TorontoChelsea

But it's not going to happen. Look at this season. We have massive holes all over the pitch. It's the perfect season to be playing our youngsters. Sturridge who was excellent on loan at a Premier League side and then was our leading scorer last season can't get into games even though our first-choice striker has been awful. We have no real second striker and we still loan out Lukaku. We have no central midfielders and we still loan out De Bruyne and McEachran. This is the least depth Chelsea are likely to have for years and our youngsters still can't get into the squad in a rebuilding year, what chance do they have down the line when we buy reinforcements? We've been chasing midfielders like Modric and Moutinho. McEachran isn't going to get in ahead of these sorts of players. You think Islam Feruz is going to challenge Falcao or Cavani or whatever world-class striker we buy? You think Roman will panic over poor results but let unproven young players make mistakes? Not a chance. Roman has always spent to buy talent and will continue to do so. The proof is in the pudding. Until we actually start to give young players a real chance to make the team, I am going to consider the academy a breeding ground for future transfers. There are teams that develop younger players and teams that don't. Last week, ManU had 6 players on their squad that were homegrown. Chelsea had one. If this winter and next summer, instead of spending 80M pounds or whatever, we just rely on our youngsters, I'll agree with you. I'm not holding my breath.

I wouldn't call those last three punts. We spent about 25M pounds on them. (Basically an average Premier League team's spending on all transfers). This is what we do. It's the opposite of the academy. We like other youngsters and we buy them and loan them out. McEachran is playing OK in the Championship. He's been playing mostly on the right wing. He has no goals and 2 assists in 16 matches. He's not about to come in and take Mata's job. Chalobah has played 10 professional games and Feruz hasn't played any. These players are all a long, long way from Chelsea first team action and will probably never get there. Talent is like a pyramid. There are lots of 17 and 18 year olds with the potential to be fantastic players but as you go up in age, there become fewer and fewer of them. For every 50 "he's going to be great" players at 17, maybe 1 is great at 23. People like getting excited by these players and that's fine, but I think it's ridiculous to expect anything from these players. Chelsea are going to keep buying top class players and you can't be a team who buys tons of players and also develops youngsters. We'll continue to let other clubs develop them for us.

Mourinho was at Uniau di Leira. Ancelotti was at Parma, Alex Ferguson started at East Stirlingshire. Raffa started at Etramadura. That's how managers get their start. Then, they get given time to develop into big names. Do you really think if Guardiola were at MK Dons, he'd have them winning the Champions League?

What academy? It's a fantasy in fan's minds to think that Chelsea are going to be bringing players along slowly and nurturing them. Chelsea are a club that are going to go out and buy their talent. It's fun to think "hey, this player is going to be great and this one will slot in perfectly there" but the truth is that we haven't produced an excellent academy player since the 1990s. Not one since Roman took over. Odds are that either zero or maybe one player currently in the academy will every play a significant role for Chelsea. Even if they did have the potential, Roman doesn't have the patience to see players develop because young players make mistakes and you have to live with that. Chelsea's strategy is to buy the top young talent off of other teams, not to develop our own. That group that ManU had was fantastic, but it hasn't been the core of United for a long time and guess what, they're still doing well.They won on Van Nistelrooy and Ronaldo, and Rooney and Vidic and now Van Persie. (In fact, the last time one of those players you mentioned won ManU player of the year was 1997-1998. Scholes and Giggs have still been very good for much of the time since, but it's hardly like they were carrying the team on their backs). They just have a much better model than us.

Roman's spending is what won us trophies. We've spent way way way more money than all but Man City in the last decade. We've won 10 tournaments in the last 10 years (not including Community Shields). We spent 52.7 million pounds per trophy. ManU spent 14,22M pounds per trophy. (That's not including what we've spent on managers) They've been much more successful based on how much money they've spent. We've actually been much less successful than we should have been based on all the money we've poured in. If you keep spending crazy amounts of money, you're going to win trophies, but the lack of managerial stability and the idiocy of the board has definitely hurt. Also, who's to say RDM wouldn't have won the CWC, the League Cup and finished top-3? We've played 12 games in the league and have already played some really tough games (Arsenal and Spurs away, ManU, Newcastle, etc...) Just because we're on a bad streak, doesn't mean that streak was going to continue forever.

Yeah, it's an issue. Is Walcott a better bet at success than Sturridge? We could also bring back some of our youngsters like Hutchinson to play the Ferreira role of doing nothing or McEachcran to be our 11th midfielder, but it would basically kill their development. Neither are ready for a regular role at Chelsea and neither would play much at all.

Exactly. Of course, there could be juggling as well (As I suggested with Blackman and Cortouis) but Chelsea are definitely going to have to buy one or two homegrown players.

Speaking of which, if Lampard, Cole, and Sturridge all go, we could be in real trouble for homegrown players. We'll have Moses, Terry, Cahill, Turnbull, and Bertrand. Since 8 of your 25 players have to be homegrown, that means Chelsea would have to add 3 homegrown players in the summer. (if we had Cech, Courtois, Turnbull, Ivanovic, Azpi, Cahill, Terry, Luiz, Bertrand, Mikel, Romeu, Ramires, Mata, Hazard, Oscar, Moses, Marin Torres, De Bruyne, Lukaku, that means the final 3 players would all have to qualify for homegrown status which leaves very little room for maneuvering. Even if you replace Torres with someone else, the situation doesn't change). I wouldn't be surprised to see Cortouis back loaned to Atletico and Blackman as the third goalie and if Cole goes Chelsea making a bid for Leighton Baines.

That's not going to happen. The headlines will always be "Roman bought XYZ" because that's what he does.

It makes no difference. Maybe we'll get a new manager bounce because players become rededicated to tactics (and because our schedule after City is really really easy) but anyone who thinks that managers come in and make an immediate massive difference is just wrong. Also, it won't take a miracle to qualify. We should win our game easily and all it would take is a Shakhtar win. Playing for a draw is not as easy as you'd think. Juventus can't sit back and hope that Shakhtar don't try to score too hard and Shakhtar don't want to lose and finish second either. They both have to actually play this one.

Interesting piece but just as confusing to me. If they wanted RDM to create a coherent attacking style, why didn't they get him the pieces to do that? It's just not possible without creative midfielders. I agree that Chelsea seemed to rely on individual brilliance more than any well-thought out game-plan, but I don't really see what attacking plan was possible. The only thing I think he could have done is make Hazard or Mata stick to the wing and then replace Oscar with Moses (or switch Oscar and Ramires) to create better shape. But then again, you run into a different problem. Chelsea spent something like 80M on those 3 players and one can only assume that they didn't just buy them to switch their positions and de-emphasize them. So, the board was setting RDM up for failure. RDM had to play Oscar, Mata, and Hazard and they all had to move in and out of the #10 spot. (Apparently, they promised Hazard he would be able to play the #10 and promised Oscar he'd be starting within a month). This inevitably caused the side to be one-dimensional offensively, lack any width, and be poor defensively. The clubs mentioned are telling. Juventus is a club that buys players that fit into the system they want to play. (and at value too...Pirlo-free, Vidal-10.5M E, Chiellini-10M E, etc...) They look and see "we need a left-sided midfielder . Let's go and find one that fits into our system and who is good value" So, they go and get Asomoah. Same with Dortmund. They lose Kagawa so they think "who can we get to replace him that will fit in and be good value" so they go out and get Reus for 17M Euros. That's how most clubs do things and it works.They don't go out and buy a bunch of players who play the same position. They don't buy tons of players and try to shove them together. They build a team and replace one or two key players a year as needed. Chelsea don't. Chelsea think "hey, this player plays really nice attacking football, let's pay whatever it takes to get him and we'll make it work.". How can the board not see this? Look at our outfield roster depth for where they would ideally be playing: RB: Ivanovic, Azpi, Ferreira CB: Terry, Luiz, Cahill (Iva) LB: Cole, Bertrand DM: Mikel, Romeu CM:Ramires CAM: Mata, Hazard, Oscar, Lampard, Piazon LW: Marin RW: Moses, Sturridge CF: Torres That's just silly. How can anyone possibly construct a coherent and consistent attack with that imbalance? To me, this just shows how clueless the board are and how absurd they blame their own shortcomings on managers. In most sports in North America, the set-up is General Manager (who makes the personnel decisions) and then the coach/manager who manages the on field/ice/court product. Usually, the General Manager gets to fire one manager, maybe two before they get the blame themselves and get fired. It makes sense. If something is not succeeding after a few years, it's time to look in the mirror and stop blaming manager after manager.

He didn't fail to qualify. Chelsea still have a decent shot of going through in a very tough group. Why didn't Roman wait until after the Nordsjelland game to see if we went through or not? Our performance this season has been better than anyone should have expected given the holes in this team. This sacking was clearly not about results, but just about not wanting RDM in there. Anyway, Benitez was actually offered the job 8 days before he took it, so the last two games weren't even a factor. Roman decided to sack RDM because we drew Liverpool and Swansea. That's all it took and that's just F^$%ing ridiculous.

Yeah. Hardly something to be proud of. I don't want to be associated with Lazio in any way. They've always been a fascist, racist club. Yes, we'll still get a racist here or there, but Chelsea have definitely moved on from that in a big way. We're one of the most international clubs around.

Mourinho also had some of his own transfers (the Portuguese players and some others). Meireles was certainly an AVB signing as well...but I agree with you entirely, it's horrible value to keep buying players the way we do. It's how we end up with a mish-mash of players who fit into different systems. If you look at our general starting outfield 10, we have a LB who would start in any system. We have one CB who is solid but slow (Terry) suited for a conservative game, and another who is skilled but a football idiot suited for a team where he doesn't have to defend. We have a right back who is fine but lacks the speed on the wings for a really attacking system. We have a defensive midfielder who is very good but moves the ball a little slowly for a really attacking system. We have a central midfielder who is best used for a counter-attack system. We have two #10s who like to get ball and distribute from the centre as well as take long shots and one #10 who likes to drive to the net and we have a striker who wants to be played in in goal with through balls. Now, some of these players can play together and can be coached into a very good side, but there are just so many diverse sorts of players who would thrive under different systems, it makes it near impossible to have a cohesive unit. What system would fit both Terry and Luiz? What system would fit Ramires and Mata? Hazard and Torres? Real football isn't like football manager where you can just put players together and expect them to work well. Some players will fit into many different systems and most players won't.

There's a thin line between being accurate and being pretentious. I've met people who say they've been on vacation to Paris ("as in paree") and you want to punch them (unless they are native French speakers). IIt's an interesting subject..Speaking of slightly OT, I once bought a football which had a bunch of countries and their flags on it (poor quality, just to kick against a wall). It was made in Pakistan and the country names were amazing! I kept the ball for like 5 years and still remember the spelling mistakes. (Englang, South Koria, Maxico, Jamica,Barsil, and others)...I still like "Englang" and "Maxico" the best.

The problem is that the club stands firm on club legends but then goes and spends like crazy on transfers and pays insane salaries to sub-par players. David Luiz had 3 years left on his contract and Chelsea still gave him an insane 120K/week on a new contract. Why? Because there were rumours that Barca wanted him for 30M? Great! We can't afford to keep Lampard or Cole, but not only have we kept Torres who makes more than anyone, we keep trying to build teams around him. It's a lack of respect towards our legends. Anyway, how much more expensive is it going to be to go out and have to buy a new LB? You can't complain about nickles and dimes when you are flushing hundred dollar bills down the toilet.

Abramovich/English dictionary. Demand: Verb: Pleading one's case while on one's knees.

It will be interesting to see what he does differently. Not really that much he can do really.

I hope so but Ancelotti, AVB, and RDM all couldn't get Luiz to behave long-term. He had brief periods of greatness followed by relapses into schoolyard football. I don't think any manager says to him "Hey David, how about you just kick the ball long to the other team 2, 3 times a game. Then, sort of wander around the midfield aimlessly for a while and then lose concentration." It's up to Luiz to straighten himself out at this point.

Managerial stability certainly still happens. Barcelona had 2 managers for about a decade. Bayern has had 4 different full-time managers in the last 15 years. Klopp has been at Dortmund for years. Arsenal, ManU, Everton, and many other English teams have had a lot of stability. It's not just about sticking with a guy forever, it's about having reasonable expectations, giving the coach some breathing room, and not going crazy after every game where we drop points. We're actually having a batter season than anyone should have hoped for. We were 6th last season and we're third now and alive in all competitions. How does that deserve a sacking? Especially when you're just hiring another temporary manager in his place. It just doesn't make sense. It's clear that Roman never wanted to hire RDM, in which case he shouldn't have. To treat anyone like that, never mind a Chelsea legend, is an absolute joke.

Yes. This exactly the problem. Chelsea almost every single year spend more than any other club and yet we still need to splash 100 million more on strikers (and an attacking midfielder. Why exactly do we need James Rodriguez?) Then, we need another midfielder and maybe a central defender so that will probably be another 50M pounds. We need a manager who has a consistent style and to bring players in who fit that style. Roman spending ridiculous amounts of money on players who may or may not fit in at Chelsea is why we're in the mess we're in. Roman thinks "hey, he's a great player, I don't care how much he costs, I'll buy him" and it produces historically horrible transfers. I don't want Chelsea always chasing big names every time something goes wrong. It makes our club a joke. Since 2003, we've spent 527M pounds more than we've sold on transfers. We've spent more per season than ManU, Liverpool, Aston Villa, Spurs, Arsenal, Newcastle, Fulham. and Everton combined. So, let's go out and spend another 200M. That will make things better. How can we have pride when we win like that? It's like a super-heavy weight beating a flyweight and bragging about it. We spend more per season than most Premier League clubs have spent in the last decade.Yes, big clubs spend more. That's the way it's always been and that's the way it will always be, but this level of spending that Chelsea, City, and a few other teams do is new and so damaging to football and I want it to stop. After the first three seasons, our spending went down to normal levels which Chelsea should be able to maintain. You buy 2-3 players every year to revitalize your squad. That's what stability gets you. You shouldn't need anything more than that but Roman prefers his massive spending/firing managers strategy.

As I mentioned earlier, I am positive the reason RDM didn't rotate that much this season is that he knew he had pressure to win every game. Last season, when RDM had no pressure, he rotated heavily. The key to proper rotations are depth and a manager who knows that his job is safe. Chelsea had neither under RDM.

I keep hoping for Roman to mellow with age. His overreactions are reminiscent of those of 19-year old supporters on the web. He's like a figure cut out Greek tragedy, a god with a hamartia (fatal flaw). If he could just back away from the game a little and hire a real football man (rather than a suite) to run the day to day operations, he'd be the best owner around. Instead, we're always chasing "names" . The most famous manager, the most famous player (we could get), etc...It's no way to manage a club. I agree, it's not the hiring of Benitez that is so upsetting, it's the treatment of Di Matteo and Wilkins without any real cause. The dismissal of Ancelotti because he had the gall to not win a trophy a year after Chelsea's greatest season ever. It's the panicked moves to buy expensive players who don't fit.

I agree with this. If you're supposed to be the Chelsea coach of the future, then you should have your say and bring in who you want but a guy who is going to coach for 6 months? Chelsea will likely just be firing all these people in half a year.

We've never replace Drogba or Lampard or Terry or Carvalho or Ballack or Essien. Our starting XI in 2005-2006 was Cech, Gallas, Carvalho, Terry, Del Horno, Makalele, Essien, Lampard, Cole, Robben, and Drogba and almost all at their peaks. That's insane. (We also had players like Gudjonsson, Crespo, Duff, and Feirera who played regularly) We had top-5, top-10 players at their position in the world all over the pitch. We had players who were elite attackers and elite defenders. We had balance, physical presence, ability on the ground, in the air, speed, leadership everything. We are light years away from that right now.