Chelsea FC EPL Champions 2015

marklazarcovic

well if it wasn't liverpool,burnley,Leicester,villa,newcastle,everton,swansea,sunderland,stoke,man city,spurs,southampton,arsenal,west ham,palace,west brom,hull or qpr that won it,im glad then it was chelsea from the rest :P

Alfred Borden

Just saw this on Sky

Raf32

Raf32 wrote: »

Just saw this on Sky

£70m right there.

Chelsea saw PSG and Everton coming. Probably couldn't believe their luck especially with the former.

Alfred Borden

But say they even just got £40 million for the two of them, they would still be behind arsenal and City and a good bit behind United.

Raf32

Raf32 wrote: »

But say they even just got £40 million for the two of them, they would still be behind arsenal and City and a good bit behind United.

Mata was another huge one recently, another £40m, Schurrle too went for over £20m


That's £130m sales on 4 players. Pretty mad really

blueser

rarnes1 wrote: »

£70m right there.

Chelsea saw PSG and Everton coming. Probably couldn't believe their luck especially with the former.

That Luiz fee was ridiculous. £50m for him? He's a car crash as a central defender; he couldn't mark a lamp post. Whoever in the Chelsea staff got that deal through really does deserve a medal.

Ulysses Gaze

blueser wrote: »

That Luiz fee was ridiculous. £50m for him? He's a car crash as a central defender; he couldn't mark a lamp post. Whoever in the Chelsea staff got that deal through really does deserve a medal.

To quote Dunphy;

"David Luiz would be a liability in the League of Ireland"

L'prof

Raf32 wrote: »

Just saw this on Sky

Still the most spent out of those clubs. Recouping money they spent in previous years is one of the perks of having pumped close to £1b into the team since the arrival of Abramovich.

the_monkey

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

To quote Dunphy;

"David Luiz would be a liability in the League of Ireland"

... in fairness he scored a nice penalty in the UCL final ....

greendom

the_monkey wrote: »

... in fairness he scored a nice penalty in the UCL final ....

And a nice header in the Champions League at Stamford Bridge this season

GavRedKing

L'prof wrote: »

Still the most spent out of those clubs. Recouping money they spent in previous years is one of the perks of having pumped close to £1b into the team since the arrival of Abramovich.

That money is a bargain when you consider City have spent as much as Chelsea in half the time and have had less success, especially in Europe.

To win the league this year we've the 3rd highest spend behind Utd and Pool and the 3rd best net spend, only Southampton, Spurs and Chelsea have made money in this window.

The days of billionaires spending their bo**ocks in a window is gone, sure City themselves have been hampered by FFP recently, which is shown by the fact that 5 other clubs out spent them this year.

No club can win anyhting without spending, Chelseas biggest asset is the fact we've got good money for people that arent needed or wanted.

Luiz (50), Lukaku (28), De Bruyne (18), Mata (37) have gone for good money, allowing us to spend and stay well within FFP.

What might be a test is when the squad starts ageing and we have less assets to sell to clubs willing to take unwanted players.

City have a similar issue right now, FFP will restrict them this summer and to overhaul the squad they'll have to sell off a few high earners or a star for big money to fund their activity, IMO, but that remains to be seen.

I cant see Chelsea spending much in the summer either even though, like all the bigger clubs, we're linked with some expensive players that would be great signings, I dont think we'll spend 130-150million.

dfx-

GavRedKing wrote: »

That money is a bargain when you consider City have spent as much as Chelsea in half the time and have had less success, especially in Europe.

To win the league this year we've the 3rd highest spend behind Utd and Pool and the 3rd best net spend, only Southampton, Spurs and Chelsea have made money in this window.

The days of billionaires spending their bo**ocks in a window is gone, sure City themselves have been hampered by FFP recently, which is shown by the fact that 5 other clubs out spent them this year.

No club can win anyhting without spending, Chelseas biggest asset is the fact we've got good money for people that arent needed or wanted.

Luiz (50), Lukaku (28), De Bruyne (18), Mata (37) have gone for good money, allowing us to spend and stay well within FFP.

What might be a test is when the squad starts ageing and we have less assets to sell to clubs willing to take unwanted players.

City have a similar issue right now, FFP will restrict them this summer and to overhaul the squad they'll have to sell off a few high earners or a star for big money to fund their activity, IMO, but that remains to be seen.

I cant see Chelsea spending much in the summer either even though, like all the bigger clubs, we're linked with some expensive players that would be great signings, I dont think we'll spend 130-150million.

Starts ageing?:P

There's going to be a mass replacement of defenders largely at the same time. Mourinho won't develop any, so it'll have to be finished articles in defence which cost a considerable amount.

GavRedKing

dfx- wrote: »

Starts ageing?:P

There's going to be a mass replacement of defenders largely at the same time. Mourinho won't develop any, so it'll have to be finished articles in defence which cost a considerable amount.

We've Zouma, hes good enough tolay on his own in the back line. The more pressing issue is a RB or LB and shift Azp to RB. Kalas is also good enough to be a squad option to cover RB and CB too and hes only just going on 22.

Theres not many good CBs around anyway so we wont be the only ones with an issue.

Could be worse, could have blown mad money on Mangala, a player we were linked with, thankfully that didnt come to pass.

greendom

GavRedKing wrote: »

We've Zouma, hes good enough tolay on his own in the back line. The more pressing issue is a RB or LB and shift Azp to RB. Kalas is also good enough to be a squad option to cover RB and CB too and hes only just going on 22.

Theres not many good CBs around anyway so we wont be the only ones with an issue.

Could be worse, could have blown mad money on Mangala, a player we were linked with, thankfully that didnt come to pass.

played well against Spurs and he generally seems to play well when he has Di Michelis alongside him.

GavRedKing

greendom wrote: »

played well against Spurs and he generally seems to play well when he has Di Michelis alongside him.

I agree, hes a decent CB IMO but I just think the outlay of over 30million for him was a bit much.

Happens when a club with money comes in for these players though.

Sgt Pepper 64

Congrats to Chelsea.

Deserve to be Champions, Jose.. love or hate him is a winner

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

DVDM93

JT26 wrote: »

Some year for the jt all the same looking forward to watching the parade!

I hate when people talk about themselves in the third person.

hullaballoo

dfx- wrote: »

Starts ageing?:P

There's going to be a mass replacement of defenders largely at the same time. Mourinho won't develop any, so it'll have to be finished articles in defence which cost a considerable amount.

But then there's this thing called the truth. Most people don't grasp it around here but don't worry, there is a salve.

Chelsea's youth set-up have probably the best young defenders there are at the moment. There is no trouble there. We also have probably the most promising forwards out of any youth academy backing us up.

I suppose there isn't really any call for moderators to actually know their field these days but sure who cares? It's only Chelsea.

MonkeyTennis

Well done. By far the best team this year . I will never like or respect you

TheDoc

Deserved winners without doubt, the hard work was done first half of the season when Chelsea were playing incredible stuff. Second half of the season it teethered off, but then Mourinho showed why he is a quality and top coach/manager, grinding out results. So many times in PL history teams leading at a canter have hit poor form second half of the season and let a title slip away, but Mourinho ensured it wasn't overly in doubt.

I think people lamenting their style, are just sour as **** to be honest. And forget how incredible they were first half of the season. Personally I fell foul of this after the 1-0 defeat at United. But on reflection it was nothing I was surprised about, and the game went how I expected, bar loosing 1-0.

I do also think thought that Chelsea capitalised on some uncertainty and issues around them, and it showed how poor the challengers were. By right, when they started dropping points second half of season, the other teams should have pilled on real pressure, but that never really happened.

City going through their typical slack title defence(I saw typical as it looks they are incapable of defending a title), Arsenal being Arsenal, United with a new manager and growing pains, and Liverpool incapable of reaching the heights of last year.

Chelsea would rightly go into next season as title favourites, but I think it will be much tighter with the chasing pack having their house in order and ready for a challenge. Was a bit like Fergusons last season in charge, won by a canter but if the rivals had their ships right, it would have been way tighter and potentially our squad wouldn't have been good enough to get over the line.

Evident this year was key players tailing off in the final 1/4 of season. Mourinho definitely needs to expand the squad with players he actually trusts.

Not a fan of Mourinho, but have utmost respect for how he goes about winning football matches and titles. And Chelsea more then deserving. I think before fans assosiated with United, City and Arsenal come out with the garbage being spouted last two weeks, best asking questions of our own clubs, as to how pathetic and limp our challenges were. City and Arsenal especially.

GavRedKing

The summer window will tell alot about who our nearest title challengers will be. For me without any transfers taken into account yet, it would be Arsenal.

Theyve a very good squad, less injuries in the 2nd half of the season and theyve a stable manager and board willing to back him.

Next it has to be Utd but again, depending on the summer they could easily be our greatest rivals for next season, Depay is a good bit of business as it stands, IMO and they can easily out spend any other team in the league with ease.

City up next, theyve potentially got a huge summer ahead of themselves, uncertantity over players and managers a like wont help and they could be restricted with FFP.

Hard to call between Spurs and Pool, decent squads that need investments in key areas but both have young, decent managers that could push them on for a top 4 challenge, cant see either winning the league but the summer could change that.

Hard to guess what Chelsea will do, we've got some issues, the squad size is one of them and we may have to sell to buy in some quality, we do need a 2nd GK, a good FB, a CM and another CF. WE've about 20,000 players coming back from loans so they might add to the coffers when theyre sold on.

KaiserGunner

TheDoc wrote: »

I think before fans assosiated with United, City and Arsenal come out with the garbage being spouted last two weeks, best asking questions of our own clubs, as to how pathetic and limp our challenges were. City and Arsenal especially.

Speaking as an Arsenal fan, there was no league challenge by us due to a poor start to the season, which gave us too much to do. The form in the second half of the season though was excellent, but we were never going to catch Chelsea in reality. So Chelsea thoroughly deserved the title this season.

I'm interested though in why you say City and Arsenals challenges were limp and pathetic especially, when compared to Man Utd? City and Arsenal are both ahead of Man Utd and Man Utd spent the most out of all the clubs last summer! So don't know why you are being less harsh on Utd.

GavRedKing

KaiserGunner wrote: »

Speaking as an Arsenal fan, there was no league challenge by us due to a poor start to the season, which gave us too much to do. The form in the second half of the season though was excellent, but we were never going to catch Chelsea in reality. So Chelsea thoroughly deserved the title this season.

I'm interested though in why you say City and Arsenals challenges were limp and pathetic especially, when compared to Man Utd? City and Arsenal are both ahead of Man Utd and Man Utd spent the most out of all the clubs last summer! So don't know why you are being less harsh on Utd.

New manager and endless system changes I'd iamgine, I never expected Utd to challenege anyway and they didnt ultimately, as seen by the tail off after losing to Chelsea.

So I'm assuming the Utd fans werent expecting LVG to push all the way for the title but make top 4 and go from there.

TheDoc

KaiserGunner wrote: »

Speaking as an Arsenal fan, there was no league challenge by us due to a poor start to the season, which gave us too much to do. The form in the second half of the season though was excellent, but we were never going to catch Chelsea in reality. So Chelsea thoroughly deserved the title this season.

I'm interested though in why you say City and Arsenals challenges were limp and pathetic especially, when compared to Man Utd? City and Arsenal are both ahead of Man Utd and Man Utd spent the most out of all the clubs last summer! So don't know why you are being less harsh on Utd.

As said below. A number of first team players to be integrated, new manager who had little pre-season, injury crisis first half of season and a number of system changes. Granted they are excuses, but perfectly valid one.

Man City are a devastating team, with obvious mental blocks, and suffer from a total lack of drive and hunger to defend a title.

Arsenal have stability in a manager and club with winning titles before, knowing how to do it, but just about making a mess of building the squad. Wenger a lot like Ferguson in this regard, completely ignoring blatant squad/first 11 issues due to loyalty, or reliance on first team players returning.

Now that Arsenal have the money to spend, excuses are very much drying up for them. Personally, I think it was a remarkable achievement by Wenger to guide Arsenal to the CL year in year out with the stadium move and the club growing their finances into a powerful position. But that needs to start bearing fruit now.

I think City arn't going to overly creditable challengers next season. Uncertainty over the manager, team rebuilding required constricted by FFP, and teams poaching around some key names. I think Pellegrini has got the rough end of the stick, as the guys above him have made some disastrous signings. (Which the manager takes partial blame with).

Arsenal do good business in the summer, they are credible challengers again. But doing it tail end of the season with the pressure off isn't the sign of champions elect, they need to hit the ground running.

dfx-

hullaballoo wrote: »

But then there's this thing called the truth. Most people don't grasp it around here but don't worry, there is a salve.

Chelsea's youth set-up have probably the best young defenders there are at the moment. There is no trouble there. We also have probably the most promising forwards out of any youth academy backing us up.

I suppose there isn't really any call for moderators to actually know their field these days but sure who cares? It's only Chelsea.

And that's why he plays a 37 year old striker, because they have the most promising strikers in the academy, still plays Mikel and a 32 year old, 332 appearances under his belt reserve keeper, why 30 year old Ivanovic plays every minute and has a 34 year old captain.

But calling them ageing is not the truth. And youth is clearly Chelsea's strength. No hope of them ever trusted to play, but it's promising. Only Chelsea.

HalloweenJack

Chelsea fan here and agree 100% with you dfx.

GavRedKing

TheDoc wrote: »

I think City arn't going to overly creditable challengers next season. Uncertainty over the manager, team rebuilding required constricted by FFP, and teams poaching around some key names. I think Pellegrini has got the rough end of the stick, as the guys above him have made some disastrous signings. (Which the manager takes partial blame with).

This is the key to Citys summer though, theyve so many things to get right and more questions than answers.

What if Pellegrini is sacked who do they repalce him with?
What if Aguero leaves?
Can we spend without selling?
Can we buy the correct type of players and not fall foul of FFP in the process?

This is arguably Citys toughest summer in a long time and theyve an ageing squad to booth, personally I think they should keep Pellegrini and give the club some stability, theres a real lack of top class managers around at the moment unless Bayern and Real pull the trigger and then they'll be looking for good managers also but maybe City could take act on this and hire Carlo or Pep.

Very interesting summer for City regardless and theyve the most to lose out of the top clubs this summer and probably have the toughest job of building for next year.

GavRedKing

dfx- wrote: »

And that's why he plays a 37 year old striker, because they have the most promising strikers in the academy, still plays Mikel and a 32 year old, 332 appearances under his belt reserve keeper, why 30 year old Ivanovic plays every minute and has a 34 year old captain.

But calling them ageing is not the truth. And youth is clearly Chelsea's strength. No hope of them ever trusted to play, but it's promising. Only Chelsea.

Spot on, the issue is trust. If Jose wants to build a dynasty and stay for a decade he has to play the youths and not in games against Pool, WBA and Sunderland when it doesnt matter.

Drogba has been poor this year but I dont think anyone expected him to play so many games with Remy and Costas injuries/bans, thats my biggest criticism for Jose this year.

Solanke has over 40 goals for the youths this year, yes its a huge step up but if you want him to make the step up he should be played and given a chance and not in a dead rubber, where he might break his bo**ocks and the other 10 lads arent interested.

Hopefully it will change as gone are the days of spending 150m a window, unless we decide to sell a few players.

Lukker-

Solanke is only 17. I agree that he should have got some minutes but you can't expecting him to start games when he's never been tested at this level and most likely isn't physically ready yet.

grumpymunster

dfx- wrote: »

And that's why he plays a 37 year old striker, because they have the most promising strikers in the academy, still plays Mikel and a 32 year old, 332 appearances under his belt reserve keeper, why 30 year old Ivanovic plays every minute and has a 34 year old captain.

But calling them ageing is not the truth. And youth is clearly Chelsea's strength. No hope of them ever trusted to play, but it's promising. Only Chelsea.

Are you seriously suggesting that JT and Ivan should not have played so many games given our defensive record? Do you see an issue with one of the 3 best goalkeepers in the PL being on our bench even if he is 32 (mind you the fact a 23 year old keeper is keeping him on the bench sort of blows a huge hole in your terribly put together argument).

To change a team for the sake of changing a team is folly. To throw in one of the youngsters in the business end games would also have been folly sometimes it has to be the old dog for the hard road. Drog didn't have a great season but when the chips were down away at Leicester who was it steadied the ship.

You quite evidently don't like Chelsea and that's fine I don't like cucumber but my wife loves cucumber so it goes. But your posts are lazy complaining we don't give youth a chance whilst bemoaning a 32 goalkeeper on the bench whilst a 23 year old plays is classic gibberish though old Gabby Johnson would be proud of you.

dfx-

Mourinho putting in a La Liga winning and Champions League finalist 23 year old does nothing to argue my point. He put in a player he trusts on the big stage having already played there, but didn't develop himself. Even then Courtois said he doesn't want to go back unless he's first choice. It does show what can be done by playing younger players perhaps.

He simply won't do that with the 'promising' academy. He never has. The 'promising' academy is largely a way of getting around FFP to afford ready-to-go players that Mourinho actually wants.

grumpymunster wrote: »

You quite evidently don't like Chelsea and that's fine I don't like cucumber but my wife loves cucumber so it goes. But your posts are lazy complaining we don't give youth a chance whilst bemoaning a 32 goalkeeper on the bench whilst a 23 year old plays is classic gibberish though old Gabby Johnson would be proud of you.

It's not really anything to do with not liking Chelsea. Can you explain it to HalloweenJack who seems to not hate Chelsea, but agrees with me.

TheDoc

I don't think dfx makes any poor points.

It is a very clear trait of Mourinho that he puts trust in certain players and will play them as much as possible to the point of exhaustion. He has done that at Chelsea first time round, Inter, Real and again this season. It's not overly different from other managers, but it's so obvious with Mourinho. There is obvious talent on the bench not to be used, and there is obvious signs of flagging on the pitch not addressed.

Something that has been fine when he has been at a club for 2-3 seasons, but as Gav said if he wants to be the prolonged Chelsea manager, he needs to lower the barrier to get into his "circle of trust" and starting learning how to integrate players into the first team.

It's always been a critique I've held against him, I don't know if its lazy or true, just my perception. But after Porto, he has been able to go to clubs with big pockets, and hasn't had to worry much about youth developement, or integrating young players. He has bought what he needed, got the job done and that is fine. But this could be his first case of operating at a big club for an extended period, so it's going to be a learning experience for him bringing through youth, knowing how to use them, when to use them, and how to develop them.

I don't doubt for a second that he would be an excellent personality and man manager for youth players, but he will need to accept mistakes and blunders as part of the process of integrating young players.

For too long Chelsea have sang loud about their youth products, but they are just farmed out for ages and then sold to flip a few million profit. While the balance books might look great from it, I'd be of the opinion if your youth setup isn't facilitating and supplementing your first team, it's not working.

GavRedKing

Lukker- wrote: »

Solanke is only 17. I agree that he should have got some minutes but you can't expecting him to start games when he's never been tested at this level and most likely isn't physically ready yet.

Solanke is certainly no small guy, Loftus Cheek is bigger but hes over 18months older. Both are in very good shape and size relative to their age but Loftus Cheek was certainly further along in his progress and it shows, I'd still like to play Solanke, his movement is very good and he knows when to attack the space and drive in behind or when its better to come short, hold it up and engage the midfield.

TheDoc wrote: »

I don't think dfx makes any poor points.

It is a very clear trait of Mourinho that he puts trust in certain players and will play them as much as possible to the point of exhaustion. He has done that at Chelsea first time round, Inter, Real and again this season. It's not overly different from other managers, but it's so obvious with Mourinho. There is obvious talent on the bench not to be used, and there is obvious signs of flagging on the pitch not addressed.

Something that has been fine when he has been at a club for 2-3 seasons, but as Gav said if he wants to be the prolonged Chelsea manager, he needs to lower the barrier to get into his "circle of trust" and starting learning how to integrate players into the first team.

It's always been a critique I've held against him, I don't know if its lazy or true, just my perception. But after Porto, he has been able to go to clubs with big pockets, and hasn't had to worry much about youth developement, or integrating young players. He has bought what he needed, got the job done and that is fine. But this could be his first case of operating at a big club for an extended period, so it's going to be a learning experience for him bringing through youth, knowing how to use them, when to use them, and how to develop them.

I don't doubt for a second that he would be an excellent personality and man manager for youth players, but he will need to accept mistakes and blunders as part of the process of integrating young players.

For too long Chelsea have sang loud about their youth products, but they are just farmed out for ages and then sold to flip a few million profit. While the balance books might look great from it, I'd be of the opinion if your youth setup isn't facilitating and supplementing your first team, it's not working.

Ya, Jose is likely to be with us for at least another few years and it will be his longest spell at the club. In that regard the youths, FFP and our loan system can all help and hinder Jose in equal measures to a degree.

We need the youths to go on loan to turn a profit for FFP.
We also in the same breath need the youths to go on loan and come back better players to improve the 1st team down the line.
If they dont they'll be sold to add to the coffers and the guys will still be playing professional football.

The middle ground is that Jose and the staff need to make a call on the best prospects, do they go on loan and play 25/30games in the Championship/League 1 or 2 or are they better served playing with the 1st team?

As you've mentioned, Jose needs to open up and allow these guys to not just train but to play with the seniors. Of course a guy like Loftus Cheek is more likely to make mistakes than say Mikel or Ramires but as an example, RLC yesterday was much better than Mikel, Jose took him off as he wasnt used to the intensity of the game and he also didnt trust his positioning so Matic came on, the only way to improve that is to play him more or give him an EPL loan.

I'm all for Chelsea buying Pogba or someone of that ilk but when youve got a talented lad like RLC on the fringes, theres other areas you cna splurge 50/60m on instead of stunting his growth as player. Take Matic as a prime example, it took him getting 1st team consistent football to develop into the player everyone thought he could be.

Hopefully a decade of Jose at Chelsea will see another 3 or 4 players come in from the youths and be Chelsea regulars, the talent is there in some of them.

Sgt Pepper 64

GavRedKing wrote: »

Solanke is certainly no small guy, Loftus Cheek is bigger but hes over 18months older. Both are in very good shape and size relative to their age but Loftus Cheek was certainly further along in his progress and it shows, I'd still like to play Solanke, his movement is very good and he knows when to attack the space and drive in behind or when its better to come short, hold it up and engage the midfield.



Ya, Jose is likely to be with us for at least another few years and it will be his longest spell at the club. In that regard the youths, FFP and our loan system can all help and hinder Jose in equal measures to a degree.

We need the youths to go on loan to turn a profit for FFP.
We also in the same breath need the youths to go on loan and come back better players to improve the 1st team down the line.
If they dont they'll be sold to add to the coffers and the guys will still be playing professional football.

The middle ground is that Jose and the staff need to make a call on the best prospects, do they go on loan and play 25/30games in the Championship/League 1 or 2 or are they better served playing with the 1st team?

As you've mentioned, Jose needs to open up and allow these guys to not just train but to play with the seniors. Of course a guy like Loftus Cheek is more likely to make mistakes than say Mikel or Ramires but as an example, RLC yesterday was much better than Mikel, Jose took him off as he wasnt used to the intensity of the game and he also didnt trust his positioning so Matic came on, the only way to improve that is to play him more or give him an EPL loan.

I'm all for Chelsea buying Pogba or someone of that ilk but when youve got a talented lad like RLC on the fringes, theres other areas you cna splurge 50/60m on instead of stunting his growth as player. Take Matic as a prime example, it took him getting 1st team consistent football to develop into the player everyone thought he could be.

Hopefully a decade of Jose at Chelsea will see another 3 or 4 players come in from the youths and be Chelsea regulars, the talent is there in some of them.

Hopefully Jose has bought himself some breathing space by winning 2 trophies, and should be able to "gamble" a little more on the kids next season.
Personally I find it very hypercritical of Roman to demand success and play the kids at the same time, and it will be interesting to see how Jose handles it, given he doesnt really have any record of bringing kids through

GavRedKing

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

Hopefully Jose has bought himself some breathing space by winning 2 trophies, and should be able to "gamble" a little more on the kids next season.
Personally I find it very hypercritical of Roman to demand success and play the kids at the same time, and it will be interesting to see how Jose handles it, given he doesnt really have any record of bringing kids through

The quality is there anyway, its a given that we want someone like Bamford or Solanke to play up top next year, it would be better to see than an ageing CF struggle for 90mins.

Nobody knows what Roman wants, I'd assume if Jose said gimme 50m now and ill sell players to add to that figure for transfers in the summer, Roman would have no problem opening the cheque book. We need some experience but we also need to blood the youths in. The league cup and FA cup are good opportunities to mix and match, hopefully we'll see a trimming of the like of Mikel from next years squad to make room for Loftus Cheek at the very least.

grumpymunster

TheDoc wrote: »

I don't think dfx makes any poor points.

It is a very clear trait of Mourinho that he puts trust in certain players and will play them as much as possible to the point of exhaustion. He has done that at Chelsea first time round, Inter, Real and again this season. It's not overly different from other managers, but it's so obvious with Mourinho. There is obvious talent on the bench not to be used, and there is obvious signs of flagging on the pitch not addressed.

Something that has been fine when he has been at a club for 2-3 seasons, but as Gav said if he wants to be the prolonged Chelsea manager, he needs to lower the barrier to get into his "circle of trust" and starting learning how to integrate players into the first team.

It's always been a critique I've held against him, I don't know if its lazy or true, just my perception. But after Porto, he has been able to go to clubs with big pockets, and hasn't had to worry much about youth developement, or integrating young players. He has bought what he needed, got the job done and that is fine. But this could be his first case of operating at a big club for an extended period, so it's going to be a learning experience for him bringing through youth, knowing how to use them, when to use them, and how to develop them.

I don't doubt for a second that he would be an excellent personality and man manager for youth players, but he will need to accept mistakes and blunders as part of the process of integrating young players.

For too long Chelsea have sang loud about their youth products, but they are just farmed out for ages and then sold to flip a few million profit. While the balance books might look great from it, I'd be of the opinion if your youth setup isn't facilitating and supplementing your first team, it's not working.

I actually think most of your points are well thought out and whilst I don't agree with some of them I can understand the logic of them. I am not sure where Jose has been since Porto where instant success was not required, certainly I think Roman has mellowed quite a lot between Jose 1 and Jose 2. Managers with excellent records have been shown the door at Madrid and we all saw what happened when Jose left Inter.

You also have to accept that Cobham was only opened fully in 2008, Jose got the bullet first time around in 2007. Up until then Harlington was used for training and state of the art that was not. So until then our training facilities were not great (I know Cobham was opened much earlier for the first team but not the Youths or youth development). Jose was here for 3 years first time around with instant success more or less demanded, if that was not the case Tinkerman would have been kept after all he saw us into the CL before Roman came on board and in the first "money season" saw us to 2nd in the league and a CL semi final.

You then need to review what are the youth facilities for, I am very confident excellent players will come through and they will play first team football for Chelsea but this is still a very new facility. At the moment it is almost certainly been used as a revenue generating process (factory if you will) to help the club comply with the requirements of FFP. This to me is a very astute business plan and I cannot really see who the losers are here. If the young lads do not made the grade with us then they have received and excellent education and excellent football training for a period of time which should allow any of them to make a good living out of the game. The Chelsea model has been praised by the Brentford chairman who reckons it to be far in advance of the England model so those who know think it good. Becoming a professional footballer at a top team is difficult - how many under 21's kicked off in the CL semi finals? If the model of the academy is to fund FFP then our model is a success if it is to populate the team with players then thus far it has been a failure but for me it is way too early to judge the latter but the former is working.

Yet dfx seems to think that Jose has failed because he has not played young footballers - this is gibberish. First time around he did not have the facilities and the second time he has been here for a wet weekend in the scheme of things.

grumpymunster

dfx- wrote: »

Mourinho putting in a La Liga winning and Champions League finalist 23 year old does nothing to argue my point. He put in a player he trusts on the big stage having already played there, but didn't develop himself. Even then Courtois said he doesn't want to go back unless he's first choice. It does show what can be done by playing younger players perhaps.

He simply won't do that with the 'promising' academy. He never has. The 'promising' academy is largely a way of getting around FFP to afford ready-to-go players that Mourinho actually wants.



It's not really anything to do with not liking Chelsea. Can you explain it to HalloweenJack who seems to not hate Chelsea, but agrees with me.

So you don't address the points who do you think Jose should have played instead of JT and Ivan????

Jose put himself under pressure last season by being quite clear that he did not expect to win it last season but if he did not win it this season then he has failed.
He said quite clearly earlier this season if the likes of Brown, Baker and Solanke do not play for England he will have failed. Perhaps you should read what he has said regarding this point, he is not hiding nor is he being vague he accepts that Chelsea now have an excellent youth structure which was started whilst he was away and it is down to him to carry this work forward.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/3-chelsea-kids-dont-play-3927033

But as normal don't let the truth get in the way of your anti Chelsea bias.

TheDoc

grumpymunster wrote: »

Yet dfx seems to think that Jose has failed because he has not played young footballers - this is gibberish. First time around he did not have the facilities and the second time he has been here for a wet weekend in the scheme of things.

I wouldn't call it a failure to be honest. It's just a part of his managerial jacket he hasn't need to do before, and probably will need to do now. There was a lot of negative comments from R.Madrid coaches and players during his time there, about his neglect for the youth setup and information he was provided from coaching staff about players ready to make the step up etc. was neglected.

But saying he "failed" is a bit much. It wasn't a priority or requirement. He was provided finance and he used that to buy finished articles and that is fine, he is meeting objectives and getting success doing it. I think it's looking for excuses or sticks to beat people with, somehow trying to say things like "oh he just buys success" and that rubbish. Especially as me being a United fan, I don't think that is something I can ever level at anyone, considering we gobbled up eveything domestically transfer wise in the 90's.

Part of a longer stint will probably require more thought and progression using the youth facilities and players available, to integrate and promote where possible.

It's totally feasible he could never promote a youth player, and buy in buy in, and achieve success, but it will be used as s stick to beat him with. It was documented how he flipped his **** when he heard he wasn't to be offered the United job, and while I think a lot of that was down to fears over transfer budgets, the controversy he creates and that follows him I think one of the main reasons United went with Moyes over Mourinho, was that Moyes had a track record of developing and nurturing youth, where Mourinho had none.

I felt that was evident from the club, where at a press conference Gill indicated they were not looking to bring someone in who would rip up the squad, and would utilize the existing base, and work with the youth setup to promote top quality talent. Obviously a massive blunder on United's part, but I think it was one of the main reasons Mourinho didn't get the United job.

I also think its something that maybe the English press and English based fans might take more note of, and demand more off. That might be me making a generalization though. As a United supporter, I don't feel an inherent demand that local English players be brought through and put into the first team. I don't concern myself with nationality or the future of Englands national team, I just want to ensure the players in the team are the best we can get, and we are doing the best we can. But I can appreciate obviously why it's such a thing to stadium going fans or English fans in general.

dfx-

I haven't said it's a failure at any point, I said they are an ageing team that's not being replaced and that is true. I said to Gav that it's going to cost a lot to get ready-to-go replacements all at once. Which it is.

hullaballoo said that this is not true and they have great strikers in the academy and excellent defenders. And I added they're not being picked. And they're not. And grumpymunster is agreeing that they shouldn't be.

So nothing is going to change, but unless they can afford pricey players, they're going to have to face up to replacing them at some point, either Mourinho gives in and palyers some young players or stump up to pay for them. It's a huge challenge that hasn't been tackled yet by "Jose 2"

GavRedKing

dfx- wrote: »

I haven't said it's a failure at any point, I said they are an ageing team that's not being replaced and that is true. I said to Gav that it's going to cost a lot to get ready-to-go replacements all at once. Which it is.

hullaballoo said that this is not true and they have great strikers in the academy and excellent defenders. And I added they're not being picked. And they're not. And grumpymunster is agreeing that they shouldn't be.

So nothing is going to change, but unless they can afford pricey players, they're going to have to face up to replacing them at some point, either Mourinho gives in and palyers some young players or stump up to pay for them. It's a huge challenge that hasn't been tackled yet by "Jose 2"

I think because hes won trophies this uear the subsequent years will be kinder so youth will get the chance, someone else mentioned it already i think but its something i expect TBH.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

grumpymunster

JT26 wrote: »

JT is world class he would easily fit into any world class team.one of the greatest defenders in the modern era.

Only team JT would not get into currently is Napoli other than that walks into any team in the world

grumpymunster

dfx- wrote: »

I haven't said it's a failure at any point, I said they are an ageing team that's not being replaced and that is true. I said to Gav that it's going to cost a lot to get ready-to-go replacements all at once. Which it is.

hullaballoo said that this is not true and they have great strikers in the academy and excellent defenders. And I added they're not being picked. And they're not. And grumpymunster is agreeing that they shouldn't be.

So nothing is going to change, but unless they can afford pricey players, they're going to have to face up to replacing them at some point, either Mourinho gives in and palyers some young players or stump up to pay for them. It's a huge challenge that hasn't been tackled yet by "Jose 2"

Average age of team is 2 years younger now than when Jose took over so how are ageing players not been replaced exactly he was very unlucky with MvG who was in the side but suffered a very bad injury.

And what does either Jose gives in mean. He has made it very clear he will have failed if he does not bring some of our young lads through. You don't like Chelsea you don't like Jose ok we all know it but if you could try and stick to the facts as they are and not planet dfx.

Sgt Pepper 64

grumpymunster wrote: »

I actually think most of your points are well thought out and whilst I don't agree with some of them I can understand the logic of them. I am not sure where Jose has been since Porto where instant success was not required, certainly I think Roman has mellowed quite a lot between Jose 1 and Jose 2. Managers with excellent records have been shown the door at Madrid and we all saw what happened when Jose left Inter.

You also have to accept that Cobham was only opened fully in 2008, Jose got the bullet first time around in 2007. Up until then Harlington was used for training and state of the art that was not. So until then our training facilities were not great (I know Cobham was opened much earlier for the first team but not the Youths or youth development). Jose was here for 3 years first time around with instant success more or less demanded, if that was not the case Tinkerman would have been kept after all he saw us into the CL before Roman came on board and in the first "money season" saw us to 2nd in the league and a CL semi final.

You then need to review what are the youth facilities for, I am very confident excellent players will come through and they will play first team football for Chelsea but this is still a very new facility. At the moment it is almost certainly been used as a revenue generating process (factory if you will) to help the club comply with the requirements of FFP. This to me is a very astute business plan and I cannot really see who the losers are here. If the young lads do not made the grade with us then they have received and excellent education and excellent football training for a period of time which should allow any of them to make a good living out of the game. The Chelsea model has been praised by the Brentford chairman who reckons it to be far in advance of the England model so those who know think it good. Becoming a professional footballer at a top team is difficult - how many under 21's kicked off in the CL semi finals? If the model of the academy is to fund FFP then our model is a success if it is to populate the team with players then thus far it has been a failure but for me it is way too early to judge the latter but the former is working.

Yet dfx seems to think that Jose has failed because he has not played young footballers - this is gibberish. First time around he did not have the facilities and the second time he has been here for a wet weekend in the scheme of things.

I don't accept the state of the training ground\facilities as an excuse at all, Utd did it at the cliff ffs, since 1938.
I think we can produce useful squad players but ultimately its fantastic luck to get so many as Utd did that one time and Fergie was an exceptional manager. Nowadays they produce squad members but still splash out for talent

grumpymunster

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

I don't accept the state of the training ground\facilities as an excuse at all, Utd did it at the cliff ffs, since 1938.
I think we can produce useful squad players but ultimately its fantastic luck to get so many as Utd did that one time and Fergie was an exceptional manager. Nowadays they produce squad members but still splash out for talent

The better the facilities the better the results. Harlington was a barren kip of a place we shared with a University, even the senior pros hated the place would have been difficult to entice good youngsters in this day and age. I don't remember us winning many youth cups when we were there so the proof of the pudding do they say.

Time will tell I don't believe during Joses first spell he had the resources or time to bring through players. I am fully confident this time round he will, and I think he is as well.

hullaballoo

dfx- wrote: »

I haven't said it's a failure at any point, I said they are an ageing team that's not being replaced and that is true. I said to Gav that it's going to cost a lot to get ready-to-go replacements all at once. Which it is.

You specifically referred to our defence.

hullaballoo said that this is not true and they have great strikers in the academy and excellent defenders. And I added they're not being picked. And they're not. And grumpymunster is agreeing that they shouldn't be.

I didn't say that. I said, "Chelsea's youth set-up have probably the best young defenders there are at the moment" and we do have. The likes of Zouma, Ola Aina, Christensen, Kalas etc. are amongst the best young defenders around.

I said the strikers in the academy have great promise. I didn't say they were the finished article.

So nothing is going to change... either Mourinho gives in and palyers some young players or stump up to pay for them. It's a huge challenge that hasn't been tackled yet by "Jose 2"

In your previous post you said Jose won't develop from the youth players.

I can't try and argue that Jose has a history of promoting youth players but I can argue that Chelsea's youth players are earning themselves a very good chance of being selected by Jose to play in the first team in their own right, so that he doesn't have to spend big. This is hugely important with Chelsea seemingly the only club actually bound by FFP.

He'll promote youth players not just because he has to but because they're good enough. They're not all going to be JTs and stay with the club for decades. I disagree with you that nothing will change and that he won't develop them.

LuckyLloyd

Not exactly sure why promoting youth matters outside of benefitting your club? If Mourinho keeps delivering trophies with purchased senior players who gives a **** really?

I've written about this before in the Liverpool thread, but I find the borderline fascination some fans have with teenage footballers very strange. If players are good enough, good for them. But a club shouldn't be losing matches to find that out if they don't have to.

Chelsea's youth policy is working exceptionally well irrespective of whether players are coming into the first XI. They are turning a profit in the transfer market by turning themselves into a global clearing house.

Dozen Wicked Words

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Not exactly sure why promoting youth matters outside of benefitting your club? If Mourinho keeps delivering trophies with purchased senior players who gives a **** really?

I've written about this before in the Liverpool thread, but I find the borderline fascination some fans have with teenage footballers very strange. If players are good enough, good for them. But a club shouldn't be losing matches to find that out if they don't have to.

Chelsea's youth policy is working exceptionally well irrespective of whether players are coming into the first XI. They are turning a profit in the transfer market by turning themselves into a global clearing house.

Well written, I agree with you completely, when I'm using my tiny brain. Football isn't always about common sense though, I think people, myself included, want to see the likes of John Terry or Steven Gerrard or Ryan Giggs at their club. (Actually outside football none have covered themselves in glory but still!)

Northampton have a lad that's come through the youth system there and he is probably only just their 3rd best striker on their books, but always gets the songs, always the biggest cheer because "he's one of our own". Heart still rules the head in football sometimes.