6 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

Football and tactics wise he has what the board want, but I'm very concerned about his lack of experience in a top league. It's all well and good having the tactics but being able to deal with the pressure of a team like Chelsea is a completely different ball game. It's a massive risk, this is a genuine make or break decision for the sporting directors, if this appointment fails then they HAVE to go.

A fair few said the same if Poch did not last.

Fan base may think it, but only matters what Egbahli thinks.

1 hour ago, timetowaste said:

Football and tactics wise he has what the board want, but I'm very concerned about his lack of experience in a top league. It's all well and good having the tactics but being able to deal with the pressure of a team like Chelsea is a completely different ball game. It's a massive risk, this is a genuine make or break decision for the sporting directors, if this appointment fails then they HAVE to go.

In my mind, they’ve already failed.

Pochettino was the make or break appointment. They didn’t see fit to see it through.

The fact so many rival fans wanted him to stay makes me think we've made the right call.

Reminds me of how annoyed I was when Wenger left Arsenal.

6 hours ago, Drogba1 said:

Honestly the list of names being suggested makes De Zerbi look like the safest option

 

The likes of Maresca and McKenna are completely unproven at top flight level

Compared to Arteta & Alonso when they got their first league roles they are very experienced. I think the board’s idea is to get a young manager like the aforementioned 2 and watch the young players grow with his ideas. Fabregas might not be a bad shout in this regard.

So what is the expectation on a young manager who’s never coached at the highest level? Get us into a Champions League place in his first season? Because anything below sixth is going to be seen as a failure now. 

On 21/05/2024 at 17:40, dR3 said:

The teams around us were also dreadful. Us being the 4th best team after the turn of the year doesn’t mean that were setting the world on fire. We were struggling a lot in most games and weren’t looking like a coached team. 
 

I acknowledge that injuries played a huge part in our downfall, but I still would’ve liked to see some structure and an actual, defined, and visible style of play.
 

The last 5 wins were great though. Also can’t forget the win against the Utd scum, probably my favourite day of the season. 

Who needs to set the world on fire? Nearly 20 years ago JM managed a team that won 2 titles without doing that, a lot of the wins were ground out rather than being prime examples of the beautiful game. 

5 hours ago, JM7 said:

𝐏𝐞𝐫 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐭𝐡𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜’𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭: 

- Training sessions were ‘tactically primitive’. 

- Poch refused to accept that his training methods contributed to injuries. 

- Jesus Perez overworked players with excessive amounts of high-intensity running. 

- Poch had a tendency to bring recovering players back into full training rather than adapted training too quickly resulted in re-injuries. 

- Poch disliked using Enzo and Caicedo together and saw Gallagher as their superior. 

- He selected Levi Colwill at LB to ‘bolster the defence’. 

- Club’s recruitment team brought Cole Palmer and Poch wasn’t too convinced. 

- Tried to sign ex-Spurs players to join the club for ‘experience’. 

- Dismissed the need for hiring the best set-piece coach in England despite Chelsea’s lackluster record.

Removing Poch was the RIGHT decision. 

Question is if the club will make the RIGHT decision on his replacement. 
 

The above doesn’t paint Poch in a good Light. 

This certainly corresponds with what we were seeing in the pitch.

We saw a lack of tactical nous, a general lack of ability to change systems before or during games, a lack of ability to set up a defence to coach set pieces, and an excessive number of long term injuries. 

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by nonotnowjim

34 minutes ago, ducavis said:

Compared to Arteta & Alonso when they got their first league roles they are very experienced. I think the board’s idea is to get a young manager like the aforementioned 2 and watch the young players grow with his ideas. Fabregas might not be a bad shout in this regard.

For every Arteta and Alonso there's a Gerrard or a Gary Neville

 

It's a gamble we don't need to take, McKenna is better than Maresca (Leicester have the biggest budget in the championship), but neither of them have shown their tactics can work at Premier League level.

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by Drogba1

Mckenna or Maresca would be incredibly naive/stupid of the club. They tried the young manager approach before with Potter. Look how that turned out. Tbh I don't understand how our club can be saddled with the payoff debt given our current financial situation. The owners are intent on running the club into the ground and any dissent is removed. Yes men need only apply... Makes me laugh that we got rid of Abramovich due to his links to a dictator and in his place we now have a proper dictatorship. 

46 minutes ago, Drogba1 said:

For every Arteta and Alonso there's a Gerrard or a Gary Neville

 

It's a gamble we don't need to take, McKenna is better than Maresca (Leicester have the biggest budget in the championship), but neither of them have shown their tactics can work at Premier League level.

Far more failures than successes. No doubt. There really is no substitute for talent spotting. It applies to managers as much as players. Virtually everyone on this forum including me believes in their heart of hearts that they know a good footballer when they see one. But how do identify a good manager? I don't know the exact answer but from 30 years of listening to business type CEOs of big public companies pitching their successes and covering their asses I do think one can develop a sense of which person is likely to be a success. There will be something in their manner, the data, or the track record. My point is that few of us on here have any real idea of whether De Zerbi or McKenna is a better coach than the other.

I was reading about McKenna on some couch site https://www.coachesvoice.com/cv/kieran-mckenna-tactics-ipswich-town/ and ended up reading an interview with Gael Clichy where he talked about Guardiola who he only worked with for 1 season. He said Guardiola was a great coach and strict. If you were 2 kg over targeted weight you didn't train, no ifs no buts. Etc. 

6 hours ago, JM7 said:

𝐏𝐞𝐫 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐭𝐡𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜’𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭: 

- Training sessions were ‘tactically primitive’. 

- Poch refused to accept that his training methods contributed to injuries. 

- Jesus Perez overworked players with excessive amounts of high-intensity running. 

- Poch had a tendency to bring recovering players back into full training rather than adapted training too quickly resulted in re-injuries. 

- Poch disliked using Enzo and Caicedo together and saw Gallagher as their superior. 

- He selected Levi Colwill at LB to ‘bolster the defence’. 

- Club’s recruitment team brought Cole Palmer and Poch wasn’t too convinced. 

- Tried to sign ex-Spurs players to join the club for ‘experience’. 

- Dismissed the need for hiring the best set-piece coach in England despite Chelsea’s lackluster record.

Removing Poch was the RIGHT decision. 

Question is if the club will make the RIGHT decision on his replacement. 
 

The above doesn’t paint Poch in a good Light. 

The Athletic? It's all opinion and hearsay. Also I prefer Gallagher to either Caicedo or Enzo, most of us do I suspect. Removing Poch was the WRONG decision - the players are allegedly very upset by his removal. If they hated the over-training, primitive tactics and rushed returns, there has been no word of it. Joke piece by the Pathletic.

It’s worth watching the video of McKenna talking in that link above.  All these overnight sensations, sports, musos etc have worked so hard to get there. 

1 hour ago, Drogba1 said:

For every Arteta and Alonso there's a Gerrard or a Gary Neville

 

It's a gamble we don't need to take, McKenna is better than Maresca (Leicester have the biggest budget in the championship), but neither of them have shown their tactics can work at Premier League level.

Exactly how are they supposed to show that without managing a PL club? Every PL manager has to be appointed to the top job at some PL club  at some time. How different is it going from a top championship club, one that you made second from top, to a premier league club as compared to going from a bottom of the table premier league club that just got relegated to Bayern Munich. Personally I think Bayern Munich are taking far more risk.

1 hour ago, ChumpX said:

Mckenna or Maresca would be incredibly naive/stupid of the club. They tried the young manager approach before with Potter. Look how that turned out. Tbh I don't understand how our club can be saddled with the payoff debt given our current financial situation. The owners are intent on running the club into the ground and any dissent is removed. Yes men need only apply... Makes me laugh that we got rid of Abramovich due to his links to a dictator and in his place we now have a proper dictatorship. 

By that logic we can say we tried the experienced proven winner route with Scolari and it didn't work so we shouldn't have gone down that route again.

That said I've done some big research on both in the last day or so and while I would agree Enzo shouldn't be anywhere near the list, McKenna however has something about him.

This thread is hilarious. Injury, training, tactic if you think the board really care about that then you are delusional. 

Poch finished 6th which in the board mind is under the target. Top 4 is their target but this is not the most important point. 

Poch want to bring more experience player and keep Chalobah n Conor. The board want to sell those two player and keep their strategy. You can hear this when Poch had a rant a while ago (i think he knew he was a goner) complaining that there are simply too many young player in this team

It is similar to what happen to RDZ n Brighton. We have been poaching manager, scout, director from Brighton because that is the model that the owner want. You can say that we are more expensive version of Brighton. 

Chelsea board want to keep salary low, sign young upcoming player, try to get top 4 (ucl money). 

This is actually not a bad idea to get the best ROI. It is probably not the best idea in term of winning thropy but that is not in their mind. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by Bob stark

51 minutes ago, ozboy said:

Exactly how are they supposed to show that without managing a PL club? Every PL manager has to be appointed to the top job at some PL club  at some time. How different is it going from a top championship club, one that you made second from top, to a premier league club as compared to going from a bottom of the table premier league club that just got relegated to Bayern Munich. Personally I think Bayern Munich are taking far more risk.

Pressure and focus I suppose. Man Utd have a better squad than Bournemouth on paper. ETH came to the PL with a solid reputation from his work with a dashing, rapier like A**x team. Iraola few had heard of (sniggers about nipple jokes) and taking over from Gary O'Neil slipped in under the radar. As soon as the wheels started to come off ETH was under the microscope for performances on the pitch and issues off of it (Sancho, Greenwood, Etc). Iraola meanwhile had no expectations to meet, just quietly worked with his squad and developed an attractive attacking side, taking GON's work and improving it. Whose stock is higher at the moment. 

For a club of our size and notoriety as far as the press are concerned anyone coming in has to have broad shoulders and has to hit the ground running.

That said, I'm still a little surprised that Xavi at Barcelona hasn't even been mentioned by the press or twitter.

33 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

This thread is hilarious. Injury, training, tactic if you think the board really care about that then you are delusional. 

Poch finished 6th which in the board mind is under the target. Top 4 is their target but this is not the most important point. 

Poch want to bring more experience player and keep Chalobah n Conor. The board want to sell those two player and keep their strategy. You can hear this when Poch had a rant a while ago (i think he knew he was a goner) complaining that there are simply too many young player in this team

It is similar to what happen to RDZ n Brighton. We have been poaching manager, scout, director from Brighton because that is the model that the owner want. You can say that we are more expensive version of Brighton. 

Chelsea board want to keep salary low, sign young upcoming player, try to get top 4 (ucl money). 

This is actually not a bad idea to get the best ROI. It is probably not the best idea in term of winning thropy but that is not in their mind. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the insight Bob, and the diligence in reading back 200 pages in this thread, no doubt, to do your research.

Not sure where the hilarity is for you as you've basically just repeated what we've all been posting for months. In fact Younes has been saying this on his YouTube channel since about October. 

4 hours ago, ChumpX said:

The Athletic? It's all opinion and hearsay. Also I prefer Gallagher to either Caicedo or Enzo, most of us do I suspect. Removing Poch was the WRONG decision - the players are allegedly very upset by his removal. If they hated the over-training, primitive tactics and rushed returns, there has been no word of it. Joke piece by the Pathletic.

I mean, f**king hell 😅

The next lad has a job in his hands. Pochettino made some groundwork for him by integrating players but that is about it. Many of these lads now have 1 full season in top flight but otherwise this is a work in progress that now is taken back a couple of gears. 

If the next lad doesn't :

Finish 4th

Or have a better injury record

Or listen to the operators (sporting directors)

He should then go after a season with the operators.

This is basically what the next guy is up to. He can't have a say on who is in his team and he has to finish top 4 taking advice from the operators...who is up for it?

 

 

I think it’s pretty clear that the decision to remove Poch was made some time ago. Poch knew it. They didn’t just decide on Monday. It explains Poch’S outburst. 
 

If we return to 9/10th in the table again, it will be an embarrassment for the club. 

that clown should've never been hired to being with i dont like these owners but im glad there werent stuck looking at the last however many games it was a season review and he did a horrible job for 90% of the season my only worry is his replacement mckenna is good but hes not at our level just yet 

 

 

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by BlueBlood99

12 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

I thought the whole article, allegedly by Twomey, Johnson "and more" (Eghbali, Winstanley and Stewart?) smacks of being a club briefed hatchet job to justify the decision, so your summary does not surprise me in the slightest 🙂 

They have only ever been mouthpieces for the club. Major reason I gave up on their podcast.

5 hours ago, Bob stark said:

This thread is hilarious. Injury, training, tactic if you think the board really care about that then you are delusional. 

Poch finished 6th which in the board mind is under the target. Top 4 is their target but this is not the most important point. 

Poch want to bring more experience player and keep Chalobah n Conor. The board want to sell those two player and keep their strategy. You can hear this when Poch had a rant a while ago (i think he knew he was a goner) complaining that there are simply too many young player in this team

It is similar to what happen to RDZ n Brighton. We have been poaching manager, scout, director from Brighton because that is the model that the owner want. You can say that we are more expensive version of Brighton. 

Chelsea board want to keep salary low, sign young upcoming player, try to get top 4 (ucl money). 

This is actually not a bad idea to get the best ROI. It is probably not the best idea in term of winning thropy but that is not in their mind. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry but your posting  is based on the negative press speculation from the likes of the DM yet you seem so keen to dismiss press stories that paint a somewhat different picture 

Of course there will be two sides to the story and the reality is we just don’t know what is fact or conjecture.

I once worked for a manager who told me that having x number of years experience is ok in one way but the reality is that the only period that is relevant is the most recent year. Experience can be a good thing but it can also in a changing environment be one of the biggest blockers .

The more I read people’s opinions it’s abundantly clear that far too many just want to see the negatives. It’s always a yea but type of response. 

As I have posted earlier in the thread I know what I witnessed and that was a coach who didn’t get close to the potential from the squad. It’s easy to dismiss the Athletic article but for me there are several things within that ring true from the lack of match prep to the fact that so many players returning from injury immediately were out again  and likewise playing the likes of Colwill in a position he had never occupied even in his academy days.

There was a reason Spurs didn’t look to bring him back last summer and that goes back to a relationship a HC  has to have with the owners. It’s nonsense to suggest that in the modern era that these multi billionaire owners rely on one man to make strategic decisions it’s downright denial and arrogance if a HC believes that they will be given total power. 

Yesterday’s managers would not get close to succeeding in the modern era even the likes of Mourino is yesterdays man . I for one welcome the idea of a young , dynamic and modern coach being appointed and the whole point about putting into place a collaborative approach is to draw on skills that others possess not simply to dismiss the value that they bring. Was it fact or conjecture the MP fought against the appointment of a set piece coach?

We have seen what happens when the  club appointed experienced managers as replacements. From the BFW to Scholari they came with impressive CVs but really were past their sell by date.

Then we can talk about AVB, Potter and Frank. AVB stood no chance because quite simply the dressing room was too strong, too experienced and had the ear of the owner. Potter as we probably now can see was the front but it was the skill set behind the scene of the data anyalists the sporting directors and yes the owner that was key . Frank ironically had had one decent ( not great ) season at Derby when he got the gig but he clearly after season one when the decisions were forced on him ( transfer ban) had a good first season but we quickly both in season two and his last  temporary period saw his lack of ability.

My point is that so many harp back to RAs version of Chelsea they almost it seems to me want the new ownership group to fail. That may be harsh and of course there needs to be signs of moving forward but Poch wasn’t anywhere close to the right fit we all now that and yes we can rightly question why he was ever appointed but come on why are so many shedding Crocodile tears now that they have righted that wrong ?

I caught Shay Given on MOTD saying he thought Poch should be a candidate for manager of the season by getting us to 6th due to the challenges of off-field reasons, he did not elaborate.

 

Not sure how people are buying into the theory that Poch is responsible for the injury crisis. 

Our players have been dropping like flies for the past 5 seasons. 

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by Victor90