A New Technical Director

[Ossie the King 634]

9 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

You aren't judging the body of the work what you are doing is looking for someone with a name because you have some sort of elitist complex. I don't give two fucks where someone started their footballing pedigree from. For all you know he came to the club because of Avram and worked his ass off to get the position he's in now. He has an eye for talent, that much is obvious. He wouldn't be at the club otherwise and he wouldn't have the job he has specifically because he's a yes man to Roman... No club with the reputation and success Chelsea have operate that way.

 

An eye for talent? He has an immense scouting network and a virtually unparalleled budget as well as phenomenal facilities to use to entice young players to the squad. Fact is that football scouting is a small world and people not only know each other, but the hot young talents coming along. Eden Hazard wasn't an unknown. Neither was Oscar. Neither was Salah or Schurrle. Let's not forget for all his hits, there have been misses too and there's been no progress in youth development in that time. 

Also don't underestimate the stupidity and cronyism in place at even the largest institutions.

11 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

What we do know is he's come aboard as technical director since 2011 and in the time we won the champions league, europa, fa cup, carling and the league. All that with a revolving door of managers.

He's also played a major role in uncovering some talented footballers like Mata, Azpilicueta, Hazard, De Bruyne, Lukaku, Oscar, Willian, Musonda, Courtois, Kenedy to name a few. The Technical Director works with the MANAGER to find the players to play our football. In his time at Chelsea he's had to work with 5 managers... And we've had success.

If you're going to attribute the Champions League success to him in some way (I wouldn't) would you also lay finishing 6th in the league at his feet (again, I wouldn't as it was probably too soon)? Of course you won't. Let's have a fair discussion.

Also Mata was uncovered by Real Oviedo at the age of 11. We signed him at the age of 23 after he'd won the World Cup. He wasn't exactly an unknown and neither were any of your examples. Maybe you hadn't heard of them but it's very, very rare that a player is signed from nowhere. That's simply not how football works.

15 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

 

Whether or not you choose not to acknowledge the good he's brought to the club is your prerogative but don't slight the man because you can't figure out how he was able to rise to prominence. Jose Mourinho was a translator and went onto become one of the most successful managers in history... When you can tell me what Emenalo's done wrong then we can have a discussion.

 

Jose didn't one day go from being a translator to being Chelsea manager. Even after Barcelona he started as an assistant and then manager at Benfica. Then he went to Uniao de Leiria to earn is stripes, then he went to Porto AND WON THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.

 

Then we hired him. Again, let's just have a fair discussion without resorting to lies or misrepresentations.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

5 minutes ago, Ossie the King said:

An eye for talent? He has an immense scouting network and a virtually unparalleled budget as well as phenomenal facilities to use to entice young players to the squad. Fact is that football scouting is a small world and people not only know each other, but the hot young talents coming along. Eden Hazard wasn't an unknown. Neither was Oscar. Neither was Salah or Schurrle. Let's not forget for all his hits, there have been misses too and there's been no progress in youth development in that time. 

Also don't underestimate the stupidity and cronyism in place at even the largest institutions.

If you're going to attribute the Champions League success to him in some way (I wouldn't) would you also lay finishing 6th in the league at his feet (again, I wouldn't as it was probably too soon)? Of course you won't. Let's have a fair discussion.

Also Mata was uncovered by Real Oviedo at the age of 11. We signed him at the age of 23 after he'd won the World Cup. He wasn't exactly an unknown and neither were any of your examples. Maybe you hadn't heard of them but it's very, very rare that a player is signed from nowhere. That's simply not how football works.

 

Jose didn't one day go from being a translator to being Chelsea manager. Even after Barcelona he started as an assistant and then manager at Benfica. Then he went to Uniao de Leiria to earn is stripes, then he went to Porto AND WON THE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.

 

Then we hired him. Again, let's just have a fair discussion without resorting to lies or misrepresentations.

So what exactly is his job??? This is such a ridiculous conversation! Either you look at what his job description is and acknowledge his role or this is just a retarded discussion. What do you credit him with??? You sound a bit moronic to say he's not qualified to do the job despite all the success then say you don't credit him for the good he's brought to the club because we have enough scouts in place to do his job for him... Why should we pay a mint for someone else to come in when they clearly would have no job yo do???? DO. YOU. UNDERSTAND. NOW???

We have the resources to bring in any world star, however, the job of the technical director is to FIND THE PLAYERS THAT FIT THE STYLE THE MANAGER WANTS TO PLAY! 

I don't underestimate anything what you fail to do is acknowledge you don't know why something is working. Perhaps in the ideal perfect scenario Chelsea would want someone who has played football at a high level, who went on to work at a big club, who after proving how incredible he is, gets hired by Chelsea... AVB comes to mind... But maybe, just maybe, Emenalo came to the club and proved he was ready for the position? How can you argue against it, the proof is in the trophies!

No one is crediting him solely with the success but by the same token you can't lay failure solely at his feet. The year we won the Champions league we tired DESPERATELY to get Modric. That failed and we ended up with Mata and Miereles. Later that year we signed Cahill... All of those players played a key role in us winning the champions league. So because we're not uncovering Lionel Messi before everyone knows who he is Emenalo's not doing an effective job? Brother you are making little to no sense at all. He identified players what would work for our team and for the manager and we were in turn successful.

Until you show me why an unknown can't have this job and prove where he's shown he's inexperienced, this discussion is moot. 

 

[Ossie the King 634]

20 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

So what exactly is his job??? This is such a ridiculous conversation! Either you look at what his job description is and acknowledge his role or this is just a retarded discussion. What do you credit him with??? You sound a bit moronic to say he's not qualified to do the job despite all the success then say you don't credit him for the good he's brought to the club because we have enough scouts in place to do his job for him... Why should we pay a mint for someone else to come in when they clearly would have no job yo do???? DO. YOU. UNDERSTAND. NOW???

First, relax. We're just two Chelsea supporters having a discussion. No need to use words like 'retarded' or 'moronic' now is there. I know you'll be reading that back feeling a bit disappointed in yourself because Chelsea supporters bring their lads up to be good, polite boys so we'll just ignore this little outburst.

Let's start with two statements though. He wasn't qualified for the job, which precludes the old 'judge him on his body of work' bit and secondly, he still isn't qualified for the job. That takes into account the job he's done. I believe both to be true.

22 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

We have the resources to bring in any world star, however, the job of the technical director is to FIND THE PLAYERS THAT FIT THE STYLE THE MANAGER WANTS TO PLAY! 

Increasingly we won't though with the way the football economy is going. I also disagree with the technical director finding players for the coach. What I think we need to do is establish a footballing philosophy find and coach players in that philosophy and also appoint a coach who fits that philosophy. By that measure, Emenalo has failed.

 

24 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

I don't underestimate anything what you fail to do is acknowledge you don't know why something is working. Perhaps in the ideal perfect scenario Chelsea would want someone who has played football at a high level, who went on to work at a big club, who after proving how incredible he is, gets hired by Chelsea... AVB comes to mind... But maybe, just maybe, Emenalo came to the club and proved he was ready for the position? How can you argue against it, the proof is in the trophies!

 

AVB didn't play at a high level but that's besides the point. We are a club in crisis. Before the season started, we decided we weren't going to defend the trophy. Emenalo and the board (who also need reviewing, except the person reviewing would be the person who hired them) failed in their duties and undermined the coach. That again goes down as a failure. 

26 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

No one is crediting him solely with the success but by the same token you can't lay failure solely at his feet. The year we won the Champions league we tired DESPERATELY to get Modric. That failed and we ended up with Mata and Miereles. Later that year we signed Cahill... All of those players played a key role in us winning the champions league. So because we're not uncovering Lionel Messi before everyone knows who he is Emenalo's not doing an effective job? Brother you are making little to no sense at all. He identified players what would work for our team and for the manager and we were in turn successful.

 

Again, the Champions League success was largely a fluke. We were the 6th best team in England that year and were mightily lucky in both the semi-final and final. We were a hair's breadth from winning it in 2008 but that wouldn't have meant Avram Grant was worthy of the Chelsea manager's job so I'm applying the same measure to Emenalo. Let's not forget that the manager we appointed had to be sacked because the personnel he had were incorrect for his system.

 

28 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

Until you show me why an unknown can't have this job and prove where he's shown he's inexperienced, this discussion is moot. 

 

Isn't our current predicament reason enough? You probably support this club because a parent did and I'm assuming you'll want your kids to support them too. Isn't it only right that we appoint the best people for the jobs to act as custodians of this great club? If Emenalo is truly the best we can attract then I actually think we're in bigger trouble than even he stated.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

4 minutes ago, Ossie the King said:

First, relax. We're just two Chelsea supporters having a discussion. No need to use words like 'retarded' or 'moronic' now is there. I know you'll be reading that back feeling a bit disappointed in yourself because Chelsea supporters bring their lads up to be good, polite boys so we'll just ignore this little outburst.

Let's start with two statements though. He wasn't qualified for the job, which precludes the old 'judge him on his body of work' bit and secondly, he still isn't qualified for the job. That takes into account the job he's done. I believe both to be true.

Increasingly we won't though with the way the football economy is going. I also disagree with the technical director finding players for the coach. What I think we need to do is establish a footballing philosophy find and coach players in that philosophy and also appoint a coach who fits that philosophy. By that measure, Emenalo has failed.

 

 

AVB didn't play at a high level but that's besides the point. We are a club in crisis. Before the season started, we decided we weren't going to defend the trophy. Emenalo and the board (who also need reviewing, except the person reviewing would be the person who hired them) failed in their duties and undermined the coach. That again goes down as a failure. 

Again, the Champions League success was largely a fluke. We were the 6th best team in England that year and were mightily lucky in both the semi-final and final. We were a hair's breadth from winning it in 2008 but that wouldn't have meant Avram Grant was worthy of the Chelsea manager's job so I'm applying the same measure to Emenalo. Let's not forget that the manager we appointed had to be sacked because the personnel he had were incorrect for his system.

 

Isn't our current predicament reason enough? You probably support this club because a parent did and I'm assuming you'll want your kids to support them too. Isn't it only right that we appoint the best people for the jobs to act as custodians of this great club? If Emenalo is truly the best we can attract then I actually think we're in bigger trouble than even he stated.

First off I apologize if you've taken offense. What I was trying to get across was you need to tell me why his isn't qualified, you can't say someone isn't qualified without justifying what the role of the job is. You've done that to some extent here so allow me a quick rebuttal... You say he wasn't qualified but what is that based on? You have no idea why he was given the job, perhaps in his time before being appointed he highlighted a number of talented players the club failed to act on. All we can go on is the job he's done since being appointed its a moot point to say "he should've never been given the job despite performing well in it" Maybe the club saw something in him and acted on it... It happens in business all the time, it happens in football too. You say he's not qualified? what are you evaluating? The players he brought to the club or the footballing philosophy of the club? If its the players he was responsible for bringing to the club I'm not sure I agree with you at all... As I've said before the role of the technical director is to work WITH the manager to identify the players he needs to fulfill a style or a philosophy. With the revolving door at the manager spot that has not even been identified let alone implemented. That isn't the fault of Emenalo, that is a Chelsea FC problem and moreover a Roman Abramovich character flaw. If you think the Technical Director's job is to implement a style and then find a coach to execute it, then I would say, judging by what we've seen from our club, that is far from how it is run and maybe that's why Emenalo is in the position. Our style and footballing philosophy throughout Roman's tenure has been dictated by our manager. 

If you disagree with how the club hierachy operates, that is something that we can go into but this isn't an Emenalo discussion. The club as a whole failed Jose but you can't lay all the failure at Emenalo's feet. We bid for Stones and didn't get it done, if the rumours are true we were also in for Pogba but Juve didn't want to sell. It was Jose who wanted Falcao and of the players we did bring in the only one that made no sense is Papi Djilibodji, who I haven't seen play at all. The signing of players is not the job of Emenalo, he FINDS the players and a committee work towards getting a signature. Jose only had a few targets, he wanted maybe 3 players to add to the squad and the club failed to deliver the two big ones, sometimes teams don't want to sell and you can't just go out and find another Pogba or Stones.

Its not about what we can or cannot attract its the structure currently in place at the club. The Technical Director is supposed to work with the manager to find players to play a certain style, if what you're saying is we should have our philosophy defined by our technical director then we may have something to talk about. Right now Emenalo has done a pretty good job at highlighting talent if you take into account what his job description is, if you fail to acknowledge his role in getting players to the club then I don't know what we're even talking about.

[Ossie the King 634]

12 hours ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

First off I apologize if you've taken offense. What I was trying to get across was you need to tell me why his isn't qualified, you can't say someone isn't qualified without justifying what the role of the job is. You've done that to some extent here so allow me a quick rebuttal... You say he wasn't qualified but what is that based on? You have no idea why he was given the job, perhaps in his time before being appointed he highlighted a number of talented players the club failed to act on. All we can go on is the job he's done since being appointed its a moot point to say "he should've never been given the job despite performing well in it" Maybe the club saw something in him and acted on it... It happens in business all the time, it happens in football too. You say he's not qualified? what are you evaluating? The players he brought to the club or the footballing philosophy of the club? If its the players he was responsible for bringing to the club I'm not sure I agree with you at all... As I've said before the role of the technical director is to work WITH the manager to identify the players he needs to fulfill a style or a philosophy. With the revolving door at the manager spot that has not even been identified let alone implemented. That isn't the fault of Emenalo, that is a Chelsea FC problem and moreover a Roman Abramovich character flaw. If you think the Technical Director's job is to implement a style and then find a coach to execute it, then I would say, judging by what we've seen from our club, that is far from how it is run and maybe that's why Emenalo is in the position. Our style and footballing philosophy throughout Roman's tenure has been dictated by our manager. 

 

 

I'm basing the fact that he wasn't qualified on his complete lack of any track record. Let's not pretend we don't have previous in making poor hires in this position after the Avram Grant debacle, although even he was more qualified.

 

I'm also saying he isn't qualified based on the current state of the club. Maybe his role is too limited and he should be given greater control over the footballing direction of this club. With it's high turnover of coaches it would be the sensible choice and it's what other clubs do. Man City are the model to follow in this regard. If we do go down this route then I'd argue that he definitely isn't qualified. 

If you're saying that his role is to acquire or identify players then this summer was an unmitigated disaster. We didn't improve the squad in the slightest and arguably regressed. If you want a case in point, Jose identified John Stones as a target and what did Emenalo (and the board who also need reviewing) provide? Papy.

12 hours ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

If you disagree with how the club hierachy operates, that is something that we can go into but this isn't an Emenalo discussion. The club as a whole failed Jose but you can't lay all the failure at Emenalo's feet. We bid for Stones and didn't get it done, if the rumours are true we were also in for Pogba but Juve didn't want to sell. It was Jose who wanted Falcao and of the players we did bring in the only one that made no sense is Papi Djilibodji, who I haven't seen play at all. The signing of players is not the job of Emenalo, he FINDS the players and a committee work towards getting a signature. Jose only had a few targets, he wanted maybe 3 players to add to the squad and the club failed to deliver the two big ones, sometimes teams don't want to sell and you can't just go out and find another Pogba or Stones.

 

 

I do disagree with how the club hierarchy operates. I don't think there's anyone there to stand up to Roman because he's insulated himself with 'yes men' and as a Chelsea supporter that terrifies me. I think he should take a massive step back from involving himself directly and should hire proper football people with track records. You can point to the aberrations in business but standard practice is to hire people who have shown themselves to be qualified. You might not want us to act like a proper business who acknowledge a responsibility to their shareholders but I do and I doubt you'd want to work for or invest in a company who act so irresponsibly. 

12 hours ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

Its not about what we can or cannot attract its the structure currently in place at the club. The Technical Director is supposed to work with the manager to find players to play a certain style, if what you're saying is we should have our philosophy defined by our technical director then we may have something to talk about. Right now Emenalo has done a pretty good job at highlighting talent if you take into account what his job description is, if you fail to acknowledge his role in getting players to the club then I don't know what we're even talking about.

You've changed the goalposts a few times. First you said he was good at uncovering talent like Mata (the World Cup has about a billion viewers and if just 1% of people knew of Mata than you're basically giving Emenalo credit for being in a select group of 10 million....damning with faint praise probably doesn't do that justice). But I'm glad you did because the issue does go beyond Emenalo. He doesn't work alone nor did he hire himself.

Roman is ultimately to blame for over-promoting an unqualified ally and he's free to do that. Ultimately he's the owner and we're increasingly becoming the 'rich man's plaything' that rival fans said we were.....the only thing they didn't realise is the number of fans who would be ok with that.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

2 hours ago, Ossie the King said:

 

I'm basing the fact that he wasn't qualified on his complete lack of any track record. Let's not pretend we don't have previous in making poor hires in this position after the Avram Grant debacle, although even he was more qualified.

 

I'm also saying he isn't qualified based on the current state of the club. Maybe his role is too limited and he should be given greater control over the footballing direction of this club. With it's high turnover of coaches it would be the sensible choice and it's what other clubs do. Man City are the model to follow in this regard. If we do go down this route then I'd argue that he definitely isn't qualified. 

If you're saying that his role is to acquire or identify players then this summer was an unmitigated disaster. We didn't improve the squad in the slightest and arguably regressed. If you want a case in point, Jose identified John Stones as a target and what did Emenalo (and the board who also need reviewing) provide? Papy.

 

I do disagree with how the club hierarchy operates. I don't think there's anyone there to stand up to Roman because he's insulated himself with 'yes men' and as a Chelsea supporter that terrifies me. I think he should take a massive step back from involving himself directly and should hire proper football people with track records. You can point to the aberrations in business but standard practice is to hire people who have shown themselves to be qualified. You might not want us to act like a proper business who acknowledge a responsibility to their shareholders but I do and I doubt you'd want to work for or invest in a company who act so irresponsibly. 

You've changed the goalposts a few times. First you said he was good at uncovering talent like Mata (the World Cup has about a billion viewers and if just 1% of people knew of Mata than you're basically giving Emenalo credit for being in a select group of 10 million....damning with faint praise probably doesn't do that justice). But I'm glad you did because the issue does go beyond Emenalo. He doesn't work alone nor did he hire himself.

Roman is ultimately to blame for over-promoting an unqualified ally and he's free to do that. Ultimately he's the owner and we're increasingly becoming the 'rich man's plaything' that rival fans said we were.....the only thing they didn't realise is the number of fans who would be ok with that.

I haven't shifted anything you just fail to grasp his role at the club. We wanted to sign Modric, we failed and he provided Mata and Meireles as secondary targets... That's his job. And while you sit here and criticize the work of the directors and staff(albeit without much of a leg to stand on since we've been HIGHLY successful with this formula) what I will never understand is why you feel the need to highlight man city as a successful model because they have Tkixi??? That is a club who have limitless resources, a stadium they can't fill, a squad full of overpaid and underwhelming players and for their immense investment, this is the second year they have qualified for the knockout stages of the champions league. That model has been a massive failure if you ask me! Not to mention they've been sanctioned by UEFA. I don't want Chelsea to look anything close to what Man City do, yes they've built some nice facilities and have a decent empire but as a strictly footballing entity we are well ahead of them if you look at the aggregate score. It sounds to me like you are more about peace of mind rather then building success... Peace of mind knowing that we hired someone "qualified" with a "track record" even though this relative "unknown" we have now has a pretty decent record.

You keep saying he's not qualified because of a lack of track record but he is building that track record with us and by all accounts he's done well, why doesn't that count for anything with you? Txiki you say, had a track record at Barca and has come to City and completely underachieved given the investment and expectations, So even one with a track record like Barca has failed! You say we fluke the champions league, HAH! Well they fluked their 2012 title and they also fluked their 2014 title! meanwhile the list of players he's bought show a complete lack of understanding for team needs. Regardless, most of what you are alluding to is not a Michael Emenalo problem but a Chelsea FC problem. We have never had a long term coach and have never really built a footballing philosophy mainly because we've not had someone with a vision come in and shape the club. My model is Man Utd under Ferguson... until we have a bit of longevity in the managerial role, someone we trust to bring in a solid footballing identity, we won't have a proper philosophy.  Perhaps you are right and the role of Emenalo needs to be expanded so he can have more of an imprint on what the club should be playing like because the spell where we were pretty much rudderless(AVB, RDM, FSW) some of the best attacking options this club have seen were purchased. The thing we couldn't do was attract Guardiola to head up the ship(apparently he wanted the job right up until we fired DiMatteo and hired FSW) Again all of this is more about the higher ups than it is Emenalo.

Now, about last summer... I would agree our transfer policy was a complete and utter disaster. When you win the title by a mile you need to strengthen and we didn't. Why? Were we under the caution for FFP and thus couldn't bring in the types of players who would improve and already title winning team? Or were the players we identified simply unattainable for the allotment we set aside in the transfer kitty? Its clear we identified the right types of players but failed to find anything close in comparison. How many Pogba's are out there? How many English CB's are of the John Stones pedigree? What I will say is this, instead of bringing in the anybodies they decided to go with we should've just given the youth more responsibility. That, I will say falls at the doorstep of Mourinho, who for whatever reason doesn't trust the youth.

I also feel Roman should back away from the day to day operations of the club but I also feel he should be able to hire whoever he trusts to do the job. What I feel would appease a lot of supporters is the hiring of a former player to also sit in the directors box, the likes of Didier, Lamps or even to a lesser degree Zola to come in and assist with the overall vision of how the club's philosophy should be shaped. We clearly have enough business people, now we need a few football people.

[Ossie the King 634]

1 hour ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

I haven't shifted anything you just fail to grasp his role at the club. We wanted to sign Modric, we failed and he provided Mata and Meireles as secondary targets... That's his job. And while you sit here and criticize the work of the directors and staff(albeit without much of a leg to stand on since we've been HIGHLY successful with this formula)

And this is where we fundamentally disagree. We've been successful mostly because of our spending power (although not as much as we should have been) and because of what was done before Emenalo came in. That's not a knock against him but our core of Cech, JT, Drogba, Lampard and Ashley were key to so much of what we have achieved and are what we will struggle to replicate.

Now we're in a real shitstorm because we've failed to commit to certain best practices. I don't blame Emenalo for that exclusively, because he didn't hire himself. The problem lies with Roman. He should've hired people who were qualified and taken a step-back. 

1 hour ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

 

You keep saying he's not qualified because of a lack of track record but he is building that track record with us and by all accounts he's done well, why doesn't that count for anything with you? Txiki you say, had a track record at Barca and has come to City and completely underachieved given the investment and expectations, So even one with a track record like Barca has failed! You say we fluke the champions league, HAH! Well they fluked their 2012 title and they also fluked their 2014 title! meanwhile the list of players he's bought show a complete lack of understanding for team needs. Regardless, most of what you are alluding to is not a Michael Emenalo problem but a Chelsea FC problem. We have never had a long term coach and have never really built a footballing philosophy mainly because we've not had someone with a vision come in and shape the club. My model is Man Utd under Ferguson... until we have a bit of longevity in the managerial role, someone we trust to bring in a solid footballing identity, we won't have a proper philosophy.  Perhaps you are right and the role of Emenalo needs to be expanded so he can have more of an imprint on what the club should be playing like because the spell where we were pretty much rudderless(AVB, RDM, FSW) some of the best attacking options this club have seen were purchased. The thing we couldn't do was attract Guardiola to head up the ship(apparently he wanted the job right up until we fired DiMatteo and hired FSW) Again all of this is more about the higher ups than it is Emenalo.

 

But City are much better placed to achieve success over the next few years and will bring in a manager (Pep) who fits the style they're establishing perfectly. We don't even know who our next coach will be or what style we want to play. That is Emenalo's legacy at this club.

I agree totally with the lack of a footballing philosophy though, which is why I'd establish a proper technical director who has the vision and tools to implement that from the academy right through to the first team. Your model may well be Fergie at United but that won't happen again. No manager will get 6 years without a trophy to establish something here.

1 hour ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

I also feel Roman should back away from the day to day operations of the club but I also feel he should be able to hire whoever he trusts to do the job. What I feel would appease a lot of supporters is the hiring of a former player to also sit in the directors box, the likes of Didier, Lamps or even to a lesser degree Zola to come in and assist with the overall vision of how the club's philosophy should be shaped. We clearly have enough business people, now we need a few football people.

Again, I agree 100% that Roman should step back. The issue is that he's hired who he trusts for 13 years and he's got a clusterfuck. The only person who has imprinted their philosophy onto the club has been Mourinho and that can still be seen in the youth teams.

Personally I'd hire Frank Lampard as technical director if experience doesn't matter. He's a Chelsea bloke and he's not only intelligent, but he's been there and done it. I think he'd have Roman's trust too. Ideally we'd appoint someone with more experience of the coaching side though. I don't think we need ex-pros in the box for the sake of it though.

That final paragraph suggests you agree with me that there's something lacking when it comes to the philosophy of football at this club and if we accept that it's unlikely that a manager will be given time to build one, then we have to look at a constant above them - that has been Emenalo for the last five managers. His role should be expanded but he should also vacate and the rest of the board should be under review because we're going to keep making the same mistakes otherwise.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

4 minutes ago, Ossie the King said:

And this is where we fundamentally disagree. We've been successful mostly because of our spending power (although not as much as we should have been) and because of what was done before Emenalo came in. That's not a knock against him but our core of Cech, JT, Drogba, Lampard and Ashley were key to so much of what we have achieved and are what we will struggle to replicate.

Now we're in a real shitstorm because we've failed to commit to certain best practices. I don't blame Emenalo for that exclusively, because he didn't hire himself. The problem lies with Roman. He should've hired people who were qualified and taken a step-back. 

But City are much better placed to achieve success over the next few years and will bring in a manager (Pep) who fits the style they're establishing perfectly. We don't even know who our next coach will be or what style we want to play. That is Emenalo's legacy at this club.

I agree totally with the lack of a footballing philosophy though, which is why I'd establish a proper technical director who has the vision and tools to implement that from the academy right through to the first team. Your model may well be Fergie at United but that won't happen again. No manager will get 6 years without a trophy to establish something here.

Again, I agree 100% that Roman should step back. The issue is that he's hired who he trusts for 13 years and he's got a clusterfuck. The only person who has imprinted their philosophy onto the club has been Mourinho and that can still be seen in the youth teams.

Personally I'd hire Frank Lampard as technical director if experience doesn't matter. He's a Chelsea bloke and he's not only intelligent, but he's been there and done it. I think he'd have Roman's trust too. Ideally we'd appoint someone with more experience of the coaching side though. I don't think we need ex-pros in the box for the sake of it though.

That final paragraph suggests you agree with me that there's something lacking when it comes to the philosophy of football at this club and if we accept that it's unlikely that a manager will be given time to build one, then we have to look at a constant above them - that has been Emenalo for the last five managers. His role should be expanded but he should also vacate and the rest of the board should be under review because we're going to keep making the same mistakes otherwise.

I think you're confused... I hate to keep going around the mulberry bush with you so let me give you this so you have a better understanding of the role Technical Director and Director of Football....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_of_football

Michael Emenalo - Technical director

 

Michael Emenalo previously worked in both the scouting and coaching departments before being promoted to his current role in July 2011. 

He has been an important part of the first team management structure since his arrival in October 2007, and now supports the work of the first team manager, leading the club's international and domestic scouting network, and assists in driving the technical programmes of our Academy and international youth network.

He previously worked as both head of opposition scouting and assistant first team coach under Carlo Ancelotti, arriving at Chelsea when former manager Avram Grant called upon a trusted ex-player from his Maccabi Tel Aviv days.

[Ossie the King 634]

31 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

I think you're confused... I hate to keep going around the mulberry bush with you so let me give you this so you have a better understanding of the role Technical Director and Director of Football....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_of_football

Michael Emenalo - Technical director

 

Michael Emenalo previously worked in both the scouting and coaching departments before being promoted to his current role in July 2011. 

He has been an important part of the first team management structure since his arrival in October 2007, and now supports the work of the first team manager, leading the club's international and domestic scouting network, and assists in driving the technical programmes of our Academy and international youth network.

He previously worked as both head of opposition scouting and assistant first team coach under Carlo Ancelotti, arriving at Chelsea when former manager Avram Grant called upon a trusted ex-player from his Maccabi Tel Aviv days.

 

I'm aware of his role. I don't think he has fulfilled the remit implied by the duties stated above (especially in this last summer window which has led to so much turmoil and upheaval) but I'd also like us to expand that role going forward with someone else at the helm.

I think with the way the club is run, we need a buffer between coach and owner who will actually help build a footballing philosophy with both the coach and the academy director (Neil Bath's role at the club must be seriously looked at too). Emenalo recognised that he couldn't work with Mourinho and tendered his resignation, yet Roman kept him on for whatever reason. That was a flaw on Roman's part. 

Now I think is the time when we make sweeping changes throughout the club and assess every single person's role from top to bottom.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

Just now, Ossie the King said:

 

I'm aware of his role. I don't think he has fulfilled the remit implied by the duties stated above (especially in this last summer window which has led to so much turmoil and upheaval) but I'd also like us to expand that role going forward with someone else at the helm.

I think with the way the club is run, we need a buffer between coach and owner who will actually help build a footballing philosophy with both the coach and the academy director (Neil Bath's role at the club must be seriously looked at too). Emenalo recognised that he couldn't work with Mourinho and tendered his resignation, yet Roman kept him on for whatever reason. That was a flaw on Roman's part. 

Now I think is the time when we make sweeping changes throughout the club and assess every single person's role from top to bottom.

Are you? Because everything you said up to this point has missed the mark in accordance to his job description. You seem to be looking for a sporting director/director of football which I would agree with... I don't think Emenalo has done a bad job as our technical director/scouting overseer, we have been bringing some incredibly talented players since he's come in. The quality of our youth program has also improved immensely as well...

You and many supporters have placed the blame at the wrong person's feet. The talent was identified and not acquired... Michael doesn't sign the players he merely finds the players. This past summer the club decided to re-use a championship winning club rather than overpay competition in places, it was a mistake but no one thought it would be this grave.

I would love to see a Sporting Director at Chelsea as well as a footballing director like Didier... Michael keeps his job as technical director in my books as we are identifying the right players.

[Ossie the King 634]

7 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

Are you? Because everything you said up to this point has missed the mark in accordance to his job description. You seem to be looking for a sporting director/director of football which I would agree with... I don't think Emenalo has done a bad job as our technical director/scouting overseer, we have been bringing some incredibly talented players since he's come in. The quality of our youth program has also improved immensely as well...

And yet not a single youth team player has made the breakthrough into the first team. There's larger issues for that but 'not done a bad job' is hardly a ringing endorsement for the man.

 

8 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

 

You and many supporters have placed the blame at the wrong person's feet. The talent was identified and not acquired... Michael doesn't sign the players he merely finds the players. This past summer the club decided to re-use a championship winning club rather than overpay competition in places, it was a mistake but no one thought it would be this grave.

 

I agree with most of this which is why I've said a root and branch review is needed, but I think Marina is just like Emenalo - one of Roman's entourage promoted beyond her capabilities. Again, to use City's example they looked to hire the best. We didn't and that startling lack of ambition is now manifesting itself on the pitch.

 

10 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

I would love to see a Sporting Director at Chelsea as well as a footballing director like Didier... Michael keeps his job as technical director in my books as we are identifying the right players.

I think just a director with an expanded remit is more than enough but I have no doubt that Emenalo would probably still be kept on by Roman, probably out of pity and a sense of duty to him. 

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

3 minutes ago, Ossie the King said:

And yet not a single youth team player has made the breakthrough into the first team. There's larger issues for that but 'not done a bad job' is hardly a ringing endorsement for the man.

 

I agree with most of this which is why I've said a root and branch review is needed, but I think Marina is just like Emenalo - one of Roman's entourage promoted beyond her capabilities. Again, to use City's example they looked to hire the best. We didn't and that startling lack of ambition is now manifesting itself on the pitch.

 

I think just a director with an expanded remit is more than enough but I have no doubt that Emenalo would probably still be kept on by Roman, probably out of pity and a sense of duty to him. 

LOL I think we need to end this here. Now Emenalo is to blame for the youth not getting into the first team? I can't even call that a stretch, I don't think a word in the english language has been invented to describe how far off the mark that insinuation is. Yes there are MUCH LARGER issues at play and given the circumstances, yes, Emenalo has not done a bad job at all.

City? Please stop... I've already shown why that model is nothing short of a disaster. How many youth have made it into their squad? I would say Chelsea are helluva lot closer to seeing youth incorporated than City are.  Inheanacho fella looks pretty good but he's hardly a youth product since he was signed in 2014, he's their version of Traore... Can you please provide another example of where top clubs have hired a director of football and thus flourished as a result because right now this City thing you keep banging on about is severely flawed. 

Would you care to offer up a few names of high ranking directors of football?

[Ossie the King 634]

1 hour ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

LOL I think we need to end this here. Now Emenalo is to blame for the youth not getting into the first team? I can't even call that a stretch, I don't think a word in the english language has been invented to describe how far off the mark that insinuation is. Yes there are MUCH LARGER issues at play and given the circumstances, yes, Emenalo has not done a bad job at all.

So you make it sound like I said he's to blame, but then acknowledge that I said there were larger issues. Ok....

 

1 hour ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

City? Please stop... I've already shown why that model is nothing short of a disaster. How many youth have made it into their squad? I would say Chelsea are helluva lot closer to seeing youth incorporated than City are.  Inheanacho fella looks pretty good but he's hardly a youth product since he was signed in 2014, he's their version of Traore... Can you please provide another example of where top clubs have hired a director of football and thus flourished as a result because right now this City thing you keep banging on about is severely flawed. 

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.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

1 minute ago, Ossie the King said:

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.

And you're crediting that to Txiki and Laporta? Are you forgetting that whole style and philosophy was founded by Dutch great Johann Cruyff? That La Masia was already well up and running long before Txiki? 

In 1988, Johan Cruyff returned to the club as manager and he assembled the so-called Dream Team.^[58] He used a mix of Spanish players like Pep Guardiola, José Mari Bakero and Txiki Begiristain while signing international players such as Ronald Koeman, Michael Laudrup, Romário and Hristo Stoichkov.^[59]

It was ten years after the inception of the youth program, La Masia, when the young players began to graduate and play for their first team. One of the first graduates, who would later earn international acclaim, was previous Barcelona coach Pep Guardiola.^[60] Under Cruyff's guidance, Barcelona won four consecutive La Liga titles from 1991 to 1994. They beat Sampdoria in both the 1989 UEFA Cup Winners' Cup final and the 1992 European Cup final atWembley, with a free kick goal from Dutch international Ronald Koeman. They also won a Copa del Rey in 1990, the European Super Cup in 1992 and three Supercopa de España trophies. With 11 trophies, Cruyff became the club's most successful manager at that point. He also became the club's longest consecutive serving manager, serving eight years.^[61] Cruyff's fortune was to change, and, in his final two seasons, he failed to win any trophies and fell out with president Núñez, resulting in his departure.^[52] On the legacy of Cruyff's football philosophy and the passing style of play he introduced to the club, future coach of Barcelona Pep Guardiola would state, "Cruyff built the cathedral, our job is to maintain and renovate it."

[Ossie the King 634]

8 minutes ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

And you're crediting that to Txiki and Laporta? Are you forgetting that whole style and philosophy was founded by Dutch great Johann Cruyff? That La Masia was already well up and running long before Txiki? 

 

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.

[Chelsea Legend 11 4,062]

1 minute ago, Ossie the King said:

 

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.

Exactly.

But what comes first? The philosophy or the manager? In almost every instance it was the iconic manager that came in and shaped the vision/blueprint. And you're right I don't agree that us winning the champions league was the result of some weird stroke of luck. What you fail to acknowledge is the years leading up to that memorable day is we had already played in 5 semi finals in the competition before we found that winning formula. I would say the win was less flukey and a testament to perseverance, and while I agree he had less to do with the Champions league than say last years Premier league title, to say he had no role or that we were flukey is so wide of the mark.

And yes we are a chequebook club! Much like Barca, Real Madrid, Bayern, PSG, City, Utd any other top club in world football! The game has changed... What we do have is a guy who has an eye for talent and we've been able to exploit his abilities to our benefit. Example of that is Kevin De Bruyne, who we bought for 7m and later caked in close to 28m on his sale. There are numerous examples of this like Lukaku... No wonder we didn't take his resignation, he's made a lot of money for the transfer kitty. Like it or not he is an asset in his defined role, what we need now is someone who has a footballing vision to shape our philosophy, we need a Johann Cruyff not Txiki who is failing miserably at trying to duplicate that which can't be duplicated.

[The Skipper 20,609]

@Chelsea Legend 11, absolutely spot on in your posts chap. I tried to have this discussion with OTK before - how we need to look at implementing a philosophy at the club and all I got is how it was Emenalo's job to do that when its pretty clear that that isn't his role and that it's something above him, something the board needs to look to improve.

[Ossie the King 634]

11 hours ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

Exactly.

But what comes first? The philosophy or the manager? In almost every instance it was the iconic manager that came in and shaped the vision/blueprint.

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. 

 

11 hours ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

And you're right I don't agree that us winning the champions league was the result of some weird stroke of luck. What you fail to acknowledge is the years leading up to that memorable day is we had already played in 5 semi finals in the competition before we found that winning formula. I would say the win was less flukey and a testament to perseverance, and while I agree he had less to do with the Champions league than say last years Premier league title, to say he had no role or that we were flukey is so wide of the mark.

 

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.

 

11 hours ago, Chelsea Legend 11 said:

And yes we are a chequebook club! Much like Barca, Real Madrid, Bayern, PSG, City, Utd any other top club in world football! The game has changed... What we do have is a guy who has an eye for talent and we've been able to exploit his abilities to our benefit. Example of that is Kevin De Bruyne, who we bought for 7m and later caked in close to 28m on his sale. There are numerous examples of this like Lukaku... No wonder we didn't take his resignation, he's made a lot of money for the transfer kitty. Like it or not he is an asset in his defined role, what we need now is someone who has a footballing vision to shape our philosophy, we need a Johann Cruyff not Txiki who is failing miserably at trying to duplicate that which can't be duplicated.

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.

[The Skipper 20,609]

@Chelsea Legend 11 @Ossie the King moved your discussion into this thread chaps. 

[The Skipper 20,609]

7 hours ago, Ossie the King said:

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.

Is this meant to be a comment against me or?

 

We've already had a similar discussion on this, CL11 just reinforced exactly what I was telling you.