The Mourinho Thread

[Kostas 1,468]

Nah, bullshit lol. Don't kid yourself mate. How many times have we said that over the last decade? Scolari, Ancelotti, Villas-Boas, we all said the same thing about 'fresh start' and all that rhetoric. We're either in 'transition' or 'starting fresh', but neither project ever comes to fruition. The project is flawed. I call it a project, ya'll call it 'identity'.

Nothing changes. But is that so wrong? I mean our current model keeps us successful lol. New managers bring fresh ideas, agreed, but the same people are being put in charge of recruitment and failing considerably.

Mourinho shoulders blame, but you're naive if you think our Board has learned anything. Roman, himself, decided on Villas-Boas and soon abandoned that project. He then had a personal interest in bringing Mourinho back and that project was abandoned.

As will project Guardiola, Simeone, etc.

Thank you! This is along very similar lines to the ones I've been thinking. The perpetual relapse and search for a new project and associated Mesiah seems to indicate a larger dynamic.

I'm beginning to wonder whether, aside from the obvious innumerable failings of our club, the idea of a project (manifested in that long-term manager we never had) is really now a false thing to believe in (or even aspire to?).

Whether that's due to the ever increased professionalization of the sport or the money in it now, your guess is as good as mine but you can't deny that attachment to long-lasting managers is really the exception rather than the rule.

As much as I hate the revisioning of Mourinho's time at Real, the most sycophantic thing about it is how those who blame him for being a short-term solution willfully ignore that he's alongside DelBosque the only manager to have survived 3 seasons in decades. Bayern haven't had a manager who stayed over 3 seasons in 11 years. In the PL, aside from unambitious clubs like Arsenal (seen any sane Arsenal fan around recently?) and Everton in the Moyes years the trend has been the same.

ManUtd under Fergie is the model but they've been erratic at best since he retired, they may very well be on the market alongside us in May. ManCity have been underperforming relative to their investment and squad and are coming near the end of a circle, their parting with Mancini was still much more peaceful than what we usually experience. Liverpool, Tottenham and Chelsea have all had hot managerial prospects, but their light shined for a season max. Was there a more promising manager when we hired AVB? Was there a more correct decision than getting rid of him?

Put it another way, do the other top clubs go through quasi-existential crises when they sack managers, or do we blow the issue out of proportion?

Edit: Came across similar charts from the FT

[LDN Blue 7,903]

ManUtd under Fergie is the model but they've been erratic at best since he retired, they may very well be on the market alongside us in May. ManCity have been underperforming relative to their investment and squad and are coming near the end of a circle, their parting with Mancini was still much more peaceful than what we usually experience. Liverpool, Tottenham and Chelsea have all had hot managerial prospects, but their light shined for a season max. Was there a more promising manager when we hired AVB? Was there a more correct decision than getting rid of him?

Put it another way, do the other top clubs go through quasi-existential crises when they sack managers, or do we blow the issue out of proportion?

Precisely.

I was discussing this with my friends before and I said once Wenger goes, that's it for this longevity myth. Even they will struggle to keep to the 'one manager a decade' philosophy.. For now it's a case of ignorance is bliss.

[Magic Lamps 11,447]

I did not participate in the blame game JOse vs the players vs the board. Pretty sure everyone is accountable for our lack of success this season to some extent.

But accusing Mourinho of not having any attacking tactics in his locker or the players for performing badly on purpose is just nonsense. You don't become such a decorated manager without having any plan on how to implement attacking football whilst you dont become a professional footballer by playing to lose. In some cases the most obvious answer is the right one, so I'll quote the unforgettable Didier Drogba on this one again:

"Things often come in three-year cycles - we'd arrived at the end of such a cycle [in 2007]. By the start of the fourth season that Jose had been in charge, I think we had started to reach a point where it was harder for his message to get through."

"We wanted to hear it, we tried but somehow we had lost a little bit of what made us special."

The lack of confidence, complacency because of lack of signings and just having won the Premier League, the inability to process Jose's messages as a consequence of that, the lack of sharpness at the beginning of the season, tactical mistakes by Jose himself.... all little reasons that can make the difference between top 4 and bottom 5 in such a competitive league. No need to single out anyone for this. In the end when someone has to get sacked it will always be the manager because it is the most straightforward and easiest thing to do. Is this fair? Probably not. But it is harder to change those structures in football than to accept them. The managers, the fans always know this before.

Just as in the Lampard to City and Arsenal to Cech cases we should stop lamenting over spilled milk and not discredit ourselves by heaping blame on a legend of the cub, which Jose still is. Gratitude for what he has done for the club and a honorable discharge are what he deserves. If we all move on, we'll sleep better. It is almost 6 in the morning here, so I will surely try to do so. KTBFFH

[quickpassnmove 924]

"During international weeks, when most of the squad were away, the Under-21 coaching staff were brought over from the academy to take the training. During those periods Mourinho's staff put their feet up.

The Chelsea manager would often amble out towards the small group of players, chat to some of the coaching staff, and leave them to it. For that reason, he lost the respect of the fringe players.

After Mourinho's departure, there is already talk at the club of 'rebuilding' Ruben Loftus-Cheek, the young player whose confidence has been destroyed by the Portuguese coach.

It is safe to say that there is not a single person in the academy building who is shedding a tear for the Special One.

When Mourinho wanted to turn it on though he still had it and he simply blew the players away with his devotion to the tactics they would use for the clash with Tottenham at White Hart Lane on November 29."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3364658/Jose-Mourinho-told-Chelsea-owner-Roman-Abramovich-defeat-West-Ham-October-Pay-go.html#ixzz3udzHoKRE
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Then: Glenn Murray

[Strike 6,960]

Its sad it ended this way. For me, Jose remains the man who took Chelsea to the heights they enjoy today.

The challenge for the new manager will be retaining our best players - Eden Hazard basically - most likely without being in the Champions League.

[DDA 9,570]

Make no mistake about it ... The writing was on the wall when Jose treated Cerneiro the way he did. That's why he lost the dressing room. I bet that pissed a lot of people off at Chelsea. He should have just manned up and said sorry.

[Bl33D BlUe 16]

Damn, I am feeling very sad and gutted, still can't believe that the players which I support from my heart managed to get rid of my favorite and no. 1 manager.

Yes we were on a free fall but if Jose is punished for this mess then I feel that players are equally responsible and they should at least be punished in some way (pay cut, training with youth, some match bans)

This season is completely destroyed now and I can't believe how are we gonna win against PSG without Special One, hope we don't get thrashed .

Damn You Players, Damn You Board and Damn You Mourinho (yes you could have avoided If you had kept quiet) and The BIGGEST FUCK YOU to EVA for starting this mess you have hurt so many Chelsea fans feelings.

But I am a supporter of CHELSEA FC not Players FC or Mourinho FC so --

:blue scalf: :blue scalf: :blue scalf: :blue scalf:

[Rhino's Skin 972]

I am disappointed events got this far and in the end he had to go, but I also feel a sense of relief.

I also feel that Jose had been dealt a bad hand of cards from the end of last season and never fully recovered.

We all know that Jose likes to be complete control of events in regards to team matters and things that would have irked him immensely would have been, the season end trip to the other side of the world after a hard year, a very short pre season , transfer targets not met....all events out of his hands and he seemed to carry this frustration into the first match of the season.

However, as a head coach/manager it was up to him to contain these emotions or as in the past get the media on his side rather than being 'spiky'.

The board who are his managers failed him, the players and the supporters in my opinion by not stepping in earlier after there was obvious situations developing by either nipping it in the bud by reading the riot act to everyone behind closed doors or removing the main offenders whether they were players, staff or Jose himself.

They (by their own admission earlier in the season) left Jose hanging out to dry when he was defending situations and mis informed stories and again should have stepped in to help him at an earlier stage.

So, whilst Jose mis managed the players, the media etc........the board mis managed him.

The post sacking interview by Emenalo was poor and again could have been worded so much better.

Poor all round from the board down to the players.

Thank gawd going to football matches is not just about the football,the club, the result or how they play......and it is also to do with the whole experience of meeting all your mates and other supporters, the journey to home/away matches, having a good social and supporting the team no matter what

[Adnane 1,101]

I honestly feel a lot in this moment, i am overwhelmed with numerous feelings and ideas i'd like to get out, but I am just waiting for his replacement.

If it isn't Hiddink, or at the very least Ancelotti, then you better ban me, because Talk Chelsea will witness a rant so big that the glass behind Abrahmovich's seat in SB will be bloody shattered.

[Rhino's Skin 972]

I honestly feel a lot in this moment, i am overwhelmed with numerous feelings and ideas i'd like to get out, but I am just waiting for his replacement.

If it isn't Hiddink, or at the very least Ancelotti, then you better ban me, because Talk Chelsea will witness a rant so big that the glass behind Abrahmovich's seat in SB will be bloody shattered.

Whoever its is...Steve Holland is in charge this weekend

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

One of the reasons I hate the cult of managers is that I feel that managers overall don't actually make a huge difference. They can make a small different and sometimes, that small difference is the edge you need, but the media and fans give them way too much credit/blame usually. The real job of a manager at a club like Chelsea is managing the egos and motivating the players.

Look at Mourinho's record overall at Chelsea. 8 years starter. I'd say about 4 of those years overall, Chelsea had the most expensive club in England and maybe the world and all of those years, Chelsea was one of the highest spending clubs in the world. In 8 years with an elite spending club Mourinho won the following major trophies:

3 Premier League titles, 1 FA Cup. In the five years in between where Mourinho wasn't a manager (where overall Chelsea had less talent) Chelsea won 1 Premier League title, 3 FA Cups, and one Champions League. Did Mourinho overall do any better than could have been expected? The answer to me is no. It's not a slight on Mourinho but a reality of managers. The managers that get called geniuses are also the managers who happen to manage the most talent. In the end, the teams that win are the teams that have the most talent and spend the most money. What Ranieri is doing with Leicester this season is far more impressive than what Guardiola has done with Bayern.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

One of the reasons I hate the cult of managers is that I feel that managers overall don't actually make a huge difference. They can make a small different and sometimes, that small difference is the edge you need, but the media and fans give them way too much credit/blame usually. The real job of a manager at a club like Chelsea is managing the egos and motivating the players.

Look at Mourinho's record overall at Chelsea. 8 years starter. I'd say about 4 of those years overall, Chelsea had the most expensive club in England and maybe the world and all of those years, Chelsea was one of the highest spending clubs in the world. In 8 years with an elite spending club Mourinho won the following major trophies:

3 Premier League titles, 1 FA Cup. In the five years in between where Mourinho wasn't a manager (where overall Chelsea had less talent) Chelsea won 1 Premier League title, 3 FA Cups, and one Champions League. Did Mourinho overall do any better than could have been expected? The answer to me is no. It's not a slight on Mourinho but a reality of managers. The managers that get called geniuses are also the managers who happen to manage the most talent. In the end, the teams that win are the teams that have the most talent and spend the most money. What Ranieri is doing with Leicester this season is far more impressive than what Guardiola has done with Bayern.

True,

But I do offer the case of City and their very late ascension to the elite. They had to wait a considerable amount of time, compared to Chelsea, to get to where they are. Inflation and all accounted for, you can argue that they spent even more to just try and match our credentials. In 7 years, since their take over, all they can boast is; PL x2 and the FA Cup x1. They've only made it past the Champions League GS twice too.

By comparison, Chelsea were on their way to a PL x3, FA Cup x3 & LC x2. While you can argue that perhaps we spent the most wise, Mourinho did help shape what was to become the Chelsea core for 8-9 years before we had a clear out of that guard he'd helped us built. That's where City went wrong, you can argue, under Hughes they never built that core & it meant they spent close to £1bn before they touched their first PL title.

While I agree with the overall premise that the role of the manager is diminishing now, I do think we should say Mourinho was an important part of the club being as successful as it has become. Most manager's can't make that claim. Perhaps Pep is the next best for re-branding/working on Cruyff's model but otherwise Mou sits in a league of his own with the likes of Sir Alex & Wenger.

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

Jose Mourinho was unaware his second spell in charge of #Chelsea was about to come to an abrupt end. [Mirror]

Mourinho was hopeful he would get #Chelsea's home fixtures against Sunderland and Watford to turn the season around. [Mirror]

When told, Mourinho appeared to be distraught. #Chelsea then released a statement saying his departure was by mutual consent. [Mirror]

Mourinho will return to Cobham on Friday for his farewells, while #Chelsea have committed to paying his wages until he finds a job. [Mirror]

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

BBC's Garry Richardson - Mourinho said "There are a couple of bad apples in my Chelsea team that are causing “lots of problems.” #CFC

BBC's G. Richardson on bad apples- Mourinho said "It's very difficult to handle for me.” and I can talk you that quote is 100% spot on" #CFC

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

Think the FA might miss Mourinho most of all...he was a nice little money earner over two spells at Chelsea...

shocking lack of respect from Emenalo to refer to Mourinho as 'the individual'...after all, he is hardly blameless.

[Ossie the King 634]

Thank gawd going to football matches is not just about the football,the club, the result or how they play......and it is also to do with the whole experience of meeting all your mates and other supporters, the journey to home/away matches, having a good social and supporting the team no matter what

It's also about those connections you develop with people within the club, specifically the manager. We've had that Mourinho like no other and I know some may dismiss that as being a 'fanboy' or it being a 'cult of Mourinho' but to me they're fundamentally misunderstanding what it is to support a club, to put your aspirations in the hands of someone.

It's almost like reading a Sheldon Cooper thesis on football fandom

One of the reasons I hate the cult of managers is that I feel that managers overall don't actually make a huge difference. They can make a small different and sometimes, that small difference is the edge you need, but the media and fans give them way too much credit/blame usually. The real job of a manager at a club like Chelsea is managing the egos and motivating the players.

Look at Mourinho's record overall at Chelsea. 8 years starter. I'd say about 4 of those years overall, Chelsea had the most expensive club in England and maybe the world and all of those years, Chelsea was one of the highest spending clubs in the world. In 8 years with an elite spending club Mourinho won the following major trophies:

3 Premier League titles, 1 FA Cup. In the five years in between where Mourinho wasn't a manager (where overall Chelsea had less talent) Chelsea won 1 Premier League title, 3 FA Cups, and one Champions League. Did Mourinho overall do any better than could have been expected? The answer to me is no. It's not a slight on Mourinho but a reality of managers. The managers that get called geniuses are also the managers who happen to manage the most talent. In the end, the teams that win are the teams that have the most talent and spend the most money. What Ranieri is doing with Leicester this season is far more impressive than what Guardiola has done with Bayern.

Bazinga!

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

[DYC. 7,542]

True,

But I do offer the case of City and their very late ascension to the elite. They had to wait a considerable amount of time, compared to Chelsea, to get to where they are. Inflation and all accounted for, you can argue that they spent even more to just try and match our credentials. In 7 years, since their take over, all they can boast is; PL x2 and the FA Cup x1. They've only made it past the Champions League GS twice too.

By comparison, Chelsea were on their way to a PL x3, FA Cup x3 & LC x2. While you can argue that perhaps we spent the most wise, Mourinho did help shape what was to become the Chelsea core for 8-9 years before we had a clear out of that guard he'd helped us built. That's where City went wrong, you can argue, under Hughes they never built that core & it meant they spent close to £1bn before they touched their first PL title.

While I agree with the overall premise that the role of the manager is diminishing now, I do think we should say Mourinho was an important part of the club being as successful as it has become. Most manager's can't make that claim. Perhaps Pep is the next best for re-branding/working on Cruyff's model but otherwise Mou sits in a league of his own with the likes of Sir Alex & Wenger.

City's road to the top was longer. Chelsea finished in the top 4 when Abramovich took over. City was average. The likes of Elano, Benjani, Petrov, Geovanni etc won't win you a thing. Robinho as your star player isn't nearly enough.

Now City is really starting to gain in on Chelsea. Good thing they're pony in Europe.