Ossie the King

Worked his way up? Like that time when we sacked Butch and appointed this bloke as assistant first team coach? Oh and the guy we didn't promote into that role - Paul Clement. It's a fucking joke mate. Apologies for laughing at this part. So apart from not being qualified for the role....sorry, could you name one other job you'd use that sentence in? But why should Chelsea be run in a responsible manner? It's Roman's toy after all. That's not uncommon nowadays. Don't mention part of his very short work history? So his job is to identify players, yet when the club (because they're all a shitshow) fail to get a ball-playing, young centre-half the best substitute he has is an untested bloke from the French leagues who is the complete opposite? OK, let's just ignore how this summer the quality of the squad went backwards under his watch. The expectations for this guy were low and apparently we should give him credit for 'identifying' Mata as someone put it. That's a man who played in a World Cup Final and this guy 'identified' him? He has an immense scouting knowledge but beyond that we live in a world where a 12 year old can find out a wealth of knowledge about a player on google, read his stats on Football Manager (which is a remarkably comprehensive resource in some cases) and see footage of them on Youtube. Yet some will give him all the credit for his successes and put the blame for the failures on Jose or the board. Fulham Broadway is right - the guy's fucking Teflon even at a point when we're in a complete mess with no idea of what type of players we should buy or what type of coach we should hire.

Precisely. For some bizarre reason people think we can become Barcelona. For some even more bizarre reason, they want us to become something like Barcelona and we won't. We're torn between two identities at the moment, the Chelsea Jose built in 2005, a strong, powerful, intense, fast, resilient team and a plastic Barcelona-lite that Roman is trying to establish and apparently some fans want us to be because it's 'entertaining'. The thing is there's already a Barcelona and they didn't exist overnight. If that's too far for people to travel then there's a slightly snootier, less successful verson of them in North London. We're the anti-Barca though. We're the team who used to bully Wenger's boys off the pitch and then when they were down we'd dance around them. We're the team that blew Barca away in 2005 and then stood toe-to-toe with them in 2012 (in the most Jose of performances) yet people now want us to become them? We're Chelsea. We're built on being a tough team, always have been right back to the days of Ossie and Cooke we'd have that tough underbelly. In the 90s we maybe forgot that a bit and that's why we were a great cup team, but we still had the likes of Wisey who knew how to stick their boot in. Why can't we build on those principles rather than trying to be something we're not?

No need to use words like stupid now is there? I brought it up when perhaps I shouldn't but I have a massive issue with twats like him, Johnny Come Lately's to this club who seem to get responsibility and power handed to them when they're not qualified and whenever there's a changing of the guard and another fuck-up, they get away scot-free. It actually sickens me to see people like that associated with this club, but you have to laugh at the people that blindly defend them. But that's just me. I may be wrong but when Roman came along in 2003 we attracted a new breed of fan in many ways and not always for the betterment of this club. And just to add, once again we need something between Roman and the coach. Despite what the job description might say on the Chelsea website, 'Mike' is it. He's also become Roman's spokesperson apparently now as well so he's going to attract a lot more attention. Personally I'd prefer proper Chelsea in that role or at least someone with a proven track record because what's established there at the moment isn't working and any discussion of new coach is pointless until we actually look at the whole organisation of this club.

You say he's not influential but you've credited him with some of our success and the fact is the guy tendered his resignation when Jose came in so I'm asking you whether you think he'd work well with either of them. You have to bear in mind that chatting to a fan of 'Mike' is something of a novelty for me.

Which one would work better alongside Mike? Or if neither one is a good choice would Rodgers be a better fit? Could Mike be coach as well? He doesn't have a track record but does that matter?

JT is probably the best bet for that. Always talked about going into coaching and very analytical apparently. I think there's a world of difference between where Barca were when Guardiola took over and where we are right now. They were already 5 years into a new plan and when they won the Champions League in 2006 they had the likes of Puyol, Iniesta, Xavi and Valdes in the squad whilst Messi is emerging as a once in a lifetime talent. Pep took them to that next level but the job we need someone to do goes beyond that. We need someone to kickstart what happened a few years before Guardiola and I don't think he's it. What he is perfect for is taking Man City to that next level and I think that's just what he'll do. If we actually want to develop on what we've got then Simeone is probably the man we need.

Couldn't agree more. I don't want us to be Barca either. I like us to be the anti-Barca, the team that steamrolls over the Arsenals and Barcelona's of this world and we absolutely are missing those aspects from our game.

United are still beholden to the Glazers and although their commercial strength means they have deep pockets, City still can (and do) outspend them. Both seem to have a greater willingness to spend than us, although maybe that changes if Roman gets the new driver he wants for his toy train.

Amazed that is used as a criticism nowadays. Simeone is a great coach.

You're right that he has a track record of building on strong existing structures at both Barca and Bayern which is why the City job makes absolute sense. Here he'd have to do a complete rebuild. I also wonder if he'd like working within the structure we have or whether he'd look for something more professional. Just that mention of experiencing a new city makes me wonder, maybe he'd do it?

He made some excellent points didn't he?

Money London Money Challenge Money The chance to work with Mike Emenalo (alright Mike!) Money A talented squad of loyal, hungry.....actually have some more money Pep.

I was 95% certain that he was going to City. I'm still hovering around that mark except he said one thing that made me question it. "I want to experience a new city and I want to work in England" Nobody says they want to 'experience' Manchester. London on the other hand fits in with the mentality of a guy who took a year off to live in New York. I'd like to think money isn't that big a factor (anyone will give him a big contract) but he did play in the Middle East at the end of his career. But who wouldn't. I just think the culture of our club doesn't fit with what he wants. On the other hand I don't think anyone else gets us out of this repeating cycle that we'd be in. He's the only coach Roman would back totally and he'd have a blank cheque to build a new squad. Then again City has been purpose-built for him, but would he feel comfortable displacing Pellegrino? What's clear is that he's Roman's 'white whale' and I don't see us being outbid for his services, and it might spark Roman to make some changes at this club. I'm 5% less certain than I was 30 minutes ago.

He didn't say that. The people on here seem to compose their posts quite carefully so there's really no need to put words in that aren't there.

Drogba was being offered £200k p/w to play in China. Not a single club in England could have offered him close to that amount. I don't for a minute think Frank tainted his legacy, nor did Big Pete at United. Maybe a few fans threw their toys out of the pram but even over time they come around. I can't find fault with Cech. We chose to let him leave to a rival even though he was under contract. At best it was naive.

We're allowed to question his professionalism though aren't we? It's inevitable if you turn up for the start of season looking a bit podgy isn't it?

He wanted to play football at the top level and that's totally understandable. Same with Frank. You can't benefit from a player's competitive instinct for over a decade then criticise them for it. The fault lies entirely with Roman for sanctioning the deal.

I think you're right. Personally I'd go with Begovic Azpi/Ivanovic Zouma Cahill Baba Ramires Matic Loftus-Cheek Kenedy Remy/Costa Hazard/Pedro I think that when you're introducing youngsters to first team football you need a stable framework to support them so you're talking about one inexperienced lad in defence, midfield and attack. It's a blunt way to describe it but I think it's important that they can look up and see someone they instinctively trust. You also have to give the older lads like Ramires, Cahill, Matic, Baba and even Hazard who didn't play against Palace the chance to play themselves back into form and maintain their fitness. It's still an important game to win and any team in the football league is savvy enough to identify areas of weakness. Christensen is a good young player but he was targetted by Bradford last season and it caused us problems so you need that framework in place to develop them. By all means have players like Traore and Musonda on the bench so they can get minutes if we're comfortable but I'd also have players like Willian there to bring on if we're chasing it. It's a delicate balancing act.

For us that has been Jose, but going forward I don't see a coach being given time to do that (especially not like Fergie or Wenger were) so I think we have to be realistic and look outside of that role. I think it was a combination of a core of experienced players making one unbelievable last push (the core assembled and moulded by Jose in his time here) and huge strokes of luck. We were not the best team in Europe that year, we weren't even the best in London arguably, but the stars aligned and everything went our way. That's not to dismiss the win but to look at it in context and acknowledge (again) the reality the what happened. I think De Bruyne went for about £10 million less than that but I get your point that part of his remit is to by appreciating assets for us to either sell or incorporate into the team in the future. With our scouting network and vast resources, I think that is possibly one of the easiest jobs in world football but that's neither here nor there. What I believe the role should expand to include is a greater influence on the footballing side so that you have some cohesion between the man who has great responsibility in acquiring players and is also the long-term stable presence that a coach is unlikely to be. Anyway, enjoyed the chat and it's clear to see we differ in our views but you engaged anyway. You weren't just a yappy little dog on the sidelines but actually got involved and I have to respect that. Cheers mate.

I very much agree and I do wonder what's actually going on at the club now. Football economics are by no means simple but both United and City have spent more money (NET) in just one season (City last summer and United the summer before) than we've spent over the last three seasons put together. This last summer we spent just £8 million (NET) more than Crystal Palace did. I honestly don't know what to think of the guy anymore. Yes there's the great work with the new stadium and maybe he's been distracted but there's still a sour taste from when he tried to rig the CPO vote last time. I don't know if I trust the man or his vision going forward.

If he is going to go it would be nice if he could do something to increase his value rather than decrease it. Also, his hypothetical departure may well be the first time under Roman's custodianship that we actually sell a player we'd rather keep. That would be a very telling sign of where we are right now were it to happen.

Imagine the scenes if we go to Old Trafford to face Mourinho and we've got Brendan Rodgers as manager.

Not at all, but it was under Laporta's presidency and Txiki's stewardship that they recommitted themselves to that style of football, as well as using more graduates from La Masia. That began with Rijkaard coming in and then continued with Guardiola taking it further, and they look to be there again with Luis Enrique. There was a great documentary on it that I could try and dig out and link to you if you'd like? That's what we should strive for - an enduring philosophy that isn't dependent on any one manager but is sustainable. We don't have that. We're a chequebook club at the moment who probably overachieved last season. But like I said, we obviously disagree. You bring up the Champions League as a sign of our success, I look at our performances and the fact we finished 6th and think old big ears was papering over some pretty massive cracks. We won't agree because we're looking for different things.

So you make it sound like I said he's to blame, but then acknowledge that I said there were larger issues. Ok.... Look at Txiki's time at Barcelona. Along with Laporta they completely revamped that club and instituted a philosophy that seems to be getting them results despite having changes in the coach's position. You favour the Fergie method and I would love for that to happen. I just don't think the realities of modern football allow for that. With our high turnover of coaches I believe we need consistency somewhere and it can't be the owner in my opinion. But let's just leave it there. We clearly won't agree on this and I don't want you to get any more wound up. I'll wave up to you at the next match. Enjoy the season.

Everton's defensive woes might actually open the door to a move for Stones. They are looking to replace Howard and probably Jagielka sooner rather than later so why don't we go back in with a bid that enables them to rebuild now? Maybe even offer them one of Djinobody or Hector either on-loan or permanent. Finally makes one of them useful. Stones actually looked a bit miffed with some of the stick he got from the crowd yesterday and gestured to them to 'calm down, calm down' but probably not in an annoying, high-pitched squawk. Would love him here. Just need to treat Everton respectfully this time. Tell Bill how great Blood Brothers is or something.