Who will the next permanent Chelsea manager be?

[xceleryx]

43 minutes ago, kev61 said:

We need a unicorn in the DM position according to you.It is not that complicated.

That's not what I said though was it. 

We need that type of player who can shield a defence, which is not what Kante is, has ever been, or will be. 

[Sciatika]

If Leicester is relegated, how about trying to pick up Wilfred Ndidi? He is 26, primarily a defender, is good at winning the ball in tackles and interceptions doesn't pick up endless cards,  and is on the last year of his contract. He has had a few injuries this season, but despite that, he has played 26 games. Leicester might be looking to cash in and would cost, say, £30m.

Edited May 21, 2023 by Sciatika

[My Blood Is Blue]

3 hours ago, Sciatika said:

If Leicester is relegated, how about trying to pick up Wilfred Ndidi? He is 26, primarily a defender, is good at winning the ball in tackles and interceptions doesn't pick up endless cards,  and is on the last year of his contract. He has had a few injuries this season, but despite that, he has played 26 games. Leicester might be looking to cash in and would cost, say, £30m.

I’d avoid Ndidi, personally, his form has really dropped off and he doesn’t look like the player he was in those first few seasons. The last thing we need is another player in the squad who doesn’t really improve us particularly, for me the signings we make this summer need to be in a few key areas and they need to be top players that will really improve the squad.

[ROTG]

4 hours ago, Sciatika said:

If Leicester is relegated, how about trying to pick up Wilfred Ndidi? He is 26, primarily a defender, is good at winning the ball in tackles and interceptions doesn't pick up endless cards,  and is on the last year of his contract. He has had a few injuries this season, but despite that, he has played 26 games. Leicester might be looking to cash in and would cost, say, £30m.

Agree 100%

not on the player, but generally taking a look at the relegated teams to see if there any tactical signing for a season or two who will come to the club, be happy to bench warm and will give 110% when selected also help install mental strength and leadership. 

e.g. Last season the club spent £30m on KK when the likes of Twarkowski and Mee went for peanuts or free. 

[Chelsea_Matt]

If we get Poch I’m looking forward to him defending us in the media. It’s important given how they hate us.

[Mark Kelly]

1 hour ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

If we get Poch I’m looking forward to him defending us in the media. It’s important given how they hate us.

Me too . Let's hope he has a touch of the Joses about him.

[FrankLampard8]

20 hours ago, ROTG said:

Agree 100%

not on the player, but generally taking a look at the relegated teams to see if there any tactical signing for a season or two who will come to the club, be happy to bench warm and will give 110% when selected also help install mental strength and leadership. 

e.g. Last season the club spent £30m on KK when the likes of Twarkowski and Mee went for peanuts or free. 

KK has been Pony but you can't honestly believe Mee or Tarkowski are Chelsea quality? (Maybe if the aim is to finish where we did this season but we clearly have higher ambitions than that).

[thevelourfog]

13 minutes ago, FrankLampard8 said:

KK has been Pony but you can't honestly believe Mee or Tarkowski are Chelsea quality? (Maybe if the aim is to finish where we did this season but we clearly have higher ambitions than that).

Mee has done well in an excellently coached team. Can't say I've watched much Everton, but just looking at the basic facts doesn't suggest Tarlowski has done well. I would have thought both would be disastrous with our rotating cast of sh*te coaches.

They'd have been cheaper than Koulibaly and easier to move on, I suppose there's that angle.

[ROTG]

13 minutes ago, FrankLampard8 said:

KK has been Pony but you can't honestly believe Mee or Tarkowski are Chelsea quality? (Maybe if the aim is to finish where we did this season but we clearly have higher ambitions than that).

Mee and Tarkowski were being given away by Burnley and would have been happy to come to a club like chelsea and been happy to bench warm.

 Those type of recruitment are tactical with their knowledge of the PL etc. short contracts of 1-2 years without breaking the bank, Instead the club spent £30 plus stupid wages on a player who can't jump and is not fit for the PL

 

[FrankLampard8]

18 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Mee and Tarkowski were being given away by Burnley and would have been happy to come to a club like chelsea and been happy to bench warm.

 Those type of recruitment are tactical with their knowledge of the PL etc. short contracts of 1-2 years without breaking the bank, Instead the club spent £30 plus stupid wages on a player who can't jump and is not fit for the PL

 

We are setting the bar really low if all we are after is someone who is happy to come and sit on the bench. 

[ROTG]

10 minutes ago, FrankLampard8 said:

We are setting the bar really low if all we are after is someone who is happy to come and sit on the bench. 

Not for next season with probably no more than 45 games - Also Poch "if he takes the reins" allegedly likes a small squad of stars with the rest being  the supporting cast.

As for the low bar - not sure it has been very high over the past two transfer windows 

Edited May 22, 2023 by ROTG

[thevelourfog]

Here's a question ... Why was Lampard being allowed to make decisions, as it seems he did, on Hall and Chuk not going to the U20 WC when those decisions have implications for their development well beyond next Sunday ... And he's here until precisely then? At least Hall has been used, probably better for his development in fairness, but seems bizarre for Chuk. We have what is supposed to be a functioning football board now, they really should be leading on that nature of decision at this point.

[xceleryx]

52 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Mee and Tarkowski were being given away by Burnley and would have been happy to come to a club like chelsea and been happy to bench warm.

 Those type of recruitment are tactical with their knowledge of the PL etc. short contracts of 1-2 years without breaking the bank, Instead the club spent £30 plus stupid wages on a player who can't jump and is not fit for the PL

We weren't after bench warming CB's in the summer though, we were chasing higher quality replacements for Rudiger and Christensen, hence Koulibaly.

[thevelourfog]

4 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

We weren't after bench warming CB's in the summer though, we were chasing higher quality replacements for Rudiger and Christensen, hence Koulibaly.

Quite, and I think the exact basis on which Koulibaly has been a failure. Big money was spent on an experienced head to fill an immediate gap. Not just as a CB option, but as someone who could perform more or less immediately. Whatever the reasons for him not being able to do that, or how likely it was he could actually perform that role, are essentially moot now. 

"They'd have been marginally less worse/expensive than who we did buy" isn't really a recruitment strategy.

[Mark Kelly]

57 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Mee and Tarkowski were being given away by Burnley and would have been happy to come to a club like chelsea and been happy to bench warm.

 Those type of recruitment are tactical with their knowledge of the PL etc. short contracts of 1-2 years without breaking the bank, Instead the club spent £30 plus stupid wages on a player who can't jump and is not fit for the PL

 

Mee and Tarkowski are both good solid pros no doubt about it , but we did buy players with Premier League experience in Fofana and Cucurella  so spending £30m on Koulibally who the old board had been desperate to sign for years isn't really the same .

[ROTG]

40 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Mee and Tarkowski are both good solid pros no doubt about it , but we did buy players with Premier League experience in Fofana and Cucurella  so spending £30m on Koulibally who the old board had been desperate to sign for years isn't really the same .

Only thing MK, both Fofana and Cucurella is had one season in the PL under their belts which was ok.

KK was a total waste of money.

Anyway all history now and hopefully there are lesson learned from the past two transfer windows.

[Chelsea_Matt]

15 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Only thing MK, both Fofana and Cucurella is had one season in the PL under their belts which was ok.

KK was a total waste of money.

Anyway all history now and hopefully there are lesson learned from the past two transfer windows.

Cucurella was £60m apparently. Let that sink in.

[Holymoly]

14 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

Me too . Let's hope he has a touch of the Joses about him.

He will have one hell of a job to turn this around. If we begin next season the way we have been playing this season we will get relegated. That is the bald truth. It won't matter a jot how well he faces up to the media.

Years ago I had a client who ran a freight forwarding company and he had a contract to fly coal (no seriously) across Russia in one of their gigantic cargo planes. After a few years he decided it would be cheaper if he flew Boeings to cater for the gigs he had in Africa. So he sent his Russian pilots to Seattle to transition into 747s. While there, every single one of them disappeared and claimed political asylum. That is kind of what I am hoping happens with some of our players during the pre-season tour. In order to engender a new feeling of togetherness within the squad I feel we have to divest ourselves of a skip full of makeweights. I hesitate to believe that any manager will have sufficient time to do this by the time the new season begins.

55 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

Cucurella was £60m apparently. Let that sink in.

Word has it that the price was artificially inflated in order that Brighton were prepared to accept Colwill as a loan rather than outright purcahse. It's just a shame we didn't see the same potential of Levi that Brighton did from the outset.

[FrankLampard8]

20 minutes ago, Holymoly said:

Word has it that the price was artificially inflated in order that Brighton were prepared to accept Colwill as a loan rather than outright purcahse. It's just a shame we didn't see the same potential of Levi that Brighton did from the outset.

Probably for the best that one of our bright young talents wasn't around to be corrupted by this dumpster fire of a season.

[xceleryx]

1 hour ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

Cucurella was £60m apparently. Let that sink in.

Brighton had already slapped a £50m asking price on him when Man City were interested. We paid the extra to effectively make Colwill's move a loan rather than permanent. 

18 minutes ago, Holymoly said:

Word has it that the price was artificially inflated in order that Brighton were prepared to accept Colwill as a loan rather than outright purcahse. It's just a shame we didn't see the same potential of Levi that Brighton did from the outset.

Colwill was never going to play for us this season, it just didn't make sense given the circumstances with losing Rudiger and Christensen. We needed established options, not an untested kid albeit it a very talented one. 

In the end it was the right move, I doubt Colwill gets the same sort of plaudits had he remained here and been part of a struggling side. I know for one he'd have been far more scrutinised for any lapses or mistakes, instead they've been kinda swept under the rug courtesy of playing in a performing team. A prime example being his mistake yesterday vs Southampton that should've put Brighton behind in the first half being completely overlooked. No way that happens here. 

[jasonb]

27 minutes ago, Holymoly said:

I hesitate to believe that any manager will have sufficient time to do this by the time the new season begins.

Yes I think we will see movement this summer and winter to sign and move on those we need to.

The new owners have made a tricky worse by signing a number of questionable players given our needs without offloading many and to think this can all be remedied in one transfer window is a bit optimistic.   

[Chelsea_Matt]

3 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Brighton had already slapped a £50m asking price on him when Man City were interested. We paid the extra to effectively make Colwill's move a loan rather than permanent. 

Colwill was never going to play for us this season, it just didn't make sense given the circumstances with losing Rudiger and Christensen. We needed established options, not an untested kid albeit it a very talented one. 

In the end it was the right move, I doubt Colwill gets the same sort of plaudits had he remained here and been part of a struggling side. I know for one he'd have been far more scrutinised for any lapses or mistakes, instead they've been kinda swept under the rug courtesy of playing in a performing team. A prime example being his mistake yesterday vs Southampton that should've put Brighton behind in the first half being completely overlooked. No way that happens here. 

That isn’t my point. He’s not worth £5,000,000. Absolute clown of a player.

[xceleryx]

2 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

That isn’t my point. He’s not worth £5,000,000. Absolute clown of a player.

That's merely your view of things, the aforementioned factual elements remain either way.

[Chelsea_Matt]

1 minute ago, xceleryx said:

That's merely your view of things, the aforementioned factual elements remain either way.

Yeah I wasn’t talking about the fee or why, thanks. I knew that. I was just amazed we even bothered with him. 

[chrisb]

5 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

Yeah I wasn’t talking about the fee or why, thanks. I knew that. I was just amazed we even bothered with him. 

He was very good at Brighton, so much so he was their Player of The Season.

We bought him, he then walked through the magical “Stars in Their Eyes” doorway at Cobham and came out the other side as a footballing clueless Cucurella look-a-like.