Super Frank Thread

[Laylabelle 9,534]

59 minutes ago, RoyalBlues said:

 

For example, something like LDDLDDLLDDLLL happened. He will be gone for sure. You guys overestimating our boards. I'm shocked.

 

Probably which would be so silly. They knew the signing situation.. They knew his lack of experience so how they can expect miracles which they probably will. Just hope he's given a window to add his touch! 

[the wes 7,212]

'It's like watching a basketball game... they have got no organisation in possession': Jamie Carragher critical of Chelsea's style under Frank Lampard

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7372829/Jamie-Carragher-SLAMS-Chelseas-start-season-singles-shocking-Willian.html

[milka 3,390]

Everybody thought David Moyes would get time at Manchester United .It was the logical road to travel. He had a six-year contract, he had the support of the club's sage, Sir Alex Ferguson, and he had Ferguson's shoes to fill, too. It was always going to be tricky for the first man in, but United had a recent history of giving managers time.

He lasted just over nine months.

The lesson here is do not presume. This is the Premier League , 2019. The idea that reason, or fair play, will prevail is quaintly nostalgic. All rational thought might suggest  Frank Lampard has two seasons, at least, to shape  Chelsea given the club's present predicament.

He has a transfer ban, he has lost the best player, he is the first coach truly engaging with the youth policy and Chelsea's current squad is a pale imitation of what went before. Plus, Lampard is a local hero and a novice manager.

Roman Abramovich has never appointed one so raw, so young, or so English. Any cogent analysis of the situation would conclude that Lampard must be indulged, even if his Chelsea team slide into mid-table.

Yet that would require senior club officials taking responsibility for a share of the crisis, and that is why Lampard, like Moyes, is not safe.

Subsequent United managers have discovered where the buck stops these days. Not upstairs. United's recruitment in Moyes's first summer was poor. The team he inherited from Ferguson needed reshaping and there was no department empowered to deliver that process. It was left to Moyes, who became overwhelmed.

Yet to admit this, to continue with the manager beyond one disappointing season, would be an admission of guilt. Far easier to make a decision that heaps the blame on his shoulders, and make a change, a complete reversal, as if Moyes was the mistake, not the system around him.

That is what the appointment of Louis van Gaal did for United's executives. It suggested it was the selection of Moyes — a manager whose teams had never challenged for titles, and whose players were not of elite status — that was flawed, and the introduction of a stellar coach like Van Gaal could resolve this. 

or the same reason, one imagines if Lampard's tenure does not work out, his successor will not be a young, English manager from a lower division or lesser club. If this doesn't work, John Terry will not get a look in for decades.

For while Lampard is a coach who is not afraid to give youth its chance, Chelsea's problems are not of his making.

He was not involved in the narrative that saw Eden Hazard depart to Real Madrid, he did not buy any of the first-team squad, he was not linked to the skulduggery around youth registration that resulted in the transfer ban. Equally, if his team is callow, this is the path Chelsea's hierarchy has been urging managers along for many years now. The club's spin on youth involvement is that the executive management is all for it, but successive managers were resistant.

If Lampard does not last in his present role, we will know why. Chelsea's managers have come second, third, lost a Champions League final, won a Champions League final, and still got sacked. No wonder they have interpreted the message from above as more Mickey Spillane than Mickey and the Gang.

Chelsea are a hard-boiled club and youth development is a revenue stream, not a philosophy that impacts on first-team plans.

And then came the transfer ban — just at a time when Chelsea were most in need of rebuilding. This is the job Lampard has inherited and it is much closer in size to Moyes at United in 2013 than the traditional lot at Stamford Bridge.

Someone has messed up and it isn't Lampard. Do not imagine, though, that the vanity and ego of the modern football executive will ever admit this.

If it goes wrong, hero or not, we know who will shoulder the blame.

 

 

[!Hazard! 3,394]

Sir Alex left Moyes a squad full of aging deadwoods. Lampard has a squad of young, extremely talented players who only need time to show their worth. I honestly can't see much parallels between these two cases. I'd rather compare Lampard's Chelsea to Pochettino's Spurs in this regard. The only difference is that Spurs ended up at fifth position during Pochettino's first season and it was regarded as a success. Not sure if fifth place finish at the end of the season would be seen as seen as a success here despite the circumstances.

[Vesper 30,088]

31 minutes ago, !Hazard! said:

Sir Alex left Moyes a squad full of aging deadwoods. Lampard has a squad of young, extremely talented players who only need time to show their worth. I honestly can't see much parallels between these two cases. I'd rather compare Lampard's Chelsea to Pochettino's Spurs in this regard. The only difference is that Spurs ended up at fifth position during Pochettino's first season and it was regarded as a success. Not sure if fifth place finish at the end of the season would be seen as seen as a success here despite the circumstances.

Anyone, and I am going to be blunt as hell on this, anyone who would say that 5th place with this team is not a success for a first year ever topflight manager, simply, and let me be clear as crystal, does not know SHIT about football.

We lost our best player, a top 5 or so in the world talent, have a 2 window transfer ban, have pure shit for strikers, crazy injuries, and have one of the worst boards (over the last 5 years) of a top 20 team, who positively FUCKED us with shit buys, horrid sales, worse non-sales, rotten cock-ups on attempted buys, AND GOT US THE FUCKING BANS in the first place.

Every top half of the table team is improved in the EPL except us. The top 6, 7 are improved dramatically, save for the dippers. 5th place would be a success, and hopefully we can nick a trophy (League Cup or FA Cup or even better, drop down via 3rd place CL group stage and win the EL again, which gives us CL footie guaranteed next year and another shot at the Super Cup.)

[communicate 2,703]

It is pretty obvious what is our problem after 3 games, defensive transition. The solution is pretty simple, either we play Willian to slow our offense down, play another destroyer next to Kante (Bakayoko) or pray that our forward line will be clinical. 

[Tomo 21,751]

21 minutes ago, communicate said:

It is pretty obvious what is our problem after 3 games, defensive transition. The solution is pretty simple, either we play Willian to slow our offense down, play another destroyer next to Kante (Bakayoko) or pray that our forward line will be clinical. 

I disagree, while it may be a ok ish short term option these sticky plaster solutions is a big part of why we're in this shit in the first place. With Pep about the league is out of reach for the next 2/3 years so we need to turn that negative into a positive and build something to compete in the long run (pragmatic quick fixes just won't cut it now).

If this is the vision Lampard has for us i'd rather go full steam ahead and take the teething process.

[Supermonkey92 1,428]

'It's like watching a basketball game... they have got no organisation in possession': Jamie Carragher critical of Chelsea's style under Frank Lampard
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7372829/Jamie-Carragher-SLAMS-Chelseas-start-season-singles-shocking-Willian.html

I somewhat agree.

But my main problem against Leicester was the midfield 2. They had no organisation when we had possession so when we lost it there was no barrier to Leicester waltzing up to our defence. Kante spent so much time in positions he would take last season in a three man midfield - almost on the right wing. We can't have that in a 4231.

Some defensive improvements have happened since old Trafford. Azpi for instance is staying back whilst Emerson goes forward. But that's a much more straightforward change than getting the double pivot to work well in and out of possession.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Supermonkey92 1,428]

I think frank solves much of the problems by choosing the same formation as last year but by continuing to give players license to get forward which cesc was clear in saying sarri stopped after that arsenal home game.

Against Liverpool we were great. Mainly because we were *balanced*.

The problem is Frank's seems pretty set on the 4231 being his style, or the formation he wants this year with these players at least. If that's how it is top 6 is in trouble, I just hope this season is sacrificed for actual progression in the next. I'm actually a bit more chipper about Frank's chances on changing things though, he's a smart guy. Get that pivot working or drop it mate!!

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[communicate 2,703]

1 hour ago, Tomo said:

I disagree, while it may be a ok ish short term option these sticky plaster solutions is a big part of why we're in this shit in the first place. With Pep about the league is out of reach for the next 2/3 years so we need to turn that negative into a positive and build something to compete in the long run (pragmatic quick fixes just won't cut it now).

If this is the vision Lampard has for us i'd rather go full steam ahead and take the teething process.

What is Lampard vision? If he want to play frenetic pace and end to end then may as well try Bakayoko. There is 0 reason to play Jorginho if he want to play that way. 

 

 

[!Hazard! 3,394]

Lampard might have to do what Sarri and Conte did as well, play false 9 to give us more control and compactness in midfield. It's hardly a risk considering how shit our strikers are and Mason Mount might just be a better goalscorer than any of them

[communicate 2,703]

1 minute ago, !Hazard! said:

Lampard might have to do what Sarri and Conte did as well, play false 9 to give us more control and compactness in midfield. It's hardly a risk considering how shit our strikers are and Mason Mount might just be a better goalscorer than any of them

False 9 was used not because of compactness, it was simply because Hazard is useless defensively. There is no reason to play false 9 with Puli and Pedro 

[manpe 10,861]

3 hours ago, Vesper said:

Anyone, and I am going to be blunt as hell on this, anyone who would say that 5th place with this team is not a success for a first year ever topflight manager, simply, and let me be clear as crystal, does not know SHIT about football.

We lost our best player, a top 5 or so in the world talent, have a 2 window transfer ban, have pure shit for strikers, crazy injuries, and have one of the worst boards (over the last 5 years) of a top 20 team, who positively FUCKED us with shit buys, horrid sales, worse non-sales, rotten cock-ups on attempted buys, AND GOT US THE FUCKING BANS in the first place.

Every top half of the table team is improved in the EPL except us. The top 6, 7 are improved dramatically, save for the dippers. 5th place would be a success, and hopefully we can nick a trophy (League Cup or FA Cup or even better, drop down via 3rd place CL group stage and win the EL again, which gives us CL footie guaranteed next year and another shot at the Super Cup.)

Preach! Your best post in my eyes. I will not blame Frank for anything this season (unless he literally comes to training naked and foaming from mouth), enough blaming the managers, everybody will lose their shit with a toxic criminal mob incompetently running the workplace.

 

11 minutes ago, !Hazard! said:

Lampard might have to do what Sarri and Conte did as well, play false 9 to give us more control and compactness in midfield. It's hardly a risk considering how shit our strikers are and Mason Mount might just be a better goalscorer than any of them

I'd rather try this with RLC than Mount. He is strong enough to offer a long hold-up option, quick enough to make runs in behind and good enough technically to create for others and himself.

[!Hazard! 3,394]

14 minutes ago, communicate said:

False 9 was used not because of compactness, it was simply because Hazard is useless defensively. There is no reason to play false 9 with Puli and Pedro 

You are completely right, it was used mainly because of Hazard's lack of defensive effort in wide areas but I think it also gave us more presence and compactness in midfield due to the extra man and that's exactly what it would do in our current team as well. Of course Hazard, even in that false 9 position, didn't contribute much defensively in central areas but Mount certainly would and it could be a temporary solution until we sign a real striker and figure out a proper balance for that midfield. Mount and Barkley/Loftus-Cheek as false 9 and number 10 could be similar to how Tadic and Van de Beek play for Ajax in their (not that different from ours) system.

[communicate 2,703]

Realistically what is our future starting 11

Striker

CHO - Mount - Puli

Ruben - Kante

Emerson - Rudi - Zouma/Chris - RB

Kepa

That look tasty on paper but it means Our rb has to be really2 good defensively. It is a shame we lost awb to united.

Ruben also need to be brilliant because, basically he will have to play pogba role.