Is now the time to consider Mancini's tenure at the club

[greasedupdeafguy]

Again, we need to separate the "Chelsea way" debate from the debate on whether or not Mancini should stay.

They are two totally separate things.

With the exception of the rags and recently, Arsenal, all clubs operate "the Chelsea way" mate.

Luckily for Chelsea, they have huge amounts of money and they have some real quality players.

Had they won nowt I could understand and would probably agree that they have gone about things the wrong way but they have, therefore rubbishing that opinion.

It might be a little unpalatable to some and that's fair enough but it has worked for Roman and Chelsea.

The Chelsea analogy is a poor one in my book, the spine of the team was from Ranieri and taken on under Mourinho, what this team had was not only very good players but also determination to succeed, the likes of cech,cole,terry lampard and drogba don't need a manager to motivate them or tell them how to play.

Managers such as Hiddink,Ancelotti,avram grant just sent those teams out and had to do very little with them, as long as the players were happy all was okay

the senior players were unhappy with scolari and AVB and only then did performances suffer, these players have in effect managed Chelsea, hell even di matteo went back to them last year and won the CL last year

Abramovich's policy of sacking managers hasn't brought them any success at all

Well it has, if they didnt sack AVB last year would they have won the double?

 

[moomba]

Two of the most successful club sides in world football, Barca and real change manager/coach more than we change underwear and it doesn't stop them.

Barcelona are 6 months into the reign of their 3rd manager in the last 9 years and that's only because Guardiola wanted time away from the game. It's hardly a revolving door is it?

Hardly building a so called dynasty under one man either imo.

like I said, build the squad, appoint a coach with the right balance and hey presto.

Barca are a club built around a footballing ethos and wont ever rely on just one man at the helm and they are regarded, rightly so as the benchmark for us all.

What's Chelsea ethos?

 

[hilts]

Let's cut the manager position at top football then, there's plenty of players like that in many top clubs, why paying for managers then.

Great response well thought out

Not much thinking was needed for it, tbh.

There are some people who are saying that line for Barcelona - aaah, they're so good they don't even need manager. And then someone/anyone who spent his whole life in football come to TV and say it's a nonsense.

What i am saying is an average manager or even a poor one can get results if the circumstances are right, i didn't say clubs don't need managers, try engaging your brain a little

 

[moomba]

Well it has, if they didnt sack AVB last year would they have won the double?

If they didn't sack Ancelotti the year before they might have.

For me AVB was brought in to revolutionise the Chelsea team. Phase out the older players, change the style of play, set a foundation for the future. There was always going to be short term pain for long term gain.

The players got the hump, AVB got the sack and they started all over again. RDM tried to phase out the older players, set a foundation for the future. Players got the hump. RDM got the sack, and they start again.

 

[blueinsa]

Conjecture as to whether they would have won more and we can argue that till the cows come home but their record aint bad.

As for disagreeing about all clubs except those, name the ones that copy the rags and are successful as im at a lost.

Two of the most successful club sides in world football, Barca and real change manager/coach more than we change underwear and it doesn't stop them.

Build a quality squad, hire a quality coach with the right balance of tactical ability and man management and you will reap the rewards.

Personnel can change but the formula remains the same as far as im concerned.

I think you and me have different ideas of what is meant by the Chelsea way.

I'm not arguing for a second that clubs should never change managers, Barcelona have sacked one in the last ten years and it worked out well for them. Madrid on the other hand had a policy for a long while of chopping and changing managers and to me it worked to their detriment.

My problem with the way Chelsea go about things is that the players have been handed absolute power at that club. They down tools just about every year when they're not happy with the manager. One of the reasons they lose faith in the manager is because they need to phase out the senior players (and most powerful in the dressing room). 1 title in 6 years (soon to be 7) for a club that has spent more than any on transfer fees and wages than anyone is a poor return. If we end up not winning another title in the next six years I'll be pretty disappointed with our return.

I completely see your argument mate, i just don't quite agree with it.

AVB wanted to rid the dressing room of some senior players, they stayed, he went, Chelsea won the CL.

Regardless of player power, Roman making that choice of his own back or a bit of both, it worked out for them and that's all they will care about.

Like I have said, when you are a club like us with the quality players we have, I honestly don't think that you need a manager who goes in, all guns blazing trying to teach players how to play football.

You need a man, tactically aware enough to set up a team, change it when needed with the man management skills to get the very best out of undoubted ego's.

Its a fine balancing act.

Bob had his hand forced after arsenal away last year, all was lost, he let the dogs off the leash so to speak and the rest is history.

Maybe its time for a long run in the park again off the leash ;-)

 

[Cellarite]

Two of the most successful club sides in world football, Barca and real change manager/coach more than we change underwear and it doesn't stop them.

Barcelona are 6 months into the reign of their 3rd manager in the last 9 years and that's only because Guardiola wanted time away from the game. It's hardly a revolving door is it?

Hardly building a so called dynasty under one man either imo.

like I said, build the squad, appoint a coach with the right balance and hey presto.

Barca are a club built around a footballing ethos and wont ever rely on just one man at the helm and they are regarded, rightly so as the benchmark for us all.

Where did I claim they were building a dynasty with one man? You said they change managers willy-nilly, I pointed out that, no, they don't really. Real Madrid fair enough, Barcelona don't though. Guardiola could've stayed there for another 5 years at least.

 

[greasedupdeafguy]

Well it has, if they didnt sack AVB last year would they have won the double?

If they didn't sack Ancelotti the year before they might have.

For me AVB was brought in to revolutionise the Chelsea team. Phase out the older players, change the style of play, set a foundation for the future.

The players got the hump, AVB got the sack and they started all over again. RDM tried to phase out the older players, set a foundation for the future. Players got the hump. RDM got the sack, and they start again.

They won it though so Romans policy has been successful. Not saying I would like our club to do what Chelsea have been doing but to say its been unsuccessful is pretty stupid when they've won more trophies than united in the past 10 years.

 

[hilts]

With the exception of the rags and recently, Arsenal, all clubs operate "the Chelsea way" mate.

Luckily for Chelsea, they have huge amounts of money and they have some real quality players.

Had they won nowt I could understand and would probably agree that they have gone about things the wrong way but they have, therefore rubbishing that opinion.

It might be a little unpalatable to some and that's fair enough but it has worked for Roman and Chelsea.

The Chelsea analogy is a poor one in my book, the spine of the team was from Ranieri and taken on under Mourinho, what this team had was not only very good players but also determination to succeed, the likes of cech,cole,terry lampard and drogba don't need a manager to motivate them or tell them how to play.

Managers such as Hiddink,Ancelotti,avram grant just sent those teams out and had to do very little with them, as long as the players were happy all was okay

the senior players were unhappy with scolari and AVB and only then did performances suffer, these players have in effect managed Chelsea, hell even di matteo went back to them last year and won the CL last year

Abramovich's policy of sacking managers hasn't brought them any success at all

Well it has, if they didnt sack AVB last year would they have won the double?

the problem with AVB was the deluded Roman brought him in to do a certain job and when he realised it wouldnt be a seemless transition he sacked him for it, it was his cock up in the first place

 

[blue rebel]

If that's what Abramovich wants, why, instead of sacking, AVB & RDM, did he not support them?

 

[blueinsa]

Barcelona are 6 months into the reign of their 3rd manager in the last 9 years and that's only because Guardiola wanted time away from the game. It's hardly a revolving door is it?

Hardly building a so called dynasty under one man either imo.

like I said, build the squad, appoint a coach with the right balance and hey presto.

Barca are a club built around a footballing ethos and wont ever rely on just one man at the helm and they are regarded, rightly so as the benchmark for us all.

Where did I claim they were building a dynasty with one man? You said they change managers willy-nilly, I pointed out that, no, they don't really. Real Madrid fair enough, Barcelona don't though. Guardiola could've stayed there for another 5 years at least.

Conjecture mate.

La Liga says you are one season from the sack should your biggest rival pip you to the title.