The Next Manager?

[OneMoSalah 8,886]

14 minutes ago, 0007 said:

I really want to see Tuchel here. He is good at developing youth and he is a lot more progressive than Allegri which can suit our group of players better. 

Everyones talking playing styles as if thats the most important. Someone who’s well respected as a coach who will improve and set high standards that the player will have to meet every week is a priority. Can keep the more progressive football if its going to be good one week, then 3/4 weeks where we don’t show up. We seen from Sarri and now Lampard where thats taken us. Maybe Tuchel would be different maybe not but there needs to be something because this is a young group and they need something/someone to put them en route to being a proper team. Not just a team that plays good football like Arsenal under Wenger after 2008 or whatever but were never truly competitive and struggled when games got shitty/tough.

[0007 511]

42 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

Everyones talking playing styles as if thats the most important. Someone who’s well respected as a coach who will improve and set high standards that the player will have to meet every week is a priority. Can keep the more progressive football if its going to be good one week, then 3/4 weeks where we don’t show up. We seen from Sarri and now Lampard where thats taken us. Maybe Tuchel would be different maybe not but there needs to be something because this is a young group and they need something/someone to put them en route to being a proper team. Not just a team that plays good football like Arsenal under Wenger after 2008 or whatever but were never truly competitive and struggled when games got shitty/tough.

And we have seen with Conte and Jose's second term that pragmatic football was not sustainable in the long-term. And not only in the long-term, but in Europe too. We sacrificied our development for an instant success and we ended up in a complete mess. 

Proactive approach doesn't  always mean Wenger levels of naivety. In fact almost all of the big teams have an attacking-minded managers. Liverpool and City are doing quite good with Pep and Klopp, Flick transformed Bayern, Ten Hag was praised for his Ajax CL run, Naggelsman too. 

I don't think Lampard and Sarri are good examples. Frank is inexperienced and although he has good ideas, I am yet to see him implementing  them. Being attacking-minded is far from enough and he has shown it. Sarri had a squad that was far from suited to his style.And he  insisted on only   one way of playing despite the lack of quality we had in attack. 

Tuchel seems to me as  way more flexible tactically than Sarri. Not to mention how much more experience he has  than Frank. I am not saying he will be the roght choice but he is the one I am the most keen on. Allegri inherited a winning squad which had already been developed by Conte.Squad that had a rock-solid defence with some of the best CBs in the world and a fantastic midfield. We have a completely different situation here. Young squad with a lot of exciting talents in attack that don't seem to know what to do. 

[Blues Forever 1,232]

Tuchel right now. If we wait until the end of the season then it has to be Nagelsmann.

[Vesper 30,231]

6 hours ago, 0007 said:

I really want to see Tuchel here. He is good at developing youth 

Lol. Have you seen the insane amount of youth players who have left PSG because they saw no chance to play nor develop further?

[Alabama 1,992]

2 hours ago, Blues Forever said:

Tuchel right now. If we wait until the end of the season then it has to be Nagelsmann.

Nagelsman would eventually face the same problem we are experiencing right now...

[Jase 43,479]

2 minutes ago, Alabama said:

Nagelsman would eventually face the same problem we are experiencing right now...

Maybe but we would likely be playing better football and have a manager with more tactical ingenuity and innovation. 

[0007 511]

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

Lol. Have you seen the insane amount of youth players who have left PSG because they saw no chance to play nor develop further?

You can laugh all you want but his Dortmund side was notorious for its youthfulness. He bought 19-years old Dembele and made him a star. Weigl was the first name on the team sheet despite being 19 at the time. Pulisic was not even 19 when Tuchel started to counting more on him and he actually played more than CHO at the same age. Ginther was another nailed on starter and he was 21 at the time  IIRC. If that's not called developing youth players , I don't know what should be. 

PSG was never about the youth and their investment on already proven players screams for an instant success,not for developing  their own academy prospects.

 

[Vesper 30,231]

5 minutes ago, 0007 said:

You can laugh all you want but his Dortmund side was notorious for its youthfulness. He bought 19-years old Dembele and made him a star. Weigl was the first name on the team sheet despite being 19 at the time. Pulisic was not even 19 when Tuchel started to counting more on him and he actually played more than CHO at the same age. Ginther was another nailed on starter and he was 21 at the time  IIRC. If that's not called developing youth players , I don't know what should be. 

PSG was never about the youth and their investment on already proven players screams for an instant success,not for developing  their own academy prospects.

 

I am still 100% against Tuchel coming here.

I have said this from the beginning. 

[lucio 5,418]

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

Lol. Have you seen the insane amount of youth players who have left PSG because they saw no chance to play nor develop further?

Are they any good?

[Tomo 21,751]

19 minutes ago, 0007 said:

You can laugh all you want but his Dortmund side was notorious for its youthfulness. He bought 19-years old Dembele and made him a star. Weigl was the first name on the team sheet despite being 19 at the time. Pulisic was not even 19 when Tuchel started to counting more on him and he actually played more than CHO at the same age. Ginther was another nailed on starter and he was 21 at the time  IIRC. If that's not called developing youth players , I don't know what should be. 

PSG was never about the youth and their investment on already proven players screams for an instant success,not for developing  their own academy prospects.

 

That's one vital thing we need to make clear to any manager that youth development is now deemed a critical goal. We have far too much talent at this point.

[Vesper 30,231]

13 minutes ago, lucio said:

Are they any good?

    
to buy the lot now, if a normal market, would cost around £250-300m or so

with COVID, say £200-250m

Loïc Mbe Soh    
Centre-Back

Adil Aouchiche    
Attacking Midfield

Tanguy Nianzou    
Centre-Back
    
Moussa Diaby    
Left Winger

Christopher Nkunku    
Attacking Midfield

Stanley Nsoki    
Left-Back

Timothy Weah  
Centre-Forward

Arthur Zagre   
Left-Back
    
Gonçalo Guedes    
Left Winger

Odsonne Edouard    
Centre-Forward

Yacine Adli    
Attacking Midfield

Jonathan Ikoné    
Right Winger

Antoine Bernede    
Central Midfield
 

[Jap Si. 50]

As fans we most be accepting to have new manager every two years it is the way of the Chelsea.

[killer1257 3,282]

As fans we most be accepting to have new manager every two years it is the way of the Chelsea.

One of the reasons why we will never have a Klopp at Chelsea

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

[Tomo 21,751]

1 hour ago, Jap Si. said:

As fans we most be accepting to have new manager every two years it is the way of the Chelsea.

I don't really get this notion as it being some kind of bad thing, it's similar at a lot of big clubs, even the one's that win league's every year. Partly because the modern player gets bored of the same voice after a while (Pep cited that as one of the reason's he left Barcelona) and partly because managers themselves want to try out different things.

Also for all this talk about us being a poisoned chalice I feel quite the opposite, if you really want to build a great team and era there's few if any better resourced clubs than us to provide for a manager. They get strong backing in the market and have the best academy in the world to dip into, yes strong results are expected but why shouldn't they be with those resources available? If you were Nagelsmann and saw the opportunity to take over an already highly talented side, spend £200m to bring your own players to compliment that and alongside both of those have youngsters of the quality of Livramento, Gallagher, Bate and Soonsup-Bell knocking on the door you really think that wouldn't appeal?

[killer1257 3,282]

Problem is that we can sell our new golden generation of youth players because our next new managers needs 200 million investments to make his new team and then guys like Soonsup bell, Broja, Anjorin will play for other Pl clubs or for Bayern [emoji23]

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

[Pizy 18,956]

I actually wouldn't put it past our board to actually consider Rafa Benitez again. Almost the same situation as last time and it would be beneficial to both sides. Chelsea gets a "safe," boring, experienced and pragmatic manager to steady the ship. Maybe luck out and go on a run in Europe like last time. Benitez gets to put himself in the shop window again and gets himself another PL gig. And with no fans in the Bridge there won't be huge backlash this time.

Of course that's not what I want by any means but I wonder if they're considering it...

[Tomo 21,751]

8 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Problem is that we can sell our new golden generation of youth players because our next new managers needs 200 million investments to make his new team and then guys like Soonsup bell, Broja, Anjorin will play for other Pl clubs or for Bayern

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk
 

DP

[Tomo 21,751]

5 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Problem is that we can sell our new golden generation of youth players because our next new managers needs 200 million investments to make his new team and then guys like Soonsup bell, Broja, Anjorin will play for other Pl clubs or for Bayern

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk
 

Why can't we do both? Many successful teams (including the current Champions of England) have combined top prospects with big spending. Even the one's who don't quite become good enough to start for us can still provide the squad depth which frees up funds for star signings as opposed to squad filler.

The two ain't mutually exclusive.

[Nero 1,875]

Ernesto Valverde?

[Jype 6,398]

13 minutes ago, Tomo said:

I don't really get this notion as it being some kind of bad thing, it's similar at a lot of big clubs, even the one's that win league's every year. Partly because the modern player gets bored of the same voice after a while (Pep cited that as one of the reason's he left Barcelona) and partly because managers themselves want to try out different things.

Also for all this talk about us being a poisoned chalice I feel quite the opposite, if you really want to build a great team and era there's few if any better resourced clubs than us to provide for a manager. They get strong backing in the market and have the best academy in the world to dip into, yes strong results are expected but why shouldn't they be with those resources available? If you were Nagelsmann and saw the opportunity to take over an already highly talented side, spend £200m to bring your own players to compliment that and alongside both of those have youngsters of the quality of Livramento, Gallagher, Bate and Soonsup-Bell knocking on the door you really think that wouldn't appeal?

Yep. And it's not like the ways of the club haven't changed in the last ten years too. In the current Chelsea setup I can't see something like Ancelotti's sacking happening anymore, a year after winning the double and then finishing second.

Roman and the board seem a lot less ruthless now than a decade ago and the managers these days won't be getting sacked after a trophyless season as long as there's still progress made and the manager doesn't go on the warpath with the board like Conte did.

Even Lampard's job would be more than safe if he was on course for a ~75pts finish in the league and the style of football looked like it's getting gradually better. Now the progress seems to have stalled completely or even gone backwards despite big investments made into the squad, and that's why he's on the verge of getting sacked.

Don't see any reason why someone like Nagelsmann etc. wouldn't want to take the job and have a go. If it works out there's a good chance he'd stay for at least 2-3 seasons and that's around the average length of a manager's life span at a top club these days anyway. How many top teams have currently had the same manager for +5 years? Liverpool, Man City and Atletico have but that's about it, the rest have been changing managers just as often as Chelsea if not even more regularly.