The Tuchel Thread

[Tomo 21,751]

8 hours ago, chippy said:

The sacking of. Frank has proved once and for all there will never be a "project" under RA.

Like every manager before him, TT will have to consistently win trophies, or be sacked.

If TT wins the CL it will put enormous pressure on him to win the league or retain the CL next season. Anything less and hell be judged the same way Carlo was after his second season.

Should give managers more time but we don't and won't, so we just have to get on with it.

The sacking of Frank happened because there's levels as to what's acceptable even during rebuilds. 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Tomo

[milka 3,393]

 

[chippy 342]

1 hour ago, Tomo said:

The sacking of Frank happened because there's levels as to what's acceptable even during rebuilds. 

True, but RA knew he was hiring a very inexperienced manager with a lot to learn. You should either accept a young manager will have tough times and stick by them, or not hire one in the first place. 

Yes, I fully accept that Frank might well have not turned things around, but I still think he should have been given until the end of this season.

Anyway, that's all history now, so onwards and hopefully upwards with TT.

[gdlk 286]

I cant believe theres people still moaning for FL sacking.. And we are 3rd and on 2 finals! 

[NikkiCFC 8,334]

10 hours ago, chippy said:

The sacking of. Frank has proved once and for all there will never be a "project" under RA.

Tbh he is the last person who should be given time to build project. No improvements in 18 months here. Our defense was shit in 2019 with Frank but also in 2021.

I think Sarri would do great job if he stayed 3 or 4 years here...

[OneMoSalah 8,886]

hace 34 minutos, chippy dijo:

True, but RA knew he was hiring a very inexperienced manager with a lot to learn. You should either accept a young manager will have tough times and stick by them, or not hire one in the first place. 

Yes, I fully accept that Frank might well have not turned things around, but I still think he should have been given until the end of this season.

Anyway, that's all history now, so onwards and hopefully upwards with TT.

Disagree completely.

Why give someone out of their depth who had us sitting like 8th and looking progressively worse than we did the previous season, after spending 250 mil on players who were significantly better than what we had the season beforehand more time? Just to make us even worse? The players weren’t particularly happy either with the lack of tactical instructions or high level of training as well as his inability to react in games before it was too late as well as blaming players and taking no responsibility with if various sources are to be believed. Plus there was tension between him and the club after a poor January and his insistence on a big money move for Declan Rice after spending near 300m with 0 obvious signs of improvement.

Just look at his mentality regarding us as well how many times did he say “we aren’t title challengers” this season when people were talking us up based on our squad whicu is the second best in the PL for depth effectively? Look at the difference in the group now we have someone who is willing to say we can win this and this or that. Or even when we go a goal down the reaction is night and day.  Tuchels already effectively said we can win the CL after beating City twice and he wants to be a title challenger next season.

We would of been lucky to close the gap as it was at that stage in the season with Frank, probably, ok no probaly about it, 100% would be out of the CL and FA cup as well as nowhere near top 4. We would of been where Arsenal or Spurs were/are, who kept/have retained their managers too long and look how thats worked for them. 

This giving managers more than 18 months time is a thing of the past if things aren’t going well at most clubs in Europe who want to be successful, yet alone without considering our track record for it with bigger and better managers.

I dont see how anyone could see how Lampard could have achieved half of what Tuchel has done since January. Obviously his legacy as a player will always be held in the highest esteem here but as a manager he had 2 runs where we went unbeaten in the 18 months he was here and that was it. Finishing 4th with our squad last season was celebrated as a major major success by many outside of the club in the media because it was Frank and we lost Hazard but I still think its no less than what anyone worth their salt should have achieved (Allegri, Sarri, whoever we could have got of a reasonable level) and we also should of finished above United considering we had a 12 point cushion after the first 4 or 5 months of that season and blew it almost going to the last game or two. 

I am baffled that anyone thinks he should have been given more time. 

[Tomo 21,751]

1 hour ago, chippy said:

True, but RA knew he was hiring a very inexperienced manager with a lot to learn. You should either accept a young manager will have tough times and stick by them, or not hire one in the first place. 

But that already feeds in to what I was saying. There was always going to be an element of learning on the job but there's a difference between raw promise and the tactical cluster fuck we saw in those last two months.

I think he did a very good job in season one and I would debate anyone on that but it was pretty clear he just didn't have it in for him for the next phase of the process, he was so wildly undercoaching our top talent.

[chippy 342]

Apologies for not putting my point over well enough.

I was thinking about the hiring of any young, inexperienced manager at a top club, not just Frank at Chelsea.

If a club is going hire such a manager, then, as I said before, they have to give that manager time to learn from their mistakes and failures and see if they can turn things around. If not, then no top club should ever hire young managers.

 

 

 

 

[Jase 43,479]

8 hours ago, chippy said:

Apologies for not putting my point over well enough.

I was thinking about the hiring of any young, inexperienced manager at a top club, not just Frank at Chelsea.

If a club is going hire such a manager, then, as I said before, they have to give that manager time to learn from their mistakes and failures and see if they can turn things around. If not, then no top club should ever hire young managers.

We hired Lampard because it was a marriage of convenience. The fans were not happy after the whole thing with Sarri and the club were under a transfer ban and had to rely on the academy players to boost the squad. So, what better way to appease the fans by bringing back a club legend in Lampard as well as the former academy coach in Jody Morris? 

Every manager makes mistakes, inexperienced or experienced. The biggest questions are how quickly they learn from them and can they fix them. In the 18 months that he was here, Lampard never showed that he was a quick learner and capable of solving those mistakes. In less than 4 months, Tuchel has been able to do that. He has been able to turn those weaknesses we saw under Lampard into strengths. And that is without a pre-season or much training time between matches considering we've been playing every 3-4 days.

There's a reason why the big clubs have never hired a club legend or former player, one who is inexperienced as a manager as their manager until very recently. We know what happened with Lampard. Juventus took a gamble with Pirlo and it looks like they might sack him at the end of the season. Arsenal hired Arteta, who is not even a legend there, and they are getting worse but he could well stay on because of their lack of ambition. Not everyone will turn out to be a Guardiola. 

[Jase 43,479]

7 hours ago, Mana said:

We could have chosen better rookie managers like Eddie Howe instead of Lampard because at least Howe has shown he can play attacking football and has more coaching years under his belt. There was ZERO major reasons to pick Lampard at the time. Zero. He lost the Championship play-off final, took Derby from 6th to 6th and only had one season under his belt.

You can point to "he has coached the youths there to take them to the play-off final" but it's one season. Could be a one season wonder. A fluke. And even people forgot Derby got that 6th place by the skins of their teeth.

No other top club would touch Lampard then and even now. We took him because of he is a legend here. That's all. Same can be said with Arteta (to an extent) and Ole.

Am surprised you have chosen to mention Eddie Howe (again) considering what happened with him at Bournemouth. Was Howe's attacking football really that great? Because for whatever good football they played, they always conceded A LOT of goals and were always in the bottom 5 for the most goals conceded in each Premier League season. Howe and Bournemouth only turned into some sort of genius and peak AC Milan side whenever they played us.

Also, it's funny how you keep on downplaying what Lampard did at Derby, considering they went into a freefall after his regime and only just survived relegation by the skin of their teeth at the weekend (could still go down due to issues off the pitch). One season or not, Lampard, at the very least, maintained a 6th place finish and got them into the play-off final. Sure, it did not work out for him and Derby in the final but he kept them up there at least.

[Jap Si. 50]

40 minutes ago, Jas said:

Also, it's funny how you keep on downplaying what Lampard did at Derby, considering they went into a freefall

He had one of the best midfielders in the country with Mount and he is having a center bac who is now with AC Milan that might have helped.

[Jase 43,479]

29 minutes ago, Jap Si. said:

He had one of the best midfielders in the country with Mount and he is having a center bac who is now with AC Milan that might have helped.

They weren't that at that point of time and it's not like Phillip Cocu didn't have the chance to bring in his own players.

[Jap Si. 50]

25 minutes ago, Jas said:

They weren't that at that point of time and it's not like Phillip Cocu didn't have the chance to bring in his own players.

Still far superior to any player in league at time.

[Jase 43,479]

1 hour ago, Jap Si. said:

Still far superior to any player in league at time.

LOL

[OneMoSalah 8,886]

hace 12 horas, Mana dijo:

We didn't hire Lampard because he's a "young, inexperienced" manager. We hired him because he's a Chelsea legend. That's the matter of it.

We could have chosen better rookie managers like Eddie Howe instead of Lampard because at least Howe has shown he can play attacking football and has more coaching years under his belt. There was ZERO major reasons to pick Lampard at the time. Zero. He lost the Championship play-off final, took Derby from 6th to 6th and only had one season under his belt.

You can point to "he has coached the youths there to take them to the play-off final" but it's one season. Could be a one season wonder. A fluke. And even people forgot Derby got that 6th place by the skins of their teeth.

No other top club would touch Lampard then and even now. We took him because of he is a legend here. That's all. Same can be said with Arteta (to an extent) and Ole.

Tbf Eddie Howe is one of the most overrated British managers out there as well. All this talk of attacking football, Bournemouth were strictly a counter attacking team when they were at their most effective in the PL and still conceded a fuck tonne of goals. Not to mention the money he spent at Bournemouth and they never improved one bit. 

I agree with the rest of the points though although Derbys fall under Cocu and Rooney now maybe highlights Lampard did a better job there than we give him credit for. 

[Tomo 21,751]

31 minutes ago, Mana said:

Howe had a complete downfall but that's only if you looked at it at face value. That Bournemouth squad has overachieved massively. Most of their squad was playing League 1 football not too long ago. His star signings during the PL were the injury-prove Jack Wilshere on a free and Ake (who then moved to City later). Mings that has been crucial back in their defence was only on loan to them. 

But what I do think Howe made a huge mistake though, is that one summer spending £80m on players and ended up 14th. Spent it like a little boy in a candy shop and had no clue what to do then. It's a shame he didn't have any help.

Say what you want about me downplaying Lampard, but you are also downplaying what Howe achieved at Bournemouth which was 100x better than what Lampard EVER did.

He is overrated and I get that but that's not the point I was trying to make. If Chelsea chose Howe, at LEAST there would be some sense to why they picked him. Yes, Howe's tenure came to a miserable end but look at what Howe achieved in Bournemouth, you cannot downplay that. What has Lampard achieved that is so better than Howe?

The summer of 2019 was a unique situation. We were losing the heartbeat of our attacking play and were not allowed to replace him.

The title and CL (bar a fluke of all flukes in the latter case) was out of the question that summer which immediately put the emphasis on rebuilding the squad, we needed a manager who would put the club before his CV and preferably knew the academy players and their characteristics well and Lampard and Jody fitted the bill (case in point when Jody told Frank that Lamptey would be able to handle coming on at The Emirates).

Yes as it turned out Lampard wasn't equipped tactically to enjoy the full fruits of his labour and yes looking back there's an argument for saying we maybe should have been ruthless last summer (although then we'd have likely been stuck with the overrated Pochettino over Tuchel) but the appointment at the time was the right decision.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Tomo

[Jase 43,479]

20 minutes ago, Mana said:

Howe had a complete downfall but that's only if you looked at it at face value. That Bournemouth squad has overachieved massively. Most of their squad was playing League 1 football not too long ago. His star signings during the PL were the injury-prove Jack Wilshere on a free and Ake (who then moved to City later). Mings that has been crucial back in their defence was only on loan to them. 

But what I do think Howe made a huge mistake though, is that one summer spending £80m on players and ended up 14th. Spent it like a little boy in a candy shop and had no clue what to do then. It's a shame he didn't have any help.

Howe did not have any help? He was basically the Sir Alex Ferguson, the Arsene Wenger of Bournemouth because of what he achieved with them. He made the calls on the signings and a lot of them were not great. That's on him.

23 minutes ago, Mana said:

Say what you want about me downplaying Lampard, but you are also downplaying what Howe achieved at Bournemouth which was 100x better than what Lampard EVER did.

Did I downplay what Howe achieved at Bournemouth? All I basically questioned is his playing style. His attacking football is a myth and there's no point in playing nice attacking football if the team are conceding goals at an alarming rate. Bournemouth conceded at least 60 goals in each of their Premier League season. He was able to spend more than the likes of Sean Dyche and only managed a Top 10 finish once. And not to mention, Dyche even got Burnley finish in one of the Europa League places not too long ago.

And no one said what Lampard did at Derby is better than what Howe did at Bournemouth. The point was Lampard at least maintained the same finish as his predecessor at Derby, considering they went into freefall after he left. 

[Jase 43,479]

4 minutes ago, Tomo said:

Yes Lampard wasn't equipped tactically to enjoy the fruits of his labour and yes looking back there's an argument for saying we maybe should have been ruthless last summer (although then we'd have likely been stuck with the overrated Pochettino over Tuchel) but the appointment at the time was the right decision.

Sacking Lampard last summer would have been harsh, I think, and had we done so, the signings might have turned out to be different signings. 

[Jase 43,479]

14 minutes ago, Mana said:

I don't know why you are bringing up Bournemouth's conceded goal numbers...especially when Lampard's isn't any better. In fact, it is an extreme embarrassment to have a Chelsea squad that he had, to concede 54 goals in one season. That number is not even counting the CL, EFL and FA Cup goals we also conceded.

I brought up their goals conceded stat because you mentioned Howe's attacking football style, which was non-existent. As I said, there's no point in a team playing pretty football if they keep conceding goals. It's also like with Lampard, who tried to make us play attacking football but had no care for defensive solidity. 

[Superblue 6,372]

1 hour ago, Mana said:

Really? We needed a manager who would put the club before his CV? Let me remind you we hired Benitez one time who disliked our club, but managed us professionally and got us our first Europa League.

For Jody - I cannot argue with you on that. He knows the academy players. Even if we appointed Jody himself, while I still think would have been a bad idea - at least he has strong knowledge of our academy players and actually has coaching experience. Adding Lampard to the mix didn't make sense (especially when HE'S the head coach and not Jody), when he just done one year of managing a club - and jumping him on to something that was too big for him.

Surely Benitez is the opposite of what you're trying to argue? The only reason he'd come here and put up with the hostility is the opportunity to win a trophy for his CV.

I agree with @Tomo, anybody that wasn't affiliated with the club would know the club's history with sacking managers and therefore would much more likely use experience over youth. The idea that Lampard had to blood the youth is a myth as there were still experienced, alternative options at the club.

Lampard currently is being made to look silly by Tuchel's success but I think over time, his tenure here will be looked at more favourably. 

Mount and James are almost certainly going to have massive careers here at Chelsea. Gilmour could well break through long term too. Even if Tammy and Tomori move on, they're now £60-70m worth of players between them now. And whatever the situation is with the new signings and whether they were his players (I think they all were, it was just that he wanted more to go with them. Mendy the exception as he said that was from Cech's recommendations), he has helped us bring some fantastic players to the club who will make a big impact here over the long term.

Replacing Lampard was completely the right decision, and the trigger could and should probably have been pulled weeks sooner. However, I think the club stand to benefit from Lampard's time here and the decision to take a chance on him actually worked out pretty well.