Some fans buy the media brainless thing that Chelsea is unfair with their managers. Since Mourinho was sacked back in 2007, I think its fair to say that only Ancelotti received a rough treatment.
Avran Grant - never produced a great job 10 years after he left Chelsea.
Scolari - after getting sacked he went to Uzbekistan, then went back to Brazil when relegate Palmeiras, then there was the 7-1 and he was the main reason for that result, went to China then now is back to Brazil.
AVB - was latter sacked by Spurs, then went to Russia and China.
RDM - sacked by Schalke 04 before even completing an entire season, and then sacked by Aston Villa after 4 months.
Mourinho - went to United where he had 2 mediocre seasons, and then finally sacked after the club realize he is now a mediocre manager.
Conte - we still don't know whats going to happen with him.
The time showed that most of those guys were just not good enough for the job, as I said, Ancelotti is the only manager that had good results after leaving Chelsea, but lets not forget he was later sacked by Real Madrid and Bayern because both clubs didn't believe he was a long term manager.
The club's problem is not sacking the managers, in 90% of those scenarios the club did the right thing, but the problem is they are just appointing the wrong people in a lot of those cases, like Grant, Scolari, AVB, RDM full time and even (in hindsight) appointing Mourinho again.
Our "unfair" treatment of managers
posted on 22/2/19
I agree we get unfairly singled out where this is concerned, plenty of others managers at top 6 clubs have been dismissed just as brutally - Rodgers, Redknapp, AVB (Spurs), all of City's managers post-08 - so this isn't unique to us. But the sheer frequency at which we go through managers has created our player power problem which is worse than our clubs.
One of the only sensible things to come out of Mourinho's mouth in 15/16 was the statement that if we sack him we've sent a clear message to the players that the manager will always take the fail for their failures. Was drenched in his own self importance but he was right, if a club figure like him who everyone was behind (fans & board unanimously) except the players falls on the sword then no-one has a chance. Until we correct this any manager of ours going forward is at the mercy of the players whims, at some point we'll have to take a chance and put a manager first.
posted on 23/2/19
Wasn't Grant just a temp? He took over after Jose's first stint.
The issue seems to be that the players can't keep up the momentum, coupled with shifting styles (managerial changes) and bad investments (Drinkwater, Giroud, Morata, etc.), it's now come to the fore.
The players are themselves an issue. You only have Hazard as a player at his peak (and he's world class), the others are either past their best, average, or yet to hit their potential.
You also have to see the drop off after winning the league under Jose (2nd stint) and with Conte. It makes it seem that they only turn up when they feel like it. If they aren't getting their way, they just go through the motions until a new guy comes in.
Unlike previous teams you no longer have a strong core. That core is important for two things. They helped keep the levels up (even if they instigated the sackings, which I don't think happened in all cases) and they were much better than what you have now.
This comes to the other two points. Shifting styles and poor investment. Sarri is very different in style and what he wants in his team to Conte and Jose. He's also more dogmatic in it. Hiring him, not getting a preseason and not investing correctly (also poorly) was always going to cause issues.
It's not like Sarri came in, had two years and signed players of his choice who didn't suit his system and then fall out with everyone. He's hardly had time to reshape the side or bring in quality players.
posted on 23/2/19
Keep the managers
Sack the BOARD
Sack the OWNER
posted on 23/2/19
Sack the supporters too.
soccer?lol.
posted on 23/2/19
comment by Devil D.A. (U6522)
posted 8 hours, 17 minutes ago
I agree we get unfairly singled out where this is concerned, plenty of others managers at top 6 clubs have been dismissed just as brutally - Rodgers, Redknapp, AVB (Spurs), all of City's managers post-08 - so this isn't unique to us. But the sheer frequency at which we go through managers has created our player power problem which is worse than our clubs.
One of the only sensible things to come out of Mourinho's mouth in 15/16 was the statement that if we sack him we've sent a clear message to the players that the manager will always take the fail for their failures. Was drenched in his own self importance but he was right, if a club figure like him who everyone was behind (fans & board unanimously) except the players falls on the sword then no-one has a chance. Until we correct this any manager of ours going forward is at the mercy of the players whims, at some point we'll have to take a chance and put a manager first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is exactly what Pep said in his press conference. If anyone want to know what's wrong with sacking managers the way we do then read what Pep said. Also anyone who endorses our policy for sacking managers loses their right to complain about our club's track record for bringing through young players
posted on 23/2/19
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 6 hours, 10 minutes ago
Wasn't Grant just a temp? He took over after Jose's first stint.
The issue seems to be that the players can't keep up the momentum, coupled with shifting styles (managerial changes) and bad investments (Drinkwater, Giroud, Morata, etc.), it's now come to the fore.
The players are themselves an issue. You only have Hazard as a player at his peak (and he's world class), the others are either past their best, average, or yet to hit their potential.
You also have to see the drop off after winning the league under Jose (2nd stint) and with Conte. It makes it seem that they only turn up when they feel like it. If they aren't getting their way, they just go through the motions until a new guy comes in.
Unlike previous teams you no longer have a strong core. That core is important for two things. They helped keep the levels up (even if they instigated the sackings, which I don't think happened in all cases) and they were much better than what you have now.
This comes to the other two points. Shifting styles and poor investment. Sarri is very different in style and what he wants in his team to Conte and Jose. He's also more dogmatic in it. Hiring him, not getting a preseason and not investing correctly (also poorly) was always going to cause issues.
It's not like Sarri came in, had two years and signed players of his choice who didn't suit his system and then fall out with everyone. He's hardly had time to reshape the side or bring in quality players.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would add Kante to Hazard but you are right.
posted on 23/2/19
DL11 (U21614)
"Point is they done little afterwards to suggest sacking them was a mistake."
-------------------------------------
Oh dear! So a manager does brilliantly at Chelsea, gets sacked, goes to another club, gets sacked, and Chelsea fans use that to justify Chelsea sacking him. Your reasoning is so warped, preposterous and totally devoid of logic or commonsense. Managers perform differently at different clubs for a whole range of reasons and factors, some beyond the manager's control. Bottom line is, you don't sack a manager who is doing well at your club.
posted on 23/2/19
comment by Grand Cannon (U18697)
posted 15 minutes ago
DL11 (U21614)
"Point is they done little afterwards to suggest sacking them was a mistake."
-------------------------------------
Oh dear! So a manager does brilliantly at Chelsea, gets sacked, goes to another club, gets sacked, and Chelsea fans use that to justify Chelsea sacking him. Your reasoning is so warped, preposterous and totally devoid of logic or commonsense. Managers perform differently at different clubs for a whole range of reasons and factors, some beyond the manager's control. Bottom line is, you don't sack a manager who is doing well at your club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When was any of them doing well at the point of sacking?
One was fighting relegation, another two didn't get off the ground in the first place and another fell out with almost everyone at the club.
Managers can also do brilliantly then it go stale meaning a chance is required, if your board realised that around 2012 you probably wouldn't be up shet creek without a paddle.
posted on 23/2/19
*change
posted on 23/2/19
When was any of them doing well at the point of sacking?
One was fighting relegation, another two didn't get off the ground in the first place and another fell out with almost everyone at the club.
Managers can also do brilliantly then it go stale meaning a chance is required, if your board realised that around 2012 you probably wouldn't be up shet creek without a paddle.
-----------------------------------------------------------
It's about striking a balance. e.g. Arsenal went too far in the other direction, Wenger had too much power and they're still trying to recover from the damage he caused hanging around too long - which may take a few years. The good example of the balance is a team like Liverpool, they might've sacked Benitez a little prematurely but they gave Hodgson enough time factoring his results, same with Dalglish, and only sacked Rodgers because they saw a clear opportunity to trade up and pounced on it. On the one hand their players know the manager has some measure of protection but he's not got a dictators' freedom.
Because we've had so many managers in the last 10 years (reasons irrelevant) at some point we're going to need to back a manager even if there's justifiable cause to sack him, we have to put some of that power back into the managers hands or this cycle of the squad downtooling as soon as the title is out of reach will never end. IMO, the only reason that shouldn't be Sarri is if Roman gives up this fixation of a 'pretty football' Chelsea and for once embraces a proper pragmatist rather than under card him, e.g. Allegri/Simeone, and he gives that manager the time.