TorontoChelsea

I hate going from goal from there. You basically never score. Would much rather try to go for a header or something indirect.

Wow...City should have scored.

Really poor game right now.

That was sarcasm based on the ridiculous criticisms of RDM having no plan B. You can't have a plan B when you don't have the players for a plan B. (and when your owner tells you the players he wants to play.)

Really proud of our supporters! Great singing today. We look exactly the same so far. Rafa has no plan B. Rafa out!

Geez Luiz!

I used to do a lot of weight training before life got in the way so it's something I am familiar with. It can be addictive and fun if you have the personality and drive but It's also really difficult on the body long-term and you have to be really really careful. if you want to lose weight, it's math. Burn more calories than you take in. The best way to do that is to find a sports league (football, basketball, etc...) that plays once or twice a week and gives you a great workout. (regular sex is great...also a good workout) You can burn a lot of calories and have fun doing it. You can't really lose weight and gain muscle at the same time (you can initially, but not long-term.) To build muscle, you have to increase your calorie intake. When I was lifting, I used to have to eat so much, it was ridiculous. I'd lose some body fat first if I were you because that's your main goal and because you're young, it shouldn't be that hard if you stick to it. When you try to accomplish too much, too quickly, it's easy to get discouraged. OreillyD36 has the right idea.

I don't even know what you're arguing. I never said that Fergie brings players straight into the team. I'm saying that he brings them into the team. (And as for the "proving themselves" you are vastly overstating the success these players had prior to being in ManU. Smalling played 12 games at Fulham the year before. Jonny Evans played 15 games at Sunderland. Welbeck scored 6 goals in a season for Sunderland.) We don't. As for Mikel, 1) That was 6 years ago 2) Mikel was a 16M pound buy. He was very expensive player (one of the most expensive that summer), a situation much closer to say Oscar or Hazard than to any of the players we discussed. That's not developing a young player, that's buying a hot prospect. That we can do and do do. Do you really think that if McEachran has a good loan spell, he'll be back starting regularly for Chelsea? It seems incredible to me that anybody can believe that after watching this team. The only time I ever remember under Roman someone going out on loan and coming back and getting a starting job was Sturridge. And that's because he scored 8 goals in 12 games at Bolton and our only other player capable of playing RW in AVB's system was 32 and a poor fit for the system and Sturridge started scoring immediately. And even though Sturridge is really one of the the only young players we've developed in about 15 years, was our leading goal scorerer last season, we're still going to let him go because the club still feels he's not good enough. Chelsea buy their talent. That's the way it's always been since Roman has taken over. (And it's been a decade already. We have plenty of evidence of that by now. 10 years, no starters developed.)

You're trying to argue that Fergie is not good at developing players because sometimes he chooses not to use academy players? Being good at developing talent doesn't mean that you always develop every single player and you don't buy anybody, it just means that you can develop some. It's like saying "if he's so good at free kicks, why did he miss the net last week"? Sometimes, he realises that the academy players aren't good enough and he has to buy someone, often even.That doesn't mean he's bad at developing talent. I'm not particularly praising Fergie anyway. I'm just pointing out that there's a model that mixes in youth and one that buys its talent. (Barcelona versus Real Madrid too). We have not developed a single starter since John Terry. That's 15 years ago. The second best player to come out of our academy since then is probably Carlton Cole and he's not even a Premier League-caliber player. It's not just about the academy. ManU are constantly buying younger players and giving them opportunities. Chelsea would never have given the opportunity for Ronaldo to develop over a few years. Ronaldo scored 9 goals in his first two seasons. When was the last time Chelsea allowed a young player to struggle and play regularly? Again, you look at us this season. We will never have a better opportunity to play our young players and we aren't. Take someone like Nick Powell. Fergie will work him into 15 games or so this season and more next season if he responds. Even with their surplus of strikers, Welbeck will still probably play in 30 games. Smalling and Evans will get a lot of time. That's what they do (and I should stress, not just them, pretty much every club except us and City). That's what we don't do and never will do. We could have kept McEachran at Chelsea. We could have kept De Bruyne. We could have played them with some regularity. We didn't. Here are our league appearances in the league by unproven young players 2011-2012-Lukaku-1 start, 7 subs, Hutchinson-1 start, 1 sub, Romeu-11 starts, 5 subs, Bertrand-6 starts, 1 sub, McEachran-0 starts, 2 subs 2010-2011-Sturridge-0 starts, 10 subs, Bertrand 0 starts, 1 sub. Kakuta-1 start, 4 subs. McEachran-1 start, 8 subs. 2009-2010-Sturridge-2 starts, 11 subs. Matic-0 starts, 2 subs. Hutchinson-0 starts 2 subs. Kakuta-0 starts 1 sub. Borini-0 starts, 4 subs. Van Aanholt-0 starts 2 subs. Bruma- 0 starts, 2 subs. 2008-2009-Di Santo-0 starts, 8 subs. Mancienne-2 starts, 2 subs. Stoch-0 starts, 5 subs. Want to see the difference? ManU 2011-2012-Welbeck-23 starts, 7 subs, Smalling-14 starts, 5 subs. Cleverly-5 starts 5 subs, Jonny Evans-28 starts, 1 sub Arsenal 2011-2012-Szcezesny-38 starts, Gibbs-15 starts, 1 sub, Oxlade-Chamberline-6 starts, 10 subs, Jenkinson-5 starts, 4 subs. Ramsay-27 starts, 7 subs. This is the fundamental difference. We do not give playing time to unproven young players. We don't work players into our starting XI. We buy them. I don't know why anyone thinks that is suddenly going to change. It's just the way we operate.

Wow...we didn't every game we should have won??? That's horrible. We should fire every coach who does that!!! (which is every single coach) This is the exact ridiculous expectations fans have. It's so annoying. "He should have made this substitution", "he should have played this formation" like there's some sort of magic formula to winning. Sometimes, it's just the players. Everyone wants to be the manager and because their formations and tactics never actually get tested, they are never wrong...and even when they are implemented and don't work, you can just blame some other aspect of the managing. From January through March 2006, Chelsea drew at home to Charlton, tied Villa and Birmingham City away, lost to Fulham, Blackburn, Middlesbrough, and Newcastle. We dropped points in 7 of our last 16 games. All of them winnable. Was Mourinho over his head? Was he tactically unaware because we dropped points to teams we shouldn't have? We had a far better team, facing much worse competition and we had much less excuse for losing. Mourinho should have been sacked then. And as for the first part, it's pertinent. You don't need to get a manager who has managed a big club before. You just need a manager who wins. Our only to visits to the CL finals were under Di Matteo and Grant our two least experienced managers. All managers start somewhere and feeling like you need to get a big name is just insecurity.

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.