Chelsea Sack Graham Potter

[Ham]

Genuinely, as long as we avoid relegation I'm willing to go with a reboot next season with no European distractions. 

Ground zero with the hope of challenging for the title or top 4 next year. 

[Mark Kelly]

12 minutes ago, Ham said:

Genuinely, as long as we avoid relegation I'm willing to go with a reboot next season with no European distractions. 

Ground zero with the hope of challenging for the title or top 4 next year. 

Pretty much my thinking , if he stays it would actually pay us to finish just below the European football cut off and have a season with more coaching time and less distraction.

If you believe what Matt Law is obviously being briefed the idea is very much to clear the decks in the summer and give Potter a second season with this one literally being used as a bedding in process for them , Potter and the players.

It doesn't mean he's the right guy , just that he's their guy.

[chara]

5 hours ago, Trini_Blue said:

I don't know if Potter will be able to achieve that sort of points total with us.

But what I can say is that he's got a far better squad of players here than at Brighton. 

So, if he's a great coach he should be able to eventually. I can't say when and if that will happen. 

GP by all accounts made the players he had at Brighton into better players.

Well done. No sarcasm.

GP has come to Chelsea with a squad of far better players on hand (now)than he had at Brighton...his job at SB isn't to make them "better" players but to get them playing at the best level they can and stay a top level side.

Long hand for coach the squad!!!!!

 

[Max Fowler]

47 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

I don't think the "tipping point" with the fans matters. Why are we expecting the owners to care about that?

Of course they do. If the fans are massively hostile it's bad for everything to do with the club. 

Will destroy the players' confidence - belief in the manager - results could only get worse.

The fact that the next games have been earmarked to win the fans back over is proof that they care.

[Mark Kelly]

5 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Of course they do. If the fans are massively hostile it's bad for everything to do with the club. 

Will destroy the players' confidence - belief in the manager - results could only get worse.

The fact that the next games have been earmarked to win the fans back over is proof that they care.

What?

Who's earmarking the games to win the fans back over exactly?

Where on earth are you getting this nonsense from? Twitter?

[hallgalley]

I wonder if AVB would he done better

given more time, he tried to change too much to soon as well …

Thiago silva next manager….

[thevelourfog]

13 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Of course they do. If the fans are massively hostile it's bad for everything to do with the club. 

Will destroy the players' confidence - belief in the manager - results could only get worse.

The fact that the next games have been earmarked to win the fans back over is proof that they care.

I mean, I'd agree it's bad for the club. It doesn't follow, though, that the owners are going to be persuaded in different action by fan hostility. That's a huge leap, especially when the only thing we know about their approach to sacking coaches is that they'll willingly do it to a fan favourite and then brief they were cornered into it.

I don't even have confidence the owners follow what the fans think that closely.

No idea what you mean with your last sentence. 

[Max Fowler]

28 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

I mean, I'd agree it's bad for the club. It doesn't follow, though, that the owners are going to be persuaded in different action by fan hostility. That's a huge leap, especially when the only thing we know about their approach to sacking coaches is that they'll willingly do it to a fan favourite and then brief they were cornered into it.

I don't even have confidence the owners follow what the fans think that closely.

No idea what you mean with your last sentence. 

Well all the word coming out of the club is that they do listen to fans voices very closely.

Reports like this seem to confirm what I'm saying is true.

 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Max Fowler

[Max Fowler]

Anyone seen this? 
This is fascinating - there is definitely potential he could go.

 

 

[Max Fowler]

2 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Anyone seen this? 
This is fascinating - there is definitely potential he could go.

 

 

"However, 90min understands that some within Chelsea's hierarchy have huge concerns about the club's form and do not share the same belief as Boehly that Potter can turn the club around.

Boehly is also believed to have been considering whether Potter does need replacing, but one thing he is unwilling to do is proceed with changes before a plan is already in place."

 

 

[Ham]

3 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Anyone seen this? 
This is fascinating - there is definitely potential he could go.

 

 

"Sources have told 90min"

Lots of credibility right there 😏

[Max Fowler]

16 minutes ago, Ham said:

"Sources have told 90min"

Lots of credibility right there 😏

I'd trust it about as much as Matt Law's pro-Potter Telegraph briefings right now.

 

[Ham]

4 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

I'd trust it about as much as Matt Law's pro-Potter Telegraph briefings right now.

 

Matt Law has always been pro-Chelsea as opposed to pro-anyone in particular (Even though he's a Villa fan). 

I think he's well informed and I'd be surprised if he risked his journalistic credibility by becoming a mouthpiece for someone. 

[Mark Kelly]

I don't believe I've ever read any positive Chelsea article penned by Simon Phillips . Not one .

[xceleryx]

10 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

I refuse to admit Mudryk is not a player who was bought for the here and now. Arsenal wanted him to help them win the title - right now. Even if he takes a couple of weeks to get fit it can still be a signing to paper over the cracks.

If this is the case then it becomes considerably difficult to have an open discussion on this. There's just no feasible way a player that's not kicked a competitive ball for 3 months arrives with the expectations of being an immediate contributor in anything more than on a nominal scale. Mudryk arrived on the 15th of January, so he's been here just over a month now and in that time still looks well short of being at optimal match fitness levels across the 244 total minutes played so far. 

Trossard, a fully match fit signing has played 215 minutes for Arsenal so far since joining. While I'm sure Arsenal would've liked Mudryk to contribute in some way this season the expectations on actually doing so would've been less than what we're requesting of him right now in our situation. There's every chance they'd have eased him back to fitness with no real urgency, with a view that maybe he'd offer something in the last month or so of the season. 

In terms of signings that paper over cracks Mudryk simply doesn't fit that profile of signing, he's someone very clearly signed with a much longer view in place. 

[Rob B]

3 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

Right - it's time to address this head on, because it keeps being said:

"It's clear Potter will be given until at least the end of the season."

No it isn't. Not at all.

I’ve got to say, I do agree with this.

Prior to Southampton, we had come off the back of a decent performance against Dortmund,  3 draws in a row which included a visit to Anfield and a narrow win against palace.  So the previous 5 games were LDDDW.

I wasn’t there on Saturday but it sounded pretty toxic by all accounts and has prompted most fans to be of the view he should go.  

Now just imagine the atmosphere if in a fortnights time we have lost to Spurs and Leeds (of all teams!) in the PL and we get knocked out the CL.  The pressure will be absolutely immense and probably too big for anyone to ignore.

I’d be shocked if they weren’t putting the feelers out through third parties already.  I don’t think Todd and Co are looking for a way out with Potter - if anything they are probably looking for reasons to keep him around, but if results don’t improve quickly, other forces such as the media, players and the fans will be impossible to ignore.  I’d also like to think that now Todd has some senior football people around the table,  he is leaning heavily on the views of Winstanly, Vivell, Stewart and even Neil Bath, so will be getting good counsel. 

One or two positive results from the next 3 (which includes draws) I think will be enough to keep the wolves at bay, but straight losses and/or the poor manner of the defeats and I think parting ways will be inevitable. 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Rob B

[Max Fowler]

40 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

If this is the case then it becomes considerably difficult to have an open discussion on this. There's just no feasible way a player that's not kicked a competitive ball for 3 months arrives with the expectations of being an immediate contributor in anything more than on a nominal scale. Mudryk arrived on the 15th of January, so he's been here just over a month now and in that time still looks well short of being at optimal match fitness levels across the 244 total minutes played so far. 

Trossard, a fully match fit signing has played 215 minutes for Arsenal so far since joining. While I'm sure Arsenal would've liked Mudryk to contribute in some way this season the expectations on actually doing so would've been less than what we're requesting of him right now in our situation. There's every chance they'd have eased him back to fitness with no real urgency, with a view that maybe he'd offer something in the last month or so of the season. 

In terms of signings that paper over cracks Mudryk simply doesn't fit that profile of signing, he's someone very clearly signed with a much longer view in place. 

I think we're talking across each other a little bit here.

Clearly we have a strategy right now of getting the best young players around in. I don't mind it. But Mudryk isn't Chukwuemeka. He's a Champions League proven player and one of the hottest properties around. He's 22 - not 18. 

Multiple things can be going on at once. We get Mudryk in for a big fee and take him off Arsenal's hands and the fanbase are appeased - it's an additional talented player in for Potter regardless of if he's already fully match fit or not.

You can still throw additional money at a situation without it contradicting the originally planned profile of player.

[Max Fowler]

1 hour ago, Ham said:

Matt Law has always been pro-Chelsea as opposed to pro-anyone in particular (Even though he's a Villa fan). 

I think he's well informed and I'd be surprised if he risked his journalistic credibility by becoming a mouthpiece for someone. 

Are you kidding? He's not said one bad word about Potter. Not one. Neither has Nizaar Kinsella. I still like them both but they have zero integrity when it comes to writing about Potter.

[Michael Tucker]

7 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

they have zero integrity when it comes to writing about Potter.

This. 

[xceleryx]

17 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

I think we're talking across each other a little bit here.

Clearly we have a strategy right now of getting the best young players around in. I don't mind it. But Mudryk isn't Chukwuemeka. He's a Champions League proven player and one of the hottest properties around. He's 22 - not 18. 

Multiple things can be going on at once. We get Mudryk in for a big fee and take him off Arsenal's hands and the fanbase are appeased - it's an additional talented player in for Potter regardless of if he's already fully match fit or not.

You can still throw additional money at a situation without it contradicting the originally planned profile of player.

Yes, but you're trying to claim he was signed to mark and immediate impact when that quite clearly isn't true because of the circumstances he arrived in with the limited football played. If we were talking about Enzo, I'd agree. Mudryk's situation isn't the same however.

He's very much a signing for years to come partly because he's still young enough to develop further, but largely also because he came on the back of not having played since November. 

This is like us "strengthening" during Conte's second season in the January window where he wanted a left back and midfielder and we signed Emerson on the back of just returning from a major knee injury, and Barkley who'd missed most of the season up to that point with a hamstring injury. Neither player were in the condition needed to make a telling contribution when arriving, Mudryk (and Madueke) fit a similar mould. 

I'm expecting more of such players next season and beyond, the only players I expected to be telling factors upon arrival where Enzo and Joao Felix, two players that had been playing regularly prior to arrival. With Badiashile being a bonus courtesy of a CB position opening up per injuries and form of others. 

 

[Trini_Blue]

3 hours ago, Ham said:

Genuinely, as long as we avoid relegation I'm willing to go with a reboot next season with no European distractions. 

Ground zero with the hope of challenging for the title or top 4 next year. 

I am too. Missing out on 1 season in the UCL is no issue for me.

The question really surrounds our (the club's) ability to make it work financially. 

But yeah. Give me a title challenge over a UCL run ANY day of the week.

[xceleryx]

1 minute ago, Trini_Blue said:

I am too. Missing out on 1 season in the UCL is no issue for me.

The question really surrounds our (the club's) ability to make it work financially. 

But yeah. Give me a title challenge over a UCL run ANY day of the week.

That's the big uncertainty through isn't it, would it just be one season of missing out? 

The leap Potter would need to make with this side would arguably be the biggest turn arounds ever seen. 

[Michael Tucker]

1 minute ago, Trini_Blue said:

I am too. Missing out on 1 season in the UCL is no issue for me.

The question really surrounds our (the club's) ability to make it work financially. 

But yeah. Give me a title challenge over a UCL run ANY day of the week.

Quick question: How does the club 'make it work financially' without the CL income? 

[xceleryx]

Just now, Michael Tucker said:

Quick question: How does the club 'make it work financially' without the CL income? 

I imagine it'll come at the cost of selling a few homegrown players - Gallagher and Mount being the big two. 

Maybe if we get a few new sponsors sorted on top we'll be able to navigate our way through. The question, which I kind raised in my last post, is what happens if we spend more than one year out of Europe? 

[Ham]

4 minutes ago, Trini_Blue said:

I am too. Missing out on 1 season in the UCL is no issue for me.

The question really surrounds our (the club's) ability to make it work financially. 

But yeah. Give me a title challenge over a UCL run ANY day of the week.

A few sales in the summer.

Bring back Lukaku. (Mark Kelly is typing)

New sponsorships.