12 minutes ago, ozboy said:

It's a completely cowardly approach playing all those defenders and forcing defenders and midfielders to be attackers. Caicedo is not a lone 6 we have already seen that. in 2/3 games he has made mistakes. Despite the price tag and the ability it's too much too soon. Play enzo a bit deeper to help and let conor or palmer stay further forward. Drop one of the back 3 and play a left sided attacker.

I don't care what the system nominally is. If you pick 3 centre backs and 2 full backs then you are playing a back 5 no matter where they stand on the field at kick off.

Really its not that hard.

Above all else empower the players to go for it. Let them loose, ultimately that's what Ange has done at spuds. 

We have already wasted the first 10% of the season. 

It's so irritating, the crowd is unforgiving but if you are going to get booed, and you will, at least give it a go.

We have been unlucky and it's better than last season. That's because this group of players does have something to prove and desperately want to succeed whereas last year the lads were just mailing it in. But it could be so much better. 

This sterile possess completely destroys confidence. Look at Havertz. He is a good player who has been psychologically ruined, that goal he missed agains ManU and diving, it's because he has run into a block and his mind isn't letting him play. That will happen to people like Jackson and Mudryck and Caicedo unless we get the mind set right.

Amen to that. This defensive minded, sterile football will block the development of our young players and kill our confidence. Have seen several fans say the same.

On another matter Pochettino talked about wanting "experience " several times along with the need to win.

I wonder if there are already fractures in his relationship with the owners because all he got were kids, plus Disasi and Sanchez who are not very good.

9 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

On another matter Pochettino talked about wanting "experience " several times along with the need to win.

I wonder if there are already fractures in his relationship with the owners because all he got were kids, plus Disasi and Sanchez who are not very good.

Yes, that's the strongest term Poch used to express his disappointment. An ambitious manager would not want work on a 'long 'term' project without success, and manager is always the fall guy when things go wrong. We are lucky to have him in charge, imagine if it's Conte in charge, we'd be making headlines already for not recruiting for him.

1 minute ago, icecoolguy22 said:

Yes, that's the strongest term Poch used to express his disappointment. An ambitious manager would not want work on a 'long 'term' project without success, and manager is always the fall guy when things go wrong. We are lucky to have him in charge, imagine if it's Conte in charge, we'd be making headlines already for not recruiting for him.

I believe he won't be here next season. I would not be surprised if he came in expecting one thing in the market, and got completely different to that expectation. His reaction to Palmer coming in says a lot.

He did not get what he wants, and the owners already got booed out of the bridge along with the team.

I believe there are issues forming there already and we know the owners won't be going anywhere for a while.

Pochettino talked about winning and experience, the owners care most about making money. They are just a different version of the glazers in my opinion, it will just take longer for us to see how they bleed us for all we are worth.

1 minute ago, axman2526 said:

the owners care most about making money. They are just a different version of the glazers in my opinion, it will just take longer for us to see how they bleed us for all we are worth.

The owners won't make money without onfield success. I can't agree they are just another version of the Glazers. I don't see that at all, they turn up and watch the team, they have invested plenty. My view is they have a different view of how to achieve success. As pointed out Brighton and Arsenal also have young teams. However we will know better by this time next year. Personally I am a big supporter of the young team approach and will be more or less  content if we play good football this year and don't make top 4, my minimum expectation as a supporter. However you have to play to the strengths of a young team and accept their weaknesses. Its been done many times in many different fields, soldiers, sports, music etc.

13 minutes ago, ozboy said:

The owners won't make money without onfield success. I can't agree they are just another version of the Glazers. I don't see that at all, they turn up and watch the team, they have invested plenty. My view is they have a different view of how to achieve success. As pointed out Brighton and Arsenal also have young teams. However we will know better by this time next year. Personally I am a big supporter of the young team approach and will be more or less  content if we play good football this year and don't make top 4, my minimum expectation as a supporter. However you have to play to the strengths of a young team and accept their weaknesses. Its been done many times in many different fields, soldiers, sports, music etc.

United have rarely been successful in the glazers time though. Yet they continue to make money off them and could sell them now and make 5billion, a massive profit.

https://www.graceonfootball.com/p/can-new-look-chelsea-actually-succeed?utm_campaign=post

My opinion on our team situation football wise is very similar to this. 

8 hours ago, ozboy said:

It's a completely cowardly approach playing all those defenders and forcing defenders and midfielders to be attackers. Caicedo is not a lone 6 we have already seen that. in 2/3 games he has made mistakes. Despite the price tag and the ability it's too much too soon. Play enzo a bit deeper to help and let conor or palmer stay further forward. Drop one of the back 3 and play a left sided attacker.

I don't care what the system nominally is. If you pick 3 centre backs and 2 full backs then you are playing a back 5 no matter where they stand on the field at kick off.

Really its not that hard.

Above all else empower the players to go for it. Let them loose, ultimately that's what Ange has done at spuds. 

We have already wasted the first 10% of the season. 

It's so irritating, the crowd is unforgiving but if you are going to get booed, and you will, at least give it a go.

We have been unlucky and it's better than last season. That's because this group of players does have something to prove and desperately want to succeed whereas last year the lads were just mailing it in. But it could be so much better. 

This sterile possess completely destroys confidence. Look at Havertz. He is a good player who has been psychologically ruined, that goal he missed agains ManU and diving, it's because he has run into a block and his mind isn't letting him play. That will happen to people like Jackson and Mudryck and Caicedo unless we get the mind set right.

Absolutely bang on, its a back 5, anyone claiming its anything else is deluded. What I dont understand is why Pochetino has changed to this from everything he did in the preseason, we may have played it at times during games but we were predominantly playing a back 4, moving the ball at pace and almost always forward.

Yet now he has decided to sh*thouse us into a defensive side ponderously playing the ball around in the league, why?

I hope the comparison is not stupid, but I feel that Chelsea is in the same situation as my local team in Bucharest was one month ago. 

The team I support in my city has a good squad, a highly rated, attacking minded manager and top conditions both on and off the pitch. Rich owners, too.

But in the first rounds things did not work because the manager was a bit precautious and the starting line up was not really the best one as some players were played out of position and some others had to be in the starting line up because of their reputation at the club and in the league. 

But after another loss everybody from fans to pundits said the manager (who really is a quality one and likes attacking football) should impose his style and build the line up in accordance with the true value of the players. 

The next round he changed to an attacking 433, five players from the bench came into the starting line up, the left full back was moved to his natural right back position and since then they play the best football in the country and score four or five goals in every match and everybody is happy. 

But the moral of the story is that everybody knew the potential of this team, the thing was nobody understood why the manager was that cautious when his tactics were perfect for that squad. But he wanted to play it safe in the first rounds as he was new in the job. 

Sometimes it is better to be brave and believe in your tactics and see what is going to happen. I feel Chelsea has a lot of potential attacking wise and Pochettino must use all that talent and impose his true style. I am sure nobody is going to be upset if we end up winning games 4-2, 3-2, 5-3 as long as we play beautiful football and score with ease.

3 hours ago, Bob stark said:

https://www.graceonfootball.com/p/can-new-look-chelsea-actually-succeed?utm_campaign=post

My opinion on our team situation football wise is very similar to this. 

Thanks for sharing this, always enjoy reading Grace's stuff

Lets just take the sh*tty tactics aside for a second, I see a lot of people talking about kids and inexperience, but I think people are putting far too much stock into that. 

I don't think it's so much the age and inexperience that's holding us back. It's the fact that this is a brand-new team and they've barely played together. It will take time for them to adapt and gel, that's just inevitable. 

Who's in the starting 11 right now who has been here since last season? Sterling.. Silva.. Gallagher.. Chillwell.. ?? And who's been in it before then? Silva and Chillwell? That's it. You have to think that is absolutely massive, no team is going to have instant success just from that alone so it does take time. 

11 hours ago, ozboy said:

It's a completely cowardly approach playing all those defenders and forcing defenders and midfielders to be attackers. Caicedo is not a lone 6 we have already seen that. in 2/3 games he has made mistakes. Despite the price tag and the ability it's too much too soon. Play enzo a bit deeper to help and let conor or palmer stay further forward. Drop one of the back 3 and play a left sided attacker.

I don't care what the system nominally is. If you pick 3 centre backs and 2 full backs then you are playing a back 5 no matter where they stand on the field at kick off.

Really its not that hard.

Above all else empower the players to go for it. Let them loose, ultimately that's what Ange has done at spuds. 

We have already wasted the first 10% of the season. 

It's so irritating, the crowd is unforgiving but if you are going to get booed, and you will, at least give it a go.

We have been unlucky and it's better than last season. That's because this group of players does have something to prove and desperately want to succeed whereas last year the lads were just mailing it in. But it could be so much better. 

This sterile possess completely destroys confidence. Look at Havertz. He is a good player who has been psychologically ruined, that goal he missed agains ManU and diving, it's because he has run into a block and his mind isn't letting him play. That will happen to people like Jackson and Mudryck and Caicedo unless we get the mind set right.

This is a stupid take. Of course you can pick players who have played a specific role all their career and deploy them somewhere else... So when David Luiz was playing as a number 6 under Mou it was a back 5 too? When Bale was still predominantly a LB it was 5 at the back when he started on the wing? 

"Formation" by definition describes how the players are deployed, not which players you pick. You can make a formation more or less effective depending on which players you pick in which position, but choosing the "wrong players" for a certain formation doesn't make it a different formation.

I do agree that this system has to go though. We need more players who are goal threats on the pitch. Move Chilly to LB, Colwill to CB, drop Disasi or Silva and get another proper attacker on. Chilwell at LW has had some chances, but has not done well enough with them to merit playing that role. Also I want Enzo running the game as an 8 and a player with more goal threat playing the number 10 role (Gallagher or maybe Palmer).

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by True Blue23

1 hour ago, True Blue23 said:

This is a stupid take. Of course you can pick players who have played a specific role all their career and deploy them somewhere else... So when David Luiz was playing as a number 6 under Mou it was a back 5 too? When Bale was still predominantly a LB it was 5 at the back when he started on the wing? 

"Formation" by definition describes how the players are deployed, not which players you pick. You can make a formation more or less effective depending on which players you pick in which position, but choosing the "wrong players" for a certain formation doesn't make it a different formation.

I do agree that this system has to go though. We need more players who are goal threats on the pitch. Move Chilly to LB, Colwill to CB, drop Disasi or Silva and get another proper attacker on. Chilwell at LW has had some chances, but has not done well enough with them to merit playing that role. Also I want Enzo running the game as an 8 and a player with more goal threat playing the number 10 role (Gallagher or maybe Palmer).

I think we agree.

"Move Chilly to LB, Colwill to CB, drop Disasi or Silva and get another proper attacker on." 

I don't think my take was stupid but thanks for your opinion 🙂  as even though Chilly was trying to play left wing or something it was totally unsuccessful. Equally Colwill is not a left full back and still less a wing back. It's true there are a few players that completely change position, Bale did move from essentially wing back to winger and yes Luiz did play about 3 games in the midfield before reverting to defence.

 

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by ozboy

Hopefully Pochettino is not stubborn as many of our previous coaches have been. 

34 minutes ago, ozboy said:

I think we agree.

"Move Chilly to LB, Colwill to CB, drop Disasi or Silva and get another proper attacker on." 

I don't think my take was stupid but thanks for your opinion 🙂  as even though Chilly was trying to play left wing or something it was totally unsuccessful. Equally Colwill is not a left full back and still less a wing back. It's true there are a few players that completely change position, Bale did move from essentially wing back to winger and yes Luiz did play about 3 games in the midfield before reverting to defence.

 

Yeah in case of who needs to play for us we agree. I'm just not a fan of blanket statements like yours because the world isn't that black and white.

I'm mainly a fullback myself in my team but the last few games I've been playing as a winger. That doesn't make us play with a back 5. Now if I'm efficient further forward that's a whole other question😂.

Bournemouth (A)

Villa (H)

Brighton (League Cup H)

Fulham (A)

Burnley (A)

Arsenal (H)

 

Next 6 fixtures. 

Edited September 5, 20232 yr by Sconnie Blue

3 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Bournemouth (H)

Villa (A)

Brighton (League Cup H)

Fulham (A)

Burnley (A)

Arsenal (H)

 

Next 6 fixtures. 

We are away to Bournemouth and at home to Villa.

I'm not the superstitious type, but I did notice that we are played 2 lost 2 when Pochettino wears the training gear rather than a suit LOL.

 

1 hour ago, Sexyfootball said:

I'm not the superstitious type, but I did notice that we are played 2 lost 2 when Pochettino wears the training gear rather than a suit LOL.

 

We basically did well vs Liverpool after the goal, unfortunately we only got the draw. All the sh*t i see that Liverpool had a weaker midfield etc is a nice excuse, but they have a stronger attack than we do so that equals things out in that sense.

West ham we outplayed for large parts of the game, get a penalty that is missed and then the game turned. We score the pen and things are most certainly different, then the momentum is in our favour.

Luton was always an expected 3 pts and would have been poor if it wasn't. But then Luton also went to Brighton and the game was 2-1 to Brighton for around 80 mins of that game. Then we lose to Notts Forest after having the chances to win it.

It's really nowhere close to catastrophic as people are making out, especially for a new team, new coach, new tactics. So far we've outplayed every team we've faced. I think we can all agree we need to convert those chances as we are up there in the league as one of the teams with of the most chances created. 

 

Positive signings I think. It shows things are improving and also where the problem is. Hopefully we’re going in the right direction. 

53 minutes ago, JM7 said:

 

Positive signings I think. It shows things are improving and also where the problem is. Hopefully we’re going in the right direction. 

Not sure those are right. We had 21 shots against Forest alone.

2 hours ago, JM7 said:

 

Positive signings I think. It shows things are improving and also where the problem is. Hopefully we’re going in the right direction. 

These stats are pointless.. I saw this throughout last season. People will look at those stats and say "Chelsea are playing well" but we're not, we were sh*te against Wimbledon, West Ham (second half) and Forest. We never have a period in a game where we create mutiple chances in quick succession. We can make one big chance and it will be another 20 or 30 minutes until we make another one. The big misses every game are an issue that needs sorting, but I see all of the top 6 miss big chances in almost every game, but it's more noticeable when we miss an easy chance because we fail to create another good one. Look at Arsenal against United, Havertz completely misses the ball with a fresh air shot. If he was a Chelsea player, that would be costly, but because he plays with a team that will create many more chances, it's not a big deal.

As for the possession. It's another meaningless stat without context. Teams allow us to have the ball, and for good reason. When we have a ton of possession, we almost always end up making a big error that leads to us losing the ball and conceding a big chance. Teams just need to bide their time and they know we will make a big error. We do it in every single game. Even in the Liverpool game that we were the better side in, Sanchez gave the ball away to Nunez and he should have punished us to win the game for Liverpool. If we're not making mistakes, teams just sit back and watch us create nothing, because they know how pathetic we are at creating chances.

Edited September 6, 20232 yr by Scott Harris

I think those stats should be taking into perspectives, all 3 teams apart from Liverpool played on the counter, part of their game plan to let us have the ball. When you have that much possession, you bound to take a shot sooner or later. I'd be interested to see the stats on touches in penalty box and shots on target. I think if we visit the stats from last season against similar teams, we will find the same pattern

42 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

These stats are pointless.. I saw this throughout last season. People will look at those stats and say "Chelsea are playing well" but we're not, we were sh*te against Wimbledon, West Ham (second half) and Forest. We never have a period in a game where we create mutiple chances in quick succession. We can make one big chance and it will be another 20 or 30 minutes until we make another one. The big misses every game are an issue that needs sorting, but I see all of the top 6 miss big chances in almost every game, but it's more noticeable when we miss an easy chance because we fail to create another good one. Look at Arsenal against United, Havertz completely misses the ball with a fresh air shot. If he was a Chelsea player, that would be costly, but because he plays with a team that will create many more chances, it's not a big deal.

As for the possession. It's another meaningless stat without context. Teams allow us to have the ball, and for good reason. When we have a ton of possession, we almost always end up making a big error that leads to us losing the ball and conceding a big chance. Teams just need to bide their time and they know we will make a big error. We do it in every single game. Even in the Liverpool game that we were the better side in, Sanchez gave the ball away to Nunez and he should have punished us to win the game for Liverpool. If we're not making mistakes, teams just sit back and watch us create nothing, because they know how pathetic we are at creating chances.

Only Stat that matters is the final score.