Buy leaders in the summer

[LDN Blue 7,903]

About 3 years ago, we looked to have a clear direction or idea of what we want to do and how we are going to do things going forward as a club. Then, Mourinho came back and almost everything has gone shit since then.

Nah come on, I don't buy that.

I'll criticise Mourinho on decisions he's made as much as the next person, but there seems to be now a culture on here to literally blame him for everything going wrong this season and it's getting tedious. Yes, personnel wise he made wrong choices. Kevin being the most prominent.. But the players take just as much blame for not emerging as leaders through this process. I'm not going to elaborate too much because even this argument is just as tedious!

But there was a time, not too long ago, where we struggled to play this 'attacking football' brand. Long before Mourinho, when we had signed Oscar, Hazard, Mata, De Bruyne and Lukaku. Only Benitez, just about, made the trio of Mata, Hazard and Oscar work! But at the same time, he also dropped Terry and so we never even had leaders at that point either.

The fact is, Mourinho's decision to bring back Drogba in 2014 and reinstate Terry was key in us winning the title. Drogba, then, chose to leave and Terry's decline became more and more evident.

So while you say we had a 'clear direction or idea' I strongly disagree. It was the same old, same old.. Buy some flare players and see what happens.

[Term-X 7,891]

The importance of leaders are exaggerated by retired footballers in England. Those pundits usually say two things: the players need a kick in the butt and the team need leaders. Boring.

Always roll my eyes when seeing posts like this..

If retired footballers who've been in the game and have the unique perspective of being in top level football keep saying 'leaders' in the dressing room are important. Then I'll take their word for it, rather than some guy who knows the game through streams and football manager.

[Jase 43,479]

But there was a time, not too long ago, where we struggled to play this 'attacking football' brand. Long before Mourinho, when we had signed Oscar, Hazard, Mata, De Bruyne and Lukaku. Only Benitez, just about, made the trio of Mata, Hazard and Oscar work! But at the same time, he also dropped Terry and so we never even had leaders at that point either.

I didn't say Mourinho is the only manager who makes the players work. Others do too obviously but compare to most, Mourinho does that way too much and he restricts players from expressing themselves. Attacking football takes time to instill - it won't be successful in days but what you would like to see is progression. Did we see that under Mourinho? No. Not only we're not playing attacking football now, we're not even playing football.

So while you say we had a 'clear direction or idea' I strongly disagree. It was the same old, same old.. Buy some flare players and see what happens.

Each to their own. The club's insistence of wanting to get Guardiola back then was clearly a sign they wanted to change our playing style .

[Jase 43,479]

As I said online, but you wouldnt find anyone moaning around SW6.

That's an exaggeration really. There are those who don't wear Mourinho tinted glasses all the time and can see through his faults and flaws, even if he's our most successful manager.

[Spike 12,049]

We need to appoint leaders first mate.

Leaders are going to lead regardless of a piece of elastic around their arm.

[Ossie the King 634]

We clearly had a plan of what we wanted to do - we wanted to change our playing style, we bought a group of technically exciting and brilliant players to play a more expansive brand of football than we had in the years before. Whether we wanted to be Barcelona 2.0, hire Guardiola or not, we definitely had decided the direction going forward. Then, we went and brought in Mourinho - the manager who prefers reactive/defensive approach to football as opposed to proactive/offensive approach that's more in line with the kind of players we had then.

So there you're perfectly describing muddled thinking at BOARD LEVEL.

Personally I think we were targetting young, appreciating assets because it's financially beneficial. Let's not forget that we also signed Lukaku who isn't what I'd describe as a technically gifted player. Again, muddled thinking.

Also three years ago we hired Rafa Benitez after sacking Robbie who finished 6th in the league after taking over from the guy we sacked before - this was not a stable club by any means.

Yes, he won the league but that's one of the only few things he did in his second time here.

That's very close to a 'what have the Romans ever done for us?' line.

Yes, he won the league but that's one of the only few things he did in his second time here. Why? (1) Our squad depth and quality is now way worse than what we had 2-3 seasons ago - he actually ditched the footballing types for a bunch of players who run around the pitch and aren't good in much else - (2) he didn't instill any sort of positive playing style especially when he constantly talked about staying for the long haul - we're so bad at football now that it looks like an achievement if we can string more than 5 passes! - (3) he constantly created drama and chaos within the club and with the media - his need for controversy, his need to create 'us against the world' mentality is pathetic. he has used those methods all throughout his career and any fella with half a brain can see through his ploys. it's like he has no other ways to motivate the players and to thrive, (4) he talked about bringing youth players, he talked about academy day bla bla bla and yet, we've seen nothing about that in 2 1/2 years.

1) Not sure I agree with that considering I could predict quite easily what team we'd be fielding EVERY week under Robbie and Rafa. In fact if we go back and look at the teamsheets from each week I'm sure we'd find little in the way of rotation. Our squad depth has been off for a while.

2) See this is where talking in absolutes isn't helpful. We were wonderful to watch at times up until the Swansea game in January, then we fell apart. We didn't have the players to maintain that style and we needed reinforcements which we never got. Again, far bigger problem than Jose.

3) The drama comes with him and it increased as the pressure increased. Like you say, we all know that's him and yet we still hired him. It did go overboard though and I think that external pressure played a massive factor but he is human at the end of the day. We've all been there and if you haven't you will.

4) Apart from the core of Hazard, Courtois and Zouma, it's been disappointing. We have a youth problem at this club and whilst I'd have loved to have seen Loftus-Cheek play more, it never seemed like the right time. From going into the run-in for the title when every point mattered to the start of the season when we were scrapping for points, you're looking at two highly pressurised situations and Jose is a safety-first pragmatist. He needed his established stars to recapture their form rather than gamble on youth players coming good.

It's a catch-22 and he'd have been castigated either way by some.

We're so far behind the likes of Barcelona, Bayern Munich etc that it's quite depressing to watch.

I agree. But blaming that all on Jose is really taking a narrow view of things. You need to look at who hired him and who was running the club over that time.

[Ossie the King 634]

I know a lot of people aren't gonna wanna hear this but rehiring Mourinho was a massive mistake maybe even the biggest mistake the club made in the Roman Abramovich period.

Yet Jose didn't hire himself. He didn't give himself a contract. You need to look at the people running this club.

I didn't say Mourinho is the only manager who makes the players work. Others do too obviously but compare to most, Mourinho does that way too much and he restricts players from expressing themselves. Attacking football takes time to instill - it won't be successful in days but what you would like to see is progression. Did we see that under Mourinho? No. Not only we're not playing attacking football now, we're not even playing football

The thing is, I've seen us play attacking football under Jose in both of his spells here. This notion that he can't let his teams off the leash is asinine. Football is about attack and defence, but it's ultimately about winning. He did that.

Each to their own. The club's insistence of wanting to get Guardiola back then was clearly a sign they wanted to change our playing style .

But Guardiola was working with kids from La Masia who had spent a decade learning how to play the way Barcelona wanted.

You want to play like Barca then you build your academy in that mould. We haven't. You watch the youth team and you know what you see? Jose's style of football and by that I mean strong, powerful teams who attack with pace often on the counter.

Jose's DNA goes right throughout this club and has done since 2005. You want THE classic Jose performance (although Barcelona 4-2 and Arsenal 6-0 are also Jose classics that people won't remember)?

MUNICH 2012, 5 years after the guy was sacked.

Leaders are going to lead regardless of a piece of elastic around their arm.

I meant off the pitch....in the boardroom.

That's an exaggeration really. There are those who don't wear Mourinho tinted glasses all the time and can see through his faults and flaws, even if he's our most successful manager.

You don't see through someone's flaws. I believe that in life and in business.

What you do is acknowledge them, accept them if you can and work on the ones you can't.

[Fulham Broadway 16,404]

That's an exaggeration really. There are those who don't wear Mourinho tinted glasses all the time and can see through his faults and flaws, even if he's our most successful manager.

I think most cringed towards the end of his tenure when he appeared at the after match interviews blaming anything. He had plenty of faultlines, as with all geniuses, and I have never met anyone who saw him as flawless.

Conversely, here, there are some who say hes set the club back years , blame him solely for the clubs present predicament -when the board, owner, players are equally responsible, and laughably see him as the only voice in who comes to and leaves the club.

I would rather move on, discuss what the future holds tbh, but people keep on bringing up Mourinho, and the fairytale of what an ogre he was in destroying any stability, but I suppose people need easy scapegoats, rather than the reality that the structure is creaking.

[11Drogba 2,000]

If retired footballers who've been in the game and have the unique perspective of being in top level football keep saying 'leaders' in the dressing room are important.

Where did I say leaders are not important? If you respect bright minds of Carragher, Keane and Owen so much I would suggest you to read retired players/pundits from other countries as well.

[Jase 43,479]

Personally I think we were targetting young, appreciating assets because it's financially beneficial. Let's not forget that we also signed Lukaku who isn't what I'd describe as a technically gifted player. Again, muddled thinking.

It's a bit of both really. When you buy young players like Mata, Hazard, Oscar, De Bruyne, Lukaku etc, you can't say we aren't trying to change the profile of the team. We clearly did. But on the other hand, if we have to sell them (some we really shouldn't have), then at least we'll be able to get decent amount of money.

That's very close to a 'what have the Romans ever done for us?' line.

No, it's not. If I had mentioned about Jose's time at Chelsea as a whole, then maybe yes. But I only mentioned his second stint, which if you look at it, it's hard to pick out many good things compared to say the first time he was here.

Not sure I agree with that considering I could predict quite easily what team we'd be fielding EVERY week under Robbie and Rafa. In fact if we go back and look at the teamsheets from each week I'm sure we'd find little in the way of rotation. Our squad depth has been off for a while.

Our squad depth has been off for a while...yeah, for the last 2-3 years. The squad Jose inherited had decent depth but it got worse as each season went off and now first XI is so predictable. And the team was hardly forseeable under Benitez, who probably had fun rotating the starting XI every game considering we had to play every 3-4 days.

See this is where talking in absolutes isn't helpful. We were wonderful to watch at times up until the Swansea game in January, then we fell apart. We didn't have the players to maintain that style and we needed reinforcements which we never got. Again, far bigger problem than Jose.

Says a lot when you said "we were wonderful to watch AT TIMES...". Yes, we played good attacking football under Jose but only for 6 months. Other than that, it was pragmatic stuff - although I'm not sure how one can categorize our football this season. And yes, we need players to improve the style but at the same time, the current group of players we have is pretty much the same as last season and the one who played that good football. Needing new signings is one thing but there's no reason why this team shouldn't be able to play good or at least decent football to watch - like putting opposition under sustained pressure, creating chances, scoring goals and defending properly. Buying players won't help to solve that. It's done through coaching the players and whose job exactly is that? Blaming the board is fine - because they aren't entirely faultless either - but let's not act as if Jose never suggested and got his reinforcements - just look at Cuadrado, Salah, Falcao to begin with.

The drama comes with him and it increased as the pressure increased. Like you say, we all know that's him and yet we still hired him. It did go overboard though and I think that external pressure played a massive factor but he is human at the end of the day. We've all been there and if you haven't you will.

That is seriously a poor excuse. We all face pressure in our life but there's a right and wrong way to go about handling yourself. Jose is a man with plenty of experience and knowledge and yet every time, he needs to create controversy. Even when the pressure is already on, he likes to add more fuel to the fire. Why? You only have to look at this season, when we were already in crisis, he continued to create more drama - with the club, players, media, referees etc. He should and must know better. Other successful managers like Fergie also experienced that kind of pressure before but he didn't go about his business like the way Jose did, certainly not in the over the top manner.

[Jase 43,479]

Apart from the core of Hazard, Courtois and Zouma, it's been disappointing. We have a youth problem at this club and whilst I'd have loved to have seen Loftus-Cheek play more, it never seemed like the right time. From going into the run-in for the title when every point mattered to the start of the season when we were scrapping for points, you're looking at two highly pressurised situations and Jose is a safety-first pragmatist. He needed his established stars to recapture their form rather than gamble on youth players coming good. It's a catch-22 and he'd have been castigated either way by some.

That I can agree. It is a double edge situation although, with the senior players already doing so badly and showing no signs of improvement even after being given like 1000 chances, you do wonder if it's worth gambling on youth because they can't do any worse, can they?

I agree. But blaming that all on Jose is really taking a narrow view of things. You need to look at who hired him and who was running the club over that time.

If you had read my posts in here and elsewhere, you would know I'm not pinning the blame entirely on Mourinho. The board and players are at fault too. Jose, however, was the one who managed the squad and was tasked with getting the best out of the players. There was no reinforcements in the transfer window from the board but it's not their fault when the man in the dugout couldn't ensure the team play well and pick up results week in week out.

The thing is, I've seen us play attacking football under Jose in both of his spells here. This notion that he can't let his teams off the leash is asinine. Football is about attack and defence, but it's ultimately about winning. He did that.

Oh we have seen the team play attacking football under Jose but we only saw that for 6 months and some matches here and there down the years. It's not consistent Like it or not, he's a pragmatic manager who doesn't adopt an attacking approach and if he could bore his way to a 1-0 win every week, think he would do it. And you're right in saying football is ultimately about winning but people would expect at least some form of entertainment to go along with it.

But Guardiola was working with kids from La Masia who had spent a decade learning how to play the way Barcelona wanted. You want to play like Barca then you build your academy in that mould. We haven't. You watch the youth team and you know what you see? Jose's style of football and by that I mean strong, powerful teams who attack with pace often on the counter.

Why talk about Guardiola and La Masia? Bayern don't have an academy like La Masia and yet that didn't stop Guardiola from promoting youth and tweak, improve the playing style of the club. He's far more adaptable than people think he is.

Jose's DNA goes right throughout this club and has done since 2005. You want THE classic Jose performance (although Barcelona 4-2 and Arsenal 6-0 are also Jose classics that people won't remember)?

That DNA went out of the window as soon as the previous team era was over. This current side couldn't do the things that Jose's teams are renowed for correctly - e.g defending solidly, don't give chances away, strong on counter attacks. You could hardly find many matches in his second stint that saw us do what Jose's teams do best.

You don't see through someone's flaws. I believe that in life and in business. What you do is acknowledge them, accept them if you can and work on the ones you can't.

Wow. That's deep...

If you have strengths, then you maintain it and try to make it even better. If you have weaknesses, then you work on it and change. If you continue allow those weaknesses stay in you and do not adapt, then you won't move forward and become better. Instead, you regress.

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

There's leaders in the Chelsea dressing room no question about it. They have played a leading role in getting three managers the sack Scolari, A.V.B. and Mourinho.

[Mechromancer 262]

Yeah, the title is wrong.

I had a new one: Sell the leaders and buy good players.

[Beigl 1,387]

We have to see this season out and have to rebuild our squad with quality players in summer as quick as possible. Players like Oscar have to be shipped out. But I am afraid that without CL football we might not be able to attract players in the mould of Pogba,Isco etc, so this rebuild could cost us years before we are challenging for the domestic title again.

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

Not in May they werent, quite happy to bathe in the glory, as I am sure you were.

Yes I actually changed the title back to the Mourinho Thread several times. If I remember rightly Lionsden was banned amongst other things because 158 of his 160 posts were slagging off the team he purported to support.' Kinda funny' too. Not 100% sure, as Mods cant ban.

Anyways, back on topic.

"Bathe in the glory" Are you talking about being happy with winning the title ? If you are then that's just ridiculous.

I was happy with us winning the title but that doesn't obligate me to like what Mourinho was doing at this club.

Come on now let's be real here. Lionsden getting banned was an utter disgrace. Acting like it was justified is hilariously stupid although i shouldn't be suprised that it's coming from you.

He was a critical member yes but that doesn't warrant a ban. Being critical isn't against the rules. You guys fucked up.

[Fulham Broadway 16,404]

"Bathe in the glory" Are you talking about being happy with winning the title ? If you are then that's just ridiculous.

I was happy with us winning the title but that doesn't obligate me to like what Mourinho was doing at this club.

Come on now let's be real here. Lionsden getting banned was an utter disgrace. Acting like it was justified is hilariously stupid although i shouldn't be suprised that it's coming from you.

He was a critical member yes but that doesn't warrant a ban. Being critical isn't against the rules. You guys fucked up.

Glad you, as a chelsea fan, were happy winning the title.

If youre unhappy about Lionsden, and think Admin 'fucked up' PM one

Now stay on track please.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

We need to appoint leaders first mate.

There isn't one in this current crop besides Terry.

[Henrique 9,133]

Terry, Lampard, Drogba and Cech were not "leaders" before 2003 or 2004. Football leader are not born as natural leaders. Those players became leaders because they were gifted players, they had strong characters and they were part of winning squad. Being serious or/and angry doesn't mean a player is necessarily a leader.

The problem in current season is not lack of leaders. Think about Robben. In Chelsea and Real Madrid days, Robben was never a leader. You might think about Robben today as leader, but look at his story: gifted player but never a protagonist in Chelsea or Real, called a player that lacked stron character because missed Nedherland chance to win a WC and Bayern's chance to win a UCL at home. He was a punished character, who redeemed himself scoring Bayern's UCL winner.

I don't think you can just "buy" a leader. If a player is a leader elsewhere, it doesn't mean he will be a leader anywhere he goes, unless you are talking about leader in terms of skills, but I don't think you are talking about this kind of leader.

Perhaps you are talking about "experienced" players, who are used to any kind of situation in football, then I might agree in this one. Makelele was perhaps the most important player in that Chelsea midfield.

The problem at the moment, perhaps people from SW6 won't agree, is that Mourinho was not the right man back in 2013, and its as simples as that. The squad that was created at that moment was the most unMourinho as possible. Guardiola's was Abramovich dream, and then he ended up getting Mourinho. That doesn't make any sense, since those managers are the opposite. At the moment it seems the favorites are Guardiola and Simeone. Again two completely different animals.

Mourinho came but never had full control of transfers. No doubt he allowed the likes of Mata, Lukaku, KDB, Luis and Luiz to leave, since they were all useless for Mourinho's taste, but Mourinho never had enough new players. Mourinho was getting rid of players he didn't like, but was just not getting enough mourinhoesque players to replace them.

In August Mourinho said Chelsea had enough money to buy big, and he said at least one defender would come. That never happened, as we know, only Djoboloboji, but I'm sure Mourinho wasn't thinking about him. In the post Southampton match rant, he said "some people should assume responsabilities". I'm sure Mourinho was not satisfied with the quiet transfer market, and he kept saying the whole transfer window that other teams were getting stronger.

What happened? In some cases Mourinho was targetting players that were not avialable at all, like Rooney, in some other cases, the club was not willing to pay the asking price, like Jones.

Instead of buying "leaders", this team need something else, and in my opinion is slowly introducing players like RLC. I'm not talking about starting then in a away game against Manchester when the team is almost in the relegation zone, and getting players from key positions: DM, one CB and a RB and a LB, and those players should be "experienced" ones, its time to stop the bullshit about only getting u-25 players, but when the team is linked with the likes of Ricardo Teixeira, I don't see anything different hapenning in the future. The team will keep getting attacking players, and will forget about the other areas.