8 minutes ago, El regreso said:

Show me an instance where rip and replace has worked? Some of the players we discarded are now playing weekly in two of the top three teams in the country.

Only player we’ve missed is Kovacic, and that’s only down to Lavia being a sick note. 

 

Edited March 31, 20242 yr by Sconnie Blue

9 minutes ago, El regreso said:

Show me an instance where rip and replace has worked? Some of the players we discarded are now playing weekly in two of the top three teams in the country.

I don't think you understand my point. Ripping the squad was the right thing but we didn't need to replace everyone at the fees we spent. If we spent 250m in 18 months instead of 1billion whilst being in the position we are, at least there would be a long term plan to improve over a 3-5 year period.

19 minutes ago, KonaKai Blue said:

What the hell is with this Tuchel love in. He's a good manager but not great. The downfall started with him. Poor player recruitment whilst he was manager. After the losses to Leeds and Southampton, he basically said he doesn't know what to do to turn things around.

Give your heads a wobble. Tuchel is not the answer. What we need are better medical staff so that we can actually field our strongest 11 and we also need better recruitment, if we have enough money left to recruit without sanctions.

 

Perhaps, although I'm not totally sure where we can pinpoint the nucleus of the downfall.  Maybe it was that 51st game, having won 32 and lost just 7 of his previous 50 games. Or maybe it was at the point of holding the Champions league trophy aloft in May 2021, or maybe winning the Super Cup, or maybe winning the World Club Cup. Its hard to see when the writing really was on the wall. Nothing to do with these idiot venture capitalists binning off virtually every remnant of the very fabric of our club, and replacing it with clowns to the left of us, jokers to the right.

 

1 minute ago, WhiteWall said:

Perhaps, although I'm not totally sure where we can pinpoint the nucleus of the downfall.  Maybe it was that 51st game, having won 32 and lost just 7 of his previous 50 games. Or maybe it was at the point of holding the Champions league trophy aloft in May 2021, or maybe winning the Super Cup, or maybe winning the World Club Cup. Its hard to see when the writing really was on the wall. Nothing to do with these idiot venture capitalists binning off virtually every remnant of the very fabric of our club, and replacing it with clowns to the left of us, jokers to the right.

 

Lukaku signing 

4 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Lukaku signing 

This. That signing was make or break and it totally killed us.

3 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Lukaku signing 

Lukaku signing was fine until the bellend opened his mouth.  He single handedly derailed the season with that interview.  TT's extra marital issues might have refocused his attention somewhat, admittedly.

35 minutes ago, KonaKai Blue said:

I don't think you understand my point. Ripping the squad was the right thing but we didn't need to replace everyone at the fees we spent. If we spent 250m in 18 months instead of 1billion whilst being in the position we are, at least there would be a long term plan to improve over a 3-5 year period.

We didn’t need to rip at all replace 1-3 players maximum each window without bloating the squad. Keep the key experience players during this transition. However this was never going to happen with the arrogance at the top.

1 hour ago, KonaKai Blue said:

This. That signing was make or break and it totally killed us.

It really wasn't. What killed us was a perfect storm so unprecedented that I doubt any major club will have to go through anything similar in such a short period. For example:

We had a injury crisis that included losing the wingbacks and midfield that the system was built on.
We had horrible luck with Covid being about the only club that never recieved a single break from the FA to recover.
On top of all that we had the worst schedule in Europe with a squad that was broken by the injuries I mentioned.
Lukaku mutiny.
On top of that again we had incredibly harsh sanctions put upon us that for a good couple of months but the entire existence of the club into questions with all the effects that had on players and staff.

So no, simply saying "Lukaku" is far, far too simplistic as poor a signing as he turned out to be. Any 1 of those things I mentioned could likely have been dealt with in a reasonable way but with all 5 (and there's far more things I could have added) occuring at the same time we had to fight and struggle for a while to get the results we needed to remain in the Top 3 which should have been entirely understandable, especially considering we knew how good we were under "normal" circumstances but some bright minds figured Tuchel should be replaced by Graham Potter and then the Spuds lad and the results speak for themselves.

Wasn't that hard to predict it would go to hell either unfortunately. That's why I said so a year and a half ago.

Edited March 31, 20242 yr by OriginalS

You can replace the broken puppet but with the blind, fingerless puppeteer still in control greater problems remain.

5 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Lukaku signing 

Lukaku's interview, we were looking like genuine title contenders before then

Lukaku was a mistake, but didn't 'kill' the club. He did cost us a trophy or 2 during that season, and created a lots of distractions. However, he wasn't even near London for the next 2 seasons. Financially it was a big lose, but we wasted double if not more on any sh1t deals after his departure. Sure, he may come back next season, doubt anyone including himself wants that, so some kind of deal will come along.

What killed us was politics got in the way of football, and everything happened afterwards, no need to review all of that.

We can still get to 7th or 8th, although the way we played on Saturday, looked like some are in end of season friendly mode. I expect the team to put in a good shift in the FA cup semi, maybe games against Arsenal and Spurs. But for those games are less appealing to the players, wouldn't be surprised if they just go for a stroll in the park.

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Zeta said:

I know a lot of people won't like the suggestion. But with Tuchel available in the summer, I really think we should give him another shot. He's the best manager we will be able to realistically get, who won't necessarily prefer other options.

TT is the last manager that you want for this team. TT biggest strengh is his modern training method to get his team to play his way and his brilliant tactical acumen. You can argue that he is the best tactical manager in the world easily. 

Now imagine manager who want his team to play certain way with young raw chaotic player. That will be marriage made in hell. 

 

 

 

On 31/03/2024 at 04:50, Frankie8Lampard said:

It's different if fans are wrong about a player but manager's are literally paid to identify the best out of their players. The only reason Poch gave Palmer a chance at the start of the season was because of injuries and him running out of ideas after poor performances. Otherwise, Palmer would have been on the bench like Mudryk and Madueke.

Are you trying to say that young unproven player need to show manager that they can play to stay in the starting lineup? 😵‍💫😵‍💫

And I don't think you understand how  patient poch has been with mudryk and madueke

 

Edited April 1, 20242 yr by Bob stark

 My bet is nagelsmann does a good job with Germany. Wish we;d gone with him. Poch has been unlucky with the defensive injuries, particularly Colwill. 

1 hour ago, ozboy said:

 My bet is nagelsmann does a good job with Germany. Wish we;d gone with him. Poch has been unlucky with the defensive injuries, particularly Colwill. 

Nagelsmann football is very extreme. Fun to watch, not sure it will be good for this team. 

 

On 31/03/2024 at 02:20, Frankie8Lampard said:

It's different if fans are wrong about a player but manager's are literally paid to identify the best out of their players. The only reason Poch gave Palmer a chance at the start of the season was because of injuries and him running out of ideas after poor performances. Otherwise, Palmer would have been on the bench like Mudryk and Madueke.

Tbh, I don't think Poch had much of a say in whether or not to give Palmer a chance. Palmer was most definitely assured by the owners that he would be guaranteed playing time and that's the only reason why he would sign with us. And Poch pretty much had to do what the owners told him. It's Poch's absolute luck that Palmer turned out to be a great signing. If Palmer hadn't hit the ground running, then Poch surely would have found excuses to put him on the bench and keep him there.

2 hours ago, Girish said:

Tbh, I don't think Poch had much of a say in whether or not to give Palmer a chance. Palmer was most definitely assured by the owners that he would be guaranteed playing time and that's the only reason why he would sign with us. And Poch pretty much had to do what the owners told him. It's Poch's absolute luck that Palmer turned out to be a great signing. If Palmer hadn't hit the ground running, then Poch surely would have found excuses to put him on the bench and keep him there.

I think Poch is an average manager but anyone suggesting him not getting credit for Palmer for playing well is just trying to fit an agenda. 

People did the same thing with Sarri and Hazard. 

Poch can both be coaching Palmer well and coaching our team poorly at the same time. Not everything he does has to be sh*t. 

31 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

I think Poch is an average manager but anyone suggesting him not getting credit for Palmer for playing well is just trying to fit an agenda. 

People did the same thing with Sarri and Hazard. 

Poch can both be coaching Palmer well and coaching our team poorly at the same time. Not everything he does has to be sh*t. 

I don't think using Hazard is a good idea. Hazard does not listen to manager at all

3 hours ago, Girish said:

Tbh, I don't think Poch had much of a say in whether or not to give Palmer a chance. Palmer was most definitely assured by the owners that he would be guaranteed playing time and that's the only reason why he would sign with us. And Poch pretty much had to do what the owners told him. It's Poch's absolute luck that Palmer turned out to be a great signing. If Palmer hadn't hit the ground running, then Poch surely would have found excuses to put him on the bench and keep him there.

 

31 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

I think Poch is an average manager but anyone suggesting him not getting credit for Palmer for playing well is just trying to fit an agenda. 

People did the same thing with Sarri and Hazard. 

Poch can both be coaching Palmer well and coaching our team poorly at the same time. Not everything he does has to be sh*t. 

I feel both these posters are right, I think originally Pochettino wasn't too keen on him and wanted more experience. Ironically it's this specific type of signing clearlake are after young talent that can perform now. The problem is it is impossible to do this for a full XI let alone a squad like they expect.

I think people truly underestimate the level players like Neymar and Hazard were at by the time they were 21. Young players are not as complete these days. The board think we can sign any talented 19 year old and they could turn into the next CR7.

Again the reason why Cr7 at 19 was a good investment at £12.5m in 2002 and Hazard at £32m at the age of 21 in 2012 is because despite the relative high price at the time if we account for inflation this is still a reasonable market price for a talented young player.

There was still the possibility to not only get value in terms of price but also the possibility to flip for a profit 3x-4x the original price. In CR7 case £80m, Hazard £130m. In fact even Barcelona despite not wanting to sell Neymar flipped €75m to €220m.

Palmer at £40m represents a good deal, realistically he can go for £100m based off this season. He's performing at the highest possible level in terms of g/a. 

Pochettino might be doing something right with Palmer even if it's simply playing him. Some players don't need expert coaching they just need game time (Hazard). Mudyrk and Madueke have potential but imo they won't be as good as Palmer even with the additional game time.

My fear is because Palmer worked out the board and ownership will feel vindicated in their strategy and continue. Whereas to everyone with eyes we can see it was more a fluke due to their scattergun approach. A real project like we did 10-12 years ago consisted of blending young talented players with proven winners (Lamps, Mata, Torres, Ivan, Cole, Ramires, Mikel, etc.). Then we had the crown jewel Hazard as the centre piece of the project. Make no mistake though Lukaku, Oscar, KDB, Salah were all high potential players we signed and failed to get the best out of. I feel like b/c of this we have a reputation for signing young talent and perhaps not getting the best out of them.

Yes we had duds like Marko Marin but we spent like £20m on him so even if we overpaid it wasn't by a ridiculous amount.

My point is,  imagine if we had kept our skeleton from last season and replaced Havertz and Mount with Palmer, he would have solved most of our issues someone who creates and finishes. We don't need a team of Palmers just 2-3 with proven professionals and perhaps a couple elite players in their positions ideally specialists like goalkeeper and striker.

The main issue is our defence is very poor. Some of that is on the board, some on the players and some on Poch.

47 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

I don't think using Hazard is a good idea. Hazard does not listen to manager at all

I think Sarris talent with Hazard was giving him the freedom to perform. 

The saying ‘the definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome’ , pretty much sums up our management strategy.

We need to change our approach somehow, we stick with a manager for a fixed period and accept mediocrity with an average squad, or we chop and change and potentially get a positive kick back but ultimately arrive at the same point.

The viewpoint of changing the manager when times are challenging that many have said is not working. When we had Potter and he was getting it tight, someone said get rid of him for anyone, Lampard comes in and they say we should have kept Potter. Poch is not the right fit, but the players are just not good enough at present.

Maybe they will develop into fine players but our current history of four managers in 2 seasons is sh*te and will never reap rewards.

I'm not one for looking back in general, but we should never have gotten rid of Tuchel. Maybe we would be the same, who knows but we’re making a joke of ourselves with this nonsense.

There are no elite coaches who would come to us, if they were available. We are bang average with a sh*te approach to recruitment, and future proofing the clubs position.

De Zerbi doing the rounds yet again. 

 

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

De Zerbi doing the rounds yet again. 

 

Urgh. Can’t cope with anymore Brighton rejects. 

1 minute ago, JM7 said:

Urgh. Can’t cope with anymore Brighton rejects. 

Can't see it being past him or Amorim.