The Mourinho Thread

[SinineUltra 1,170]

What? That piece that was about 10% relevant content wrapped in 90% fluff talking about the beyond flesh and blood transcendental nature of a football club? Yeah, we were going to ignore it. It might read well to the romantics but it wasn't nearly as deep as he thought it was.

We know clubs are institutions that will long outlive their managers and squads, that isn't news to anybody. It's not overly relevant to the present stability of the club though.

He talks about Barcelona being stable because of their identity and that certainly helps, sure. But of all the clubs he chooses to knock, it's Arsenal. Arsenal are a team who, if nothing else, are pure identity. People often meet statements like "the West Ham way" or "the Tottenham way" with a degree confusion, but "the Arsenal way"? Not so much. They might have changed over the years but it certainly wasn't an identity crisis that got them where they are now. As a side, Barcelona's core principles may have been in place prior to Pep, but it's hardly a dynasty. It's not even been a decade since Pep got the first team job.

United under Ferguson epitomized stability and even had a bit of identity in there for good measure, but I don't think it was that identity that kept Ferguson in a job for 23 odd years. It wasn't long disappearing if it was...

And it isn't the constant firing of Chelsea managers that's the problem? Well at very least I'm sure it doesn't help. If, as is suggested, it's simply just a matter of getting in coaches who "have something to do with each other" then Liverpool would still be winning titles and United post Ferguson would have kicked on without missing a beat.

Anyway, we all know the opposite sides aren't going to agree because there have been enough well thought out arguments on this site to win over anybody who was able to be won. All that matters is that the club, for the first time, have publicly backed the manager. A great manager, and that's all that matter to me.

I sincerely believe that one of the major factors we are in this situation right now boils down to the sheer number of managers we've had over the recent years. Every manager tries to bring in players he likes and sees suitable for his own formations and tactics. So in the end we are left with a team that does not work well together in a long run - neither fish nor fowl.

[Fernando 6,489]

Interesting read:

Jose Mourinho's insistence on control at Chelsea is becoming a weakness

http://www.espnfc.us/blog/espn-fc-united-blog/68/post/2649376/chelsea-suffering-due-to-jose-mourinho-need-for-control

[Tautvix 1,321]

We are still the champions

[Clockwork 1,794]

Now that he's committed publicly to saying RLC will get a run of games, I wonder who it's in place of. I would suspect Matic but surely we won't line up with a two man midfield comprising of Fabregas and RLC? That could leave us even more exposed defensively.

I would suggest switching to a 4-3-3 (which I've begged for for ages) but then one of Willian or Pedro would have to be dropped continuously since we know Cesc never gets benched.

Matic without a doubt, nothing more obvious. Ok after Ivanovic and Cesc starting, no doubt Mou really dislikes Matic atm.

He said this after the match, he publicly criticized One player(Matic), he subbed Matic as a sub. He really has shown his displeasure with Matic and maybe Hazard(benched against Porto).

[kmk108 1,186]

Is it true we don't actually have an attacking coach at Chelsea? I find this extraordinary at a club the size of ours.

Will Jose give into his ego and get in an attacking coach to improve our football ?

Jose has stuck to his philosophy, because he's always enjoyed success. That type of managing has nearly always brought him success.

I think this is giving him a wake up call, and he won't want to let this be his lasting legacy at Chelsea. His ego may be the thing that changes his philosophy.

[Henrique 9,133]

Willian on Mourinho's relationship with players: "With the players there is no problem" (Globo Esporte) #CFC

Willian: "People generally want to find a problem when the team loses but I never saw Mourinho arguing or fighting with another player" #CFC

Willian: I think it’s a bad time for all of us. Too bad, because we play for #CFC, one of the world's largest clubs & are losing many games.

Willian: "The players playing here have never gone through a situation like this, losing so many games." #CFC

Willian: "But we have everything to win again, despite our many errors" #CFC (Globo Esporte)

In the same interview he said the doesn't know what happened between Mourinho and "the doctor", and that was something discussed with Mourinho, "the doctor" and "the board", and he doesn't know a thing about the situation.

Right.

[lionsden 4,689]

What? That piece that was about 10% relevant content wrapped in 90% fluff talking about the beyond flesh and blood transcendental nature of a football club? Yeah, we were going to ignore it. It might read well to the romantics but it wasn't nearly as deep as he thought it was.

We know clubs are institutions that will long outlive their managers and squads, that isn't news to anybody. It's not overly relevant to the present stability of the club though.

Stability simply means continuation and a stable environment and an arguemnt could be made that Mourinho has actually been a disruptive figure to the stability of this club with the constant chopping and changing of players ranging from Mata, cech, De Bryune, David Luiz, schurrle, lukaku, Bertrand, Luis, salah, cuadrado and so on. some of them were key players and others were never even given a chance to settle into the team before been sold or loaned out. that level of player turnover in such a short space of time is anything but stable and good for stability.

Then there is the issue of lack of identity and pattern to our play. How is he making a case for stability if he's been here for 3 seasons and the team still lacks any form of identity?

The only thing mourinho brings apart from the odd success is short term-ism and chaos to a football club. He's not proven at any point in his career to be suited to long term management. There's absolutely nothing to show or suggest that he's the right man to bring stability. His past record and current evidence does not support that theory. so the question is, if there's nothing to suggest both in his past and current that he is capable of bringing stability to a club in the long term, why should the club and fans trust him with the future of this club?

seeking stability with the wrong man is counter-productive and just as damaging as the suppose negative side effect of high managerial turnover.

He talks about Barcelona being stable because of their identity and that certainly helps, sure. But of all the clubs he chooses to knock, it's Arsenal. Arsenal are a team who, if nothing else, are pure identity. People often meet statements like "the West Ham way" or "the Tottenham way" with a degree confusion, but "the Arsenal way"? Not so much. They might have changed over the years but it certainly wasn't an identity crisis that got them where they are now. As a side, Barcelona's core principles may have been in place prior to Pep, but it's hardly a dynasty. It's not even been a decade since Pep got the first team job.

If you actually bothered to read his post carefully. He used arsenal as an example to illustrate the importance of identity and consistency towards achieving stability. Arsenal might have some identity but lack (ed) the consistency to effectively implement their philosophy. They went from playing with power, pace and combination of counter attack and passing football with players like Viera, henry, pires, overmars, bergkamp et al to possession (tiki taka wannabe) based football with smaller players and became too obsessed with buying cheap and developing youngsters.

The difference between the arsenal that dominated English football in the 2000s with man utd isn't just in personnel changes but style as well. They lost their way/aura along the way.

Moreover shouldn't wenger's reign at Arsenal be evidence that keeping a manger at club long term for the sake of stability is overrated anyway?. Arsenal haven't won any major trophy in 11 years despite their managerial stability. Perhaps if they had fired him and hired a more ambitious manager who believes in the arsenal way of playing football, they would have achieved more in that time.

And it isn't the constant firing of Chelsea managers that's the problem? Well at very least I'm sure it doesn't help. If, as is suggested, it's simply just a matter of getting in coaches who "have something to do with each other" then Liverpool would still be winning titles and United post Ferguson would have kicked on without missing a beat.

Anyway, we all know the opposite sides aren't going to agree because there have been enough well thought out arguments on this site to win over anybody who was able to be won. All that matters is that the club, for the first time, have publicly backed the manager. A great manager, and that's all that matter to me.

How does this even make any sense. How have the managers liverpool have had post 1990 reflective of the strong identity they had in the 70s through to the late 80s? Their identity was "pass and move" football and the managers they have had in that time have been anything but the epitome of that philosophy Souness, gerarld Houlier, Benitez, Roy Hogson?

and do you care to explain how david Moyes is a like for like replacement for Alex ferguson in terms of keeping the philosophy at Utd alive? One plays relentless attacking football with use of wingers while the other is the essennce of a typical "British manager" i,e negative, defensive and unimaginative.

[Henrique 9,133]

Uh oh. It's the dreaded vote of confidence.

Don't see what's the big deal with the club releasing a statement to back Mourinho. Yes, it's the first time we've done that under Roman but it's the same as the Director of Football, Chairman etc coming out to support the manager in public. A few more bad results this month and he'll likely get the sack.

To ne honest, that statement was a little strange. I was reading the news today, and everyone is talking about this statement, and then I went to official site and found this:

"The club wants to make it clear that Jose continues to have our full support.

As Jose has said himself, results have not been good enough and the team's performances must improve. However, we believe that we have the right manager to turn this season around and that he has the squad with which to do it."

Pretty short, and it seems no more than a strategic formality.

I don't want to sound negative, but it just more pressure on Mourinho's shoulders. Its not common when a sports club release an official statement saying "we support the coach". They are actually recognizing there is a situation involving the manager, and he "continues" to have full support, and the team's performances MUST improve, and "we" have the right manager AND he has the right squad.

Well, Mourinho is in the press and is talking about sacking and asking the club to "take responsabilities". The club releases an official statement saying Mourinho has full support, so now its a public support, at the same time the club is making one thing clear: Mourinho has the right players to turn thing around. If Mourinho is fired, no one will say that "lack of support" was the reason why. There is no excuses here.

[Bosnian Blue 2,471]

We wanted RLC but he drops Matic for him ffs. What's wrong with this guy? Matic needs to be in the pivot with RLC! FABREGAS NEEDS TO BE DROPPED!!!!!!!!!!!!! It also looks like he is using excuses to back Ivanovic smh! I've lost all the confidence I've had after I read his interview............ Something always has to be wrong with his selections ALWAYS

Exactly. Loftus can kick start our season BUT not instead of Matic, with Matic together. Would hate to see him turning into a Mikel.

[lionsden 4,689]

Exactly. Loftus can kick start our season BUT not instead of Matic, with Matic together. Would hate to see him turning into a Mikel.

The introduction of a single player cannot be the solution to this mess. It runs way deeper than simply dropping Ivanovich and fabregas and introducing rlc and baba.

I believe there's a huge tactical and fitness issue with this team and the confidence is at an all time low.

Rlc won't suddenly make us creative again nor will baba turn us into a clean sheet machine.

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

As a club we have never done stability you just have to accept it as a Chelsea fan. Since Dave Sexton left in 1974 only two managers have been at the club four years John Neal and Ranieri. That vote of confidence is basically the Sword of Damocles so expect change pretty soon. How many more defeats and piss performances is Mourinho away from the sack?. Not many. Close battling losses ok. But if we have a repeat of the Southampton debacle then he's gone.

[Bosnian Blue 2,471]

The introduction of a single player cannot be the solution to this mess. It runs way deeper than simply dropping Ivanovich and fabregas and introducing rlc and baba.

I believe there's a huge tactical and fitness issue with this team and the confidence is at an all time low.

Rlc won't suddenly make us creative again nor will baba turn us into a clean sheet machine.

Maybe, but introducing Rahman and Loftus would be a positive change, risk worth taking at the moment.

[kmk108 1,186]

The introduction of a single player cannot be the solution to this mess. It runs way deeper than simply dropping Ivanovich and fabregas and introducing rlc and baba.

I believe there's a huge tactical and fitness issue with this team and the confidence is at an all time low.

Rlc won't suddenly make us creative again nor will baba turn us into a clean sheet machine.

Overall, yes, there are much larger issues. Can someone like RLC come in, make a difference for a match and provide a small confidence boost? That's what everyone is hoping.

[Tomo 21,733]

We saw a similar occurence under Ancelotti. For a long while the entire team looked like crap in 10/11. Ancelotti was blamed (thank God for that late run to finish 2nd). He also won the double the season before.

This is even worse (Tomo disagrees with me). Why not blame Mourinho?

To expand on my POV, I think the fact that run happened mid season (meaning our position in the table didn't look so disastrous) helps make that run look better but for me that is our worst run in the Roman era, probably our worse since the Zola, RDM, Vialli invasion.

I read somewhere a while back that if the season started against Sunderland (0-3), we would have only got out of the relegation zone (ironically) after the 4-2 win at the Stadium of the light.

Also 're Carlo I think it was a similar split to what's on here now 're Jose, some gave him some of the blame (like I do then and now), some layed it firmly on his door and others refused to blame him and targeted the players.

[xPetrCechx 13,563]

[DYC. 7,542]

Ancelotti had lost squad depth and various important players, Ballack, Deco and so on.

This is a totally different case where the same personnel are performing awfully.

You do realise that just makes things harder for Ancelotti, which makes Mourinho's case worse.

Mourinho isn't on the pitch playing, the players are. The same ones that walked the league. Mourinho isn't on our left wing, he isn't in midfield, and he isn't a defender.

He sets them out and prepares them just has he did last season when they were good. They're not performing to standard.

So what you are saying is different rules apply to Mourinho because he's Mourinho. Got it.

[DYC. 7,542]

To expand on my POV, I think the fact that run happened mid season (meaning our position in the table didn't look so disastrous) helps make that run look better but for me that is our worst run in the Roman era, probably our worse since the Zola, RDM, Vialli invasion.

I read somewhere a while back that if the season started against Sunderland (0-3), we would have only got out of the relegation zone (ironically) after the 4-2 win at the Stadium of the light.

Also 're Carlo I think it was a similar split to what's on here now 're Jose, some gave him some of the blame (like I do then and now), some layed it firmly on his door and others refused to blame him and targeted the players.

I'm not just talking about the fans though. He was sacked. So he didn't get the chance to fix things .

[Tomo 21,733]

The introduction of a single player cannot be the solution to this mess. It runs way deeper than simply dropping Ivanovich and fabregas and introducing rlc and baba.

I believe there's a huge tactical and fitness issue with this team and the confidence is at an all time low.

Rlc won't suddenly make us creative again nor will baba turn us into a clean sheet machine.

That is why I said to Didierforever that dropping Ivan (as much as it should happen) will barely solve the defensive issue, from the little I've seen of Baba he is still very raw and isn't the best positionally, he will also get targeted just like Ivan is right now.

What we need to work on is the spine, I mean take 05-06 for example, Del Horno was useless and every bit as bad as Ivanovic is right now, but we still ended the season with only 22 goals allowed because of the centre defence and centre midfield.

I'm not for a second trying to defend Brana, but a solid CB partnership with an in form Matic (we already have two top keepers) and we would barely concede no matter how shit Ivanovic was playing.