9 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

I got it from Boehly's interview on letting Tuchel go. 

He essentially stated their vision for the club was to have a collaborative network between the manager, the scouting department, and the director of football. Since Boehly was playing director of football this summer, I take it he was heavily involved with the team. Now I would agree to the point that maybe Tuchel just wanted to focus on coaching the team, but Boehly's comment that Tuchel didn't share the same vision and, more specifically, that 'there were a lot of walls to break down', gives me the impression the coaching staff were refusing to change. This in itself would of presented a massive headache moving forward as the director of football isn't a role this club is used to. You then take into consideration Tuchel's falling out at Mainz, Dortmund, and PSG, and things start to become unsurprising. 

Is that actually true though? I understand what Boehly is claiming, albeit with the perfection of hindsight, but he is free to give his opinion on what happened whereas Tuchel is not.

It is clear that Tuchel was heavily involved from the moment Granovskaia and Cech left:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2022/jun/22/todd-boehly-thomas-tuchel-guadiola-klopp-chelsea-granovskaia
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/chelsea-tuchel-abramovich-boehly-owner-27488253

It is also clear that Tuchel really, really didn't want to do anything other than coach the first team, especially having spent the last 6 month negotiating a divorce while being the club's ambassador on everything from private equity brokerage to geopolitics.

Interview from 2021: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/thomas-tuchel-ive-kept-it-simple-with-chelsea-i-just-coach-2h5ldvmgs
Interview from 2022: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11177251/Chelsea-head-international-scouting-Scott-McLachlan-departs-club-11-year-stint.html

Boehly is free to be revisionist and claim that Tuchel didn't share the same vision, but it's the verbal equivalent of "I know you are but what am I"? It is very clear that Tuchel, whether under Abramovich or Boehly/Clearlake, has never cared about back room dealings and wanted to entirely focus on coaching. That isn't a "wall that needs breaking down", just a different way of working. It sounds more and more like Boehly gets rid of anyone who doesn't agree with what he wants. It is a stark difference to Abramovich who was deserving of the opposite critcism, in that he really had little overarching vision for the club (until perhaps the final years) other than to win things.

"Taking into account" Tuchel's previous fallings out is adding 2 + 2 and contriving to get 5. None of those situations are remotely similar except Dortmund, where again there was an undercurrent of Tuchel being forced into being some sort of moral voice following the bombing incident. Tuchel wanted to take responsibility for nothing other than the things he is trained to do - ie. football. Tuchel did not want to involve himself in transfers, backroom staffing etc and be foisted responsbility for decisions he was forced to collaborate on. If it all went wrong, Tuchel knew he was always the most likely fall guy - as seen in his exit from PSG.

Boehly's cooperative model is nothing new, but we fans also need to understand that we are owned by a consortium. Boehly, Clearlake, Wyss, Goldstein, coaches, technical director, sporting director...at what point will too many cooks spoil the broth?

 

Quote

For as long as I can remember I don't recall this club having a director of football in the same essence on what Boehly wants (Edwards, Txiki, Monchi, etc). We've had Emenalo sure but I don't classify him as ever being effective, or offering the same level of involvement with the team and knowledge of football compared to those three. The foundation of City's success is the teamwork between Pep and Txiki. 

If we were to believe everything that comes out of the Boehly press machine, Todd Boehly alone re-invented football in May 2022 and Chelsea under Roman were a village basketcase with no business sense to speak of. We need to be very skeptical of Boehly's saviour complex and it should be challenged at every opportunity.

To say Emenalo was never effective in an era where Kevin de Bruyne and Mohammed Salah are among the best players in the EPL and Chelsea won a Champions League with academy players is illogical. We've had a drastic decline in our scouting/player recruitment since he left. The foundation of City's success is the trillion-dollar fund that backs them. They were successful before Guardiola and they will be after too, sporting director or not.

3 hours ago, loz said:

I see the Pulisic issue slightly differently from some.

Only slightly though.  Do I think he is good enough to play at the level Chelsea need him to? No I don't. I don't think he will ever be consistently good enough for a club with regular ambition for major trophies.

Do I think he deserves vitriol? No. Other than his slightly stupid recent book release I don't think he has a poor attitude. Ziyech for example is far more deserving of contempt than Pulisic. I never doubt Pulisic's commitment, effort or desire and that's the least you expect from a highly paid footballer. When you can't even offer that then you deserve the wrath of the ticket paying fans. Ziyech joins the likes of Bogarde and Lukaku in that regard.

Just because Ziyech has a different personality and playstyle it doesn't mean that he isn't committed, it's not really fair to compare him to Lukaku. Ziyech came to play in a 4-3-3 with a lot of freedom and with many touches with the ball, after all that was his sales pitch to begin with and yes he can pass the ball well but just can't get to have a run of matches in the starting lineup and as a result he's inconsistent, he simply didn't adapt well enough and the truth is that some players just can't.

We all have preferences as viewers too, I think that given how the squad has been that I preferred to see a player like Ziyech as he has in him that attitude and the kind of a decision-making to try a heroic ball very often, very often that failed to produce anything but it was refreshing to see it.

In comparison, Pulisic will try to pass by 3-4 players and he will fail very often at that, now I find that to be much more annoying but when all said and done it doesn't show to me more commitment, just a different player doing his own thing.

Both have failed to become key players for us, which is what they were bought for so both are flops, I mean yes Pulisic did score and assisted in the CL semi-finals so at least there's that but technically he was supposed to be the replacement for Hazard so with that in mind one can argue that he failed harder as he was projected to be the next big thing.

The reality is that it's rare to find a perfect player in both ability and personality, I remember Mourinho once said that if he had 11 Azpilicuetas, that with those 11 Daves he would win the CL. 

6 hours ago, Gol15 said:

Just because Ziyech has a different personality and playstyle it doesn't mean that he isn't committed,

Watching him not be committed means hes not committed, seeing him constantly pull out of challenges is disgraceful, he needs binning first chance we get.

13 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Is that actually true though? I understand what Boehly is claiming, albeit with the perfection of hindsight, but he is free to give his opinion on what happened whereas Tuchel is not.

It is clear that Tuchel was heavily involved from the moment Granovskaia and Cech left:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2022/jun/22/todd-boehly-thomas-tuchel-guadiola-klopp-chelsea-granovskaia
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/chelsea-tuchel-abramovich-boehly-owner-27488253

It is also clear that Tuchel really, really didn't want to do anything other than coach the first team, especially having spent the last 6 month negotiating a divorce while being the club's ambassador on everything from private equity brokerage to geopolitics.

Interview from 2021: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/thomas-tuchel-ive-kept-it-simple-with-chelsea-i-just-coach-2h5ldvmgs
Interview from 2022: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11177251/Chelsea-head-international-scouting-Scott-McLachlan-departs-club-11-year-stint.html

Boehly is free to be revisionist and claim that Tuchel didn't share the same vision, but it's the verbal equivalent of "I know you are but what am I"? It is very clear that Tuchel, whether under Abramovich or Boehly/Clearlake, has never cared about back room dealings and wanted to entirely focus on coaching. That isn't a "wall that needs breaking down", just a different way of working. It sounds more and more like Boehly gets rid of anyone who doesn't agree with what he wants. It is a stark difference to Abramovich who was deserving of the opposite critcism, in that he really had little overarching vision for the club (until perhaps the final years) other than to win things.

"Taking into account" Tuchel's previous fallings out is adding 2 + 2 and contriving to get 5. None of those situations are remotely similar except Dortmund, where again there was an undercurrent of Tuchel being forced into being some sort of moral voice following the bombing incident. Tuchel wanted to take responsibility for nothing other than the things he is trained to do - ie. football. Tuchel did not want to involve himself in transfers, backroom staffing etc and be foisted responsbility for decisions he was forced to collaborate on. If it all went wrong, Tuchel knew he was always the most likely fall guy - as seen in his exit from PSG.

Boehly's cooperative model is nothing new, but we fans also need to understand that we are owned by a consortium. Boehly, Clearlake, Wyss, Goldstein, coaches, technical director, sporting director...at what point will too many cooks spoil the broth? 

If we were to believe everything that comes out of the Boehly press machine, Todd Boehly alone re-invented football in May 2022 and Chelsea under Roman were a village basketcase with no business sense to speak of. We need to be very skeptical of Boehly's saviour complex and it should be challenged at every opportunity.

Can you define "Heavily Involved", because from what's been reported Tuchel hasn't been doing anything out of the ordinary a normal manager who has influence in the transfer market wouldn't do, IE a normal elite manager. Sure the team needed a complete rebuild, but you are behaving as if Tuchel was also making internal infrastructure decisions instead of merely improving the first team. 

From the links you provided, the only involvement Tuchel had with Boehly were recommendations to improve the first team. That's it. Matter of fact, at least two of your links state as much, and the 4th link you provided even has Tuchel saying he isn't involved in the search for a new scout so not sure why you posted that link. Boehly handled the negotiations, Boehly handled the sales,  Boehly handled the contracts, Boehly handled the infrastructure, Boehly handled the staff recruitment, etc, etc. 

From those reports, Tuchel enjoyed the simplicity of his role and little involvement Marina and Cech had. Maybe that's been the issue all these years? It is evident from all of this Tuchel had a gripe with Boehly becoming so involved in the day to day and was "annoyed with the additional meetings and persistent interaction", which I found strange because this tends to be a normal relationship between coach and sporting director. 

- He fell out of Mainz due to falling out with the president.

- He fell out with Dortmund by a prolonged fit and over time destroyed virtually every relationship he had with the players, staff, and sporting directors (this wasn't solely down to a bombing incident) 

- He fell out with PSG due to a disruptive relationship with the sporting director Leanardo. 

The most successful clubs in Europe have an structure in place where there is constant communication and a vision + identity which is shared within all levels of the organization. From the coach to the directors. Why is it all of a sudden a risk now that we are adapting this model? Because the "big bad American" is our owner?

 

14 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

To say Emenalo was never effective in an era where Kevin de Bruyne and Mohammed Salah are among the best players in the EPL and Chelsea won a Champions League with academy players is illogical. We've had a drastic decline in our scouting/player recruitment since he left. The foundation of City's success is the trillion-dollar fund that backs them. They were successful before Guardiola and they will be after too, sporting director or not.

I may have been a tad harsh with my wording but my point was Emenelo didn't really set an structure in place that breeds sustainability and cultivates a club identity. Perhaps the manager instability played a big role but Emenalo failed to deliver on two crucial occasions, 2011 and 2016, where the club drastically needed to improve with injection of young/better quality. 

Arnesen and de Visser have majority responsibility of our academy reaching the elite levels they've had this past decade and the players we now see in the first team. Emenalo did a great job sustaining it. 

 

 

 

18 hours ago, Gol15 said:

 

The reality is that it's rare to find a perfect player in both ability and personality, I remember Mourinho once said that if he had 11 Azpilicuetas, that with those 11 Daves he would win the CL. 

Great sound bite but typical Jose talking absolute bollocks again!

So far so good 👍🏿 all we want is for the players to perform to an attacking level which we know they can. A proper structure needs to be put in place and specific instructions which will allow the attackers to thrive. Graham is proving so far his Brighton side was not a fluke he can coach good football, long may it continue. 

You look at this squad and there should be a good balance of a strong attack and defence Thiago, Koulibaly and James are world class defenders and Chilwell once he regains form is pushing that bracket. Aubameyang and Sterling are world class attackers and Mount has the potential to reach that level too. As does Kai who needs to add consistency to his game. 

There is a fine blend of talent, experience and youth in the squad. All we need now is to add some more steel to the midfield. I suspect Rice arrives in the summer. I hope Kante stays and tbh Jorginho too with reduced mins spread out across the midfield and another world class forward in Nkunku arriving and a creative mid who can unlock stubborn defences. 

Edited October 11, 20223 yr by LongtimerLurker

23 minutes ago, LongtimerLurker said:

There is a fine blend of talent, experience and youth in the squad. All we need now is to add some more steel to the midfield. I suspect Rice arrives in the summer. I hope Kante stays and tbh Jorginho too with reduced mins spread out across the midfield and another world class forward in Nkunku arriving and a creative mid who can unlock stubborn defences. 

Reports say Kante would like to stay but with a longer extended contract while Jorginho is looking to leave once his contract expires.

Potter might not want Rice at all, we shall see who will be their replacement but I believe that Potter will find the right person.

For me the biggest difference between Potball and Tuchfooty is we are less rigid. TT insisted we need the ball to defend. Potter is okay with sitting back. That has created us much more spaces to attack, especially against Milan over two legs. We had chances to score 10 over both legs.

Very happy with the performances under GP so far. Solid and professional. It seems Potter's plan at the moment is to unlock the attackers and teach the team press very high up the pitch. Small steps, but so far so good.

But still... It is the exact same bounce we got right after Tuchel came here and we rode that wave not for a very long time. 

This has been a big concern, to be more consistent in the technical department and have the squad not getting complacent that easy.

But maybe with the new ownership, Potter's staff and the plethora of all the technical and sporting directors rumoured to arrive soon we will improve on those aspects.

Same formation, different results - people who were calling for a change in formation now realise it was the framework of that formation that was failing.

We can of course switch to a back 4, but I like potters approach, and I was for Tuchel to stay.

19 minutes ago, El regreso said:

Same formation, different results - people who were calling for a change in formation now realise it was the framework of that formation that was failing.

We can of course switch to a back 4, but I like potters approach, and I was for Tuchel to stay.

I think people were asking for a different formation because we weren't performing under Tuchel. Normally i am against changing managers but no way would Tuchel have had these results if we continued with him. Potter has done brilliantly thus far, and long it may continue. 

1 hour ago, El regreso said:

Same formation, different results - people who were calling for a change in formation now realise it was the framework of that formation that was failing.

We can of course switch to a back 4, but I like potters approach, and I was for Tuchel to stay.

You understand people werent calling for just a change in formation, it was for Tuchel to actually attempt to use the right players in a formation that suits them, which is exactly what Potter has done in the games he has managed.

2 minutes ago, dkw said:

You understand people werent calling for just a change in formation, it was for Tuchel to actually attempt to use the right players in a formation that suits them, which is exactly what Potter has done in the games he has managed.

I lurked for a while before signing up and Tuchel got plenty of criticism for both formation and also some of the dispositions that Potter have made. For example with wingers at wingback that was some great sin according to many when he did it.

6 minutes ago, Droy said:

I lurked for a while before signing up and Tuchel got plenty of criticism for both formation and also some of the dispositions that Potter have made. For example with wingers at wingback that was some great sin according to many when he did it.

How he was using the wingers at wing back compared to how Potter does is night and day.

2 minutes ago, dkw said:

How he was using the wingers at wing back compared to how Potter does is night and day.

Pretty similar in my opinion but we can disagree on that.

Potter is doing well though so thats good. But we are in the honeymoon period and I doubt supporters will be so keen to look through their fingers about a back five with two DM's and wingers at wingback when the first poor games and losses come around.
 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Droy said:

Pretty similar in my opinion but we can disagree on that.

We defintely do.

 

2 minutes ago, Droy said:

Pretty similar in my opinion but we can disagree on that.

Potter is doing well though so thats good. But we are in the honeymoon period and I doubt supporters will be so keen to look through their fingers about a back five with two DM's and wingers at wingback when the first poor games and losses come around.

Thats not how we set up under Potter.

1 minute ago, dkw said:

Thats not how we set up under Potter.

He's switched it up a bit but yesterday it certainly was. Or did you see it some other way?

3 hours ago, evissy said:

For me the biggest difference between Potball and Tuchfooty is we are less rigid. TT insisted we need the ball to defend. Potter is okay with sitting back. That has created us much more spaces to attack, especially against Milan over two legs. We had chances to score 10 over both legs.

I'm not okay with that. Just a preference, but we had manager after manager for a while playing pragmatic football and giving the opposition half the pitch in defense. I much preferred the full engagement of Tuchelball. I couldn't care less about creating more space against a weak Milan. Show me that we can go to Madrid and Barca and be utterly dominant. I'm not sure if that is outside of the realm of expectation now, but I guess we'll see.

5 minutes ago, Droy said:

He's switched it up a bit but yesterday it certainly was. Or did you see it some other way?

Theres more to a formation than where players sand at kick off. And we havent played 5 at the back in all potters games, in fact we have played several different set ups, he doesnt have one that he sticks rigidly to and fits players in, like Tuchel did.

1 minute ago, dkw said:

Theres more to a formation than where players sand at kick off. And we havent played 5 at the back in all potters games, in fact we have played several different set ups, he doesnt have one that he sticks rigidly to and fits players in, like Tuchel did.

I don't disagree with that.

Hopefully he keeps up the good work. Certainly got my full support.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Droy said:

He's switched it up a bit but yesterday it certainly was. Or did you see it some other way?

Chilwell and James were wing backs yesterday no? 
 

Sterling and Mount were both playing just off of Auba in more central roles, and without the ball they were tucking back into midfield to help out, I didn't see it as wingers playing as wing backs though. 

1 hour ago, venom2011 said:

I'm not okay with that. Just a preference, but we had manager after manager for a while playing pragmatic football and giving the opposition half the pitch in defense. I much preferred the full engagement of Tuchelball. I couldn't care less about creating more space against a weak Milan. Show me that we can go to Madrid and Barca and be utterly dominant. I'm not sure if that is outside of the realm of expectation now, but I guess we'll see.

My worry as well, but we can only hope Brighton's performances against United and Liverpool give some indication Potter isn't afraid to take the initiative in big matches. 

1 hour ago, venom2011 said:

I'm not okay with that. Just a preference, but we had manager after manager for a while playing pragmatic football and giving the opposition half the pitch in defense. I much preferred the full engagement of Tuchelball. I couldn't care less about creating more space against a weak Milan. Show me that we can go to Madrid and Barca and be utterly dominant. I'm not sure if that is outside of the realm of expectation now, but I guess we'll see.

Frank wanted to attack more straightforward (end-to-end action) which led us to concede tons of goals. He didn't want us to defend with the ball as did his predecessor Sarri. 

Tuchel came in and fixed the defense by making us play 3 at back and defend with the ball. That stifled us in the attack.

Now Potter is in and as you can imagine he is changing again something to fix the problem immediately. So far it has worked. 

End of the day, midfield has been the issue since the Conte era. 

Needs complete surgery next year. 

I am enjoying our football so far under Potter, that is a big improvement.

We will see if the new owners do indeed do things differently or if we are talking about a new manager bounce again in 18 months 

Edited October 12, 20223 yr by axman2526