Sarri But Not Sarri Thread

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

4 minutes ago, Henrique said:

You made interesting points, I thought you would come up with the idea that if Sarri get sacked no other manager would be willing to take the job, and we know Chelsea job is wanted by any manager around for one simple reason: the job is well paid, and if they get axed it basically means they can go home and get an abusive amount of cash without working. For example, its understood Mourinho staff received 8m in compensation after he was sacked in 2016...and after he was sacked again by United he is getting 22m in compensation. Any person in the world is willing to take such job. Its a win/win situation.

And yet, Guardiola himself turned us down because the board were not willing to work with him. 

No top manager will want to come here and only be the role of the 'yes man'. 

[Henrique 9,133]

Just now, MoroccanBlue said:

And yet, Guardiola himself turned us down because the board were not willing to work with him. 

No top manager will want to come here and only be the role of the 'yes man'. 

Thats completely false. Guardiola turned Chelsea down because he had a better offer. City was offering more money, and was willing to give him more power. Simple as that. Chelsea always hired managers that are considered "top", even if the club is well known to sack managers before the end of contract. Managers are professionals and they are interested in getting as much cash as possible, or are you telling me that Scolari, Ancelotti, Mourinho, Conte and now Sarri were not considered top managers when they were appointed? 

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

Just now, Henrique said:

Thats completely false. Guardiola turned Chelsea down because he had a better offer. City was offering more money, and was willing to give him more power. Simple as that. Chelsea always hired managers that are considered "top", even if the club is well known to sack managers before the end of contract. Managers are professionals and they are interested in getting as much cash as possible, or are you telling me that Scolari, Ancelotti, Mourinho, Conte and now Sarri were not considered top managers when they were appointed? 

What have I said that was wrong then? The part in bold is specifically what I'm referring to? Our board wouldn't work with him to get what he needed. Football is evolving and coaches are now taking a more hands on approach. They want control of the team in every aspect. 

Scolari, Ancelotti, and Mourinho had teams of leaders. Easy to work with. We now have a team full of average and weak minded individuals. A complete rebuild looks necessary yet it's been proven for a few seasons now that our board won't ever fully back the manager. 

So Tell me, what top manager will want to come here where a rebuild is necessary, and a board that won't fully back you? 

[Henrique 9,133]

1 minute ago, MoroccanBlue said:

So Tell me, what top manager will want to come here where a rebuild is necessary, and a board that won't fully back you? 

Any top manager, as long as they get the right contract aka enough money and a fat paycheck if they sacked.

[mccg 1,528]

Chelsea will not appoint a permanent manager until the summer if Maurizio Sarri is sacked

 

https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/11/chelsea-will-not-appoint-permanent-manager-summer-maurizio-sarri-sacked-8526296/

[Special Juan 27,424]

The money that is thrown at any manager can attract anyone. It's easy money, and if they get sacked they are laughing, one big massive fat cheque.

Imagine getting 15-20M for two years after being sacked

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

5 minutes ago, Henrique said:

Any top manager, as long as they get the right contract aka enough money and a fat paycheck if they sacked.

And name me those top managers. 

[El P. 1,354]

43 minutes ago, Henrique said:

You made interesting points, I thought you would come up with the idea that if Sarri get sacked no other manager would be willing to take the job, and we know Chelsea job is wanted by any manager around for one simple reason: the job is well paid, and if they get axed it basically means they can go home and get an abusive amount of cash without working. For example, its understood Mourinho staff received 8m in compensation after he was sacked in 2016...and after he was sacked again by United he is getting 22m in compensation. Any person in the world is willing to take such job. Its a win/win situation.

Yes, well, this is another factor too, but not for interim coaches. Interim coaches are content with cash, as you mentioned.

I am not even considering that manager who replaces Sarri could stay after summer... to find someone who is really worth it in this short period would be really really hard, I am not even considering it as an option.

[ChelseaFanUK 1,014]

40 minutes ago, mccg said:

Chelsea will not appoint a permanent manager until the summer if Maurizio Sarri is sacked

 

https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/11/chelsea-will-not-appoint-permanent-manager-summer-maurizio-sarri-sacked-8526296/

we have made a decision though, he will stay.  Previously Roman would have shown him the exit door by now.  

But he has to change and if he doesn't? We'll be carabao cup runners up, out of the fa cup all by the end of this month.  (think we will beat Malmo and all will be rosy, Sarri will be delighted with the positive response, attitude, mentality etc etc everyone will be 'Sarri in' again)

[Laylabelle 9,351]

17 minutes ago, ChelseaFanUK said:

we have made a decision though, he will stay.  Previously Roman would have shown him the exit door by now.  

But he has to change and if he doesn't? We'll be carabao cup runners up, out of the fa cup all by the end of this month.  (think we will beat Malmo and all will be rosy, Sarri will be delighted with the positive response, attitude, mentality etc etc everyone will be 'Sarri in' again)

If we lose to Spurs he'll be gone I think. 

We won against City and it just paved cracks for a few games then back to normal. Which will probably happen again. A win.. A loss.. Loss.. 

[whats happening 1,525]

10 hours ago, Mana said:

He will be wearing red if Sarri remains in charge, I agree.

But look what happened to Martial earlier in the season. He wanted to go, but manager sacked, now signed a new deal.

CHO is a Chelsea boy, Vesper. He would rather be a top Chelsea star than a Bayern one. His stunts he is doing now is because he is being treated like dirt.

bullshit, if he was really a chelsea boy he would not moan and wanted to leave the club like a bitch after 3 months of the season. and we are talking about an 18 yo player not an established player. btw, still hasnt showed that he can play week-in-week-out in the premier league.

 

6 hours ago, Jason said:

Sure but let's not pretend Conte didn't ask for some really average (to put it kindly) players as well - e.g. Llorente, Candreva. We would just be replacing crap players with crap players.

he also wanted vvd, koulibaly, alex sandro, and many more better players. dont say like he wanted llorente and candreva as starters.

[Jase 43,479]

Just now, whats happening said:

he also wanted vvd, koulibaly, alex sandro, and many more better players. dont say like he wanted llorente and candreva as starters.

Many more better players like who? Matt Law made it sound as if Conte would have gotten rid of half the squad and brought in quality players all around when that wouldn't have been the case. 

[Henrique 9,133]

57 minutes ago, Jason said:

Many more better players like who? Matt Law made it sound as if Conte would have gotten rid of half the squad and brought in quality players all around when that wouldn't have been the case. 

This...some people think its pretty easy to buy Alex Sandro to replace Alonso.

[Henrique 9,133]

That Chelsea Reddit page is full of people with the same old common sense form yesterday. The word there is: the club needs stability and think long term. Abramovich bought Chelsea 15 years ago, and no other club in England won more trophies than Chelsea. Liverpool won just 3 trophies during this period: 1 Champions League, 1 FA Cup and 1 League Cup...but some people are pretty convinced they are doing a better job than Chelsea. City is spending money for fun, but right now their better result in Europe was not getting embarrassed by Real Madri in a UCL semi-final. 

City "long-term" project is spending big cash on players for fun and hiring the best manager in the world available (cheating the financial fair play in the process)...but people act like City superb squad is the product of a long term project from people who know how to run a club. City current squad is no more than the product from unlimited transfer budget. 

[ulsterchelsea 3,221]

The problems at the club are from top to bottom. Board are tubes, no football people to speak of in positions of power, too many so so players, too much player power, very dodgy unproven manager, no leaders, no balls. If we can sort that out we'll probably be ok

[the wes 7,212]

 

[Clockwork 1,794]

41 minutes ago, Henrique said:

That Chelsea Reddit page is full of people with the same old common sense form yesterday. The word there is: the club needs stability and think long term. Abramovich bought Chelsea 15 years ago, and no other club in England won more trophies than Chelsea. Liverpool won just 3 trophies during this period: 1 Champions League, 1 FA Cup and 1 League Cup...but some people are pretty convinced they are doing a better job than Chelsea. City is spending money for fun, but right now their better result in Europe was not getting embarrassed by Real Madri in a UCL semi-final. 

City "long-term" project is spending big cash on players for fun and hiring the best manager in the world available (cheating the financial fair play in the process)...but people act like City superb squad is the product of a long term project from people who know how to run a club. City current squad is no more than the product from unlimited transfer budget. 

City hired a bunch of ex Barca executives well before they hired Pep, they laid the foundation to play this type of football well before the manager was hired. There was a bit of planning, support, and football intelligence on their part. 

City spending power is undoubtedly a huge factor too.

There is no question of the achievement of Abramovich since he purchased the club, but simply the current Roman is not the same man. First of all the excitement and interest in the club is no longer the same, he is having trouble entering the country and that fire has faded. 

Secondly his money is not the same and has been surpassed by bigger spenders, his spending power is not the same. Back than for 32m he could buy arguably one of the biggest players in the world, nowadays you get players like Zappacosta with that type of money. 

 

If things stand we will miss out of the CL for 3rd time in 4 years, that is mediocrity and a huge fall from Roman early days. There are issues at the top, there should be no convincing needed to see that. 

[Jase 43,479]