"

Manuel Pellegrini won the league with Manchester City, doesn't make him even remotely as good a manager as Jurgen Klopp or Mauricio Pochettino who haven't won it (in England).

"How about how well he did with a very average Italy side?"

This is what I don't think many people understand. On the international level, most managers are genuinely shocking. Didier Deschamps is poor, look at what happened to Scolari when he joined Chelsea with a squad that narrowly lost the CL final. Roberto Martinez has been very successful with Belgium, and yet he failed dramatically at Everton. Louis Van Gaal hugely overperformed with that Netherlands team but when he went to United his limitations as a manager showed. So how come all of these managers succeed at international level compared to club level. Therefore, it was easy for Conte to just order his team to sit back and play on the counter-attack. Also, you hear "quarter finals of the Euros" and assume he did well, but in reality. He beat Belgium 2-0 in his first game, but Belgium significantly underperformed at the Euros and WC 2014 and looked nowhere near as good as they do now. They lost to Wales 3-1, managed by Chris Coleman who failed in the Championship. Beat Sweden, hardly impressive. Lost to Ireland. Beat Spain but Spain was awful at both WC 2014 and the Euros, didn't even top their group. And against Germany they lost on penalties, although holding them out was quite impressive, in the entire campaign he had what? 2 impressive results if that? How can that even be remotely compared to a season with multiple impressive results? Because to point out the hypocrisy, "he didn't win the World Cup so it wasn't impressive" (a play on the Sarri finishing second argument.

Maurizio Sarri is a superior manager than Antonio Conte and always will be, his success at Napoli was seen as impossible with the players he had available and their recent history. Tell me, how many managers could have lost their striker who scored the record amount in Serie A, their replacement get injured and only manage 5 goals in 17 games, and STILL improve? If you want to make the argument that Conte has been more successful at Chelsea than Sarri, I'd agree. But Conte's "1 Premier League and 1 FA Cup in 2 seasons" is quite misleading although factually accurate. In reality there were a lot of circumstances that made Conte's success in his first season possible that weren't in anyway related to his managerial ability. And as we know his second season was awful, I do thank him for the memories in the first season though, it's a shame his transfer business in the summer was very poor.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Desailly123 bro Pellegrini has won more - look at the trophies he has won & compair that to Poch & Kloop - they wish they could get some silverware like him

As a manager[edit]

170px-Pellegrini_cropped.JPG
 
Pellegrini with the Premier League trophy on Manchester City's victory parade, May 2014

Universidad Católica

LDU Quito

San Lorenzo

River Plate

Villarreal

Manchester City

 

Edited by robdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conte is superior to Sarri in every way when it comes to being a winner and winning titles. He took a Juventus who were finishing 7th and made them into serial title winners. That doesn't matter now though we have Sarri as our manager and fully back him up if he can get us into champions league, integrate the youth and create an attractive attacking football. There will be alot of ups and downs ofcourse but when you have players such as Hazard and Luiz praising his methods i dont see anyone else available at the moment who could do better than Sarri. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
2 minutes ago, robdog said:

@Desailly123 bro Pellegrini has won more - look at the trophies he has won & come that to Poch & Kloop - they wish they could get some silverware like him

As a manager[edit]

170px-Pellegrini_cropped.JPG
 
Pellegrini with the Premier League trophy on Manchester City's victory parade, May 2014

Universidad Católica

LDU Quito

San Lorenzo

River Plate

Villarreal

Manchester City

 

Klopp's is better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 
 
 
2 minutes ago, robdog said:

@Desailly123 bro Pellegrini has won more - look at the trophies he has won & come that to Poch & Kloop - they wish they could get some silverware like him

As a manager[edit]

170px-Pellegrini_cropped.JPG
 
Pellegrini with the Premier League trophy on Manchester City's victory parade, May 2014

Universidad Católica

LDU Quito

San Lorenzo

River Plate

Villarreal

Manchester City

 

Klopp's is better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, robdog said:

tenor.gif?itemid=4486668

Pellegrini won a couple trophies in South America. 

He then went to Villarreal and won the UEFA Intertoto Cup (a cup that excluded all clubs who participated in the Champions League/Europa League.

He then won the Premier League and 2 League Cups. 

Impressive trophies: 1

Semi-impressive trophies: 2

Klopp on the meanwhile:

Took Dortmund from 13th to Bundesliga winners in 3 seasons.

Won back-to-back Bundesligas despite playing in the league that was literally a monopoly in Bayern's favour

Did it with extremely limited funding.

Impressive trophies: 2 (Bundesliga 10/11 and Bundesliga 11/12)

Semi-Impressive trophies: 1 (DFB-Pokal)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Desailly123 said:

Pellegrini won a couple trophies in South America. 

He then went to Villarreal and won the UEFA Intertoto Cup (a cup that excluded all clubs who participated in the Champions League/Europa League.

He then won the Premier League and 2 League Cups. 

Impressive trophies: 1

Semi-impressive trophies: 2

Klopp on the meanwhile:

Took Dortmund from 13th to Bundesliga winners in 3 seasons.

Won back-to-back Bundesligas despite playing in the league that was literally a monopoly in Bayern's favour

Did it with extremely limited funding.

Impressive trophies: 2 (Bundesliga 10/11 and Bundesliga 11/12)

Semi-Impressive trophies: 1 (DFB-Pokal)

still more league titles, but that is ok...You can look like VvD

D5gvD7wXsAAhTGD.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Gentian said:

Conte is superior to Sarri in every way when it comes to being a winner and winning titles. He took a Juventus who were finishing 7th and made them into serial title winners. That doesn't matter now though we have Sarri as our manager and fully back him up if he can get us into champions league, integrate the youth and create an attractive attacking football. There will be alot of ups and downs ofcourse but when you have players such as Hazard and Luiz praising his methods i dont see anyone else available at the moment who could do better than Sarri. 

He's only a winner because he's had 5 seasons at world class clubs compared to Conte's one. Juventus is dominant in that league and I wouldn't call him a winner because he won Serie A, the biggest monopoly in world football for the past few years. Albeit his first season in Serie A was impressive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Gentian said:

Conte is superior to Sarri in every way when it comes to being a winner and winning titles. He took a Juventus who were finishing 7th and made them into serial title winners. That doesn't matter now though we have Sarri as our manager and fully back him up if he can get us into champions league, integrate the youth and create an attractive attacking football. There will be alot of ups and downs ofcourse but when you have players such as Hazard and Luiz praising his methods i dont see anyone else available at the moment who could do better than Sarri. 

They are not exactly going to say anything else though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ernie_blue said:

They are not exactly going to say anything else though

They most definitely would, like Rudiger did earlier in the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, robdog said:

still more league titles, but that is ok...You can look like VvD

D5gvD7wXsAAhTGD.jpg

Ah it's nice to know you think Pellegrini is better than Klopp because he's won more trophies. But it's also nice to know you think Guus Hiddink is better than Conte 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ernie_blue said:

Mr defender of Sarri at all costs :face_palm:

Most of the reports actually claim the contrary to what you're saying, and the "well he must be lying because we don't like Sarri so the players must not like him" is pure speculation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...