Was interesting that when Frank was appointed there were those saying that Chelsea should prepare for a few years of transition and others saying that Roman wouldn't accept it... and so the latter has been proven right.
A shame really, as I felt it may be a chance for Chelsea to move past that short term approach.
Unlikely to bode well for English youngsters.
What I don't understand about Frank's time at Chelsea is he was tasked with bringing through the youth, which he did relatively well and managed to get top 4. Abrahams, Mount, James etc all played to a decent level. Then they go and purchase players in the exact same positions that they brought these youngsters through and unsettled the squad lol
Mount and James have been successful.
I wonder if they have abandoned this approach though really with the signings of Werner, Havertz and Ziyech for instance which puts Hudson-Odoi's place in some doubt now as well as shipping Tomori out on loan to AC Milan.
I wonder if the directors at Chelsea looked at the youngsters last season and said "these won't be good enough for us to win the league". That seems like the only logical explanation really.
There are limits to what is acceptable in a transition. Chelsea’s performances and results haven’t been acceptable.
But it’s more than that. When the atmosphere, and relationship between the higher ups and the manager, and the manager and his players, become strained then you cannot see through a longer term approach with that manager.
Long term rebuilds only work if you’ve got the right man. Lampard obviously wasn’t the right man.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 6 minutes ago
Was interesting that when Frank was appointed there were those saying that Chelsea should prepare for a few years of transition and others saying that Roman wouldn't accept it... and so the latter has been proven right.
A shame really, as I felt it may be a chance for Chelsea to move past that short term approach.
Unlikely to bode well for English youngsters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All get sent out on loan
comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 52 seconds ago
There are limits to what is acceptable in a transition. Chelsea’s performances and results haven’t been acceptable.
But it’s more than that. When the atmosphere, and relationship between the higher ups and the manager, and the manager and his players, become strained then you cannot see through a longer term approach with that manager.
Long term rebuilds only work if you’ve got the right man. Lampard obviously wasn’t the right man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Equally though, you could argue that it's absurd to accept a period of pain/transition and then give up at the first sign of trouble.
We have no idea what the board expected though.
It seems the fans knew they'd be in for a bumpy ride, although some have quickly changed their minds on whether they can tolerate that, but maybe Roman never saw this as a period of transition at all.
I heard it was meant to be a 3 year plan under Lampard. In the 2nd year he was supposed to close the gap to the top of the table for Chelsea and achieve more consistency with results. Considering half the season is gone and he failed to do that, it's understandable and completely fair him being fired. If he wasn't likeable English boy Frank Lampard and someone else, no one would complain.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Sideshow, from what’s being reported about Lampard he didn’t even speak to some players for months. There’s making them feel part of the squad and then there’s just being a bit of a cuuuunt.
But it’s not absurd when there’s so much tension around the manager at the club. You don’t just stick with a manager because transition.
If a manager is at odds with the board and the players there’s only one solution.
comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 12 seconds ago
Sideshow, from what’s being reported about Lampard he didn’t even speak to some players for months. There’s making them feel part of the squad and then there’s just being a bit of a cuuuunt.
But it’s not absurd when there’s so much tension around the manager at the club. You don’t just stick with a manager because transition.
If a manager is at odds with the board and the players there’s only one solution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'If' being the operative word here.
And from everything being reported that was the case. It’s not a shock that’s happened, happens all the time at every club.
comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 16 minutes ago
There are limits to what is acceptable in a transition. Chelsea’s performances and results haven’t been acceptable.
But it’s more than that. When the atmosphere, and relationship between the higher ups and the manager, and the manager and his players, become strained then you cannot see through a longer term approach with that manager.
Long term rebuilds only work if you’ve got the right man. Lampard obviously wasn’t the right man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When have Chelsea done anything `long term`?
https://twitter.com/thespursweb/status/1353710020995788801
comment by Phendompelé (U20037)
posted 8 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/thespursweb/status/1353710020995788801
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's cheap but I like it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/FootballCliches/status/1353670146481643525
https://mobile.twitter.com/stevehitchen76/status/1353674392816021506
comment by Roy's Keane (U11635)
posted 6 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Mike. (U1170)
posted 16 minutes ago
After taking Derby from 6th to 6th and then Chelsea in his first season from 3rd to 4th, following it up by spending £200m+ and guiding them down to 9th, this has come as a big surprise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Wednesday
https://twitter.com/thatguysjokes/status/1353768105982504962?s=19
comment by Phendompelé (U20037)
posted 2 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/thatguysjokes/status/1353768105982504962?s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign in if you want to comment
Fat Frank to be sacked
Page 5 of 5
posted on 25/1/21
Was interesting that when Frank was appointed there were those saying that Chelsea should prepare for a few years of transition and others saying that Roman wouldn't accept it... and so the latter has been proven right.
A shame really, as I felt it may be a chance for Chelsea to move past that short term approach.
Unlikely to bode well for English youngsters.
posted on 25/1/21
What I don't understand about Frank's time at Chelsea is he was tasked with bringing through the youth, which he did relatively well and managed to get top 4. Abrahams, Mount, James etc all played to a decent level. Then they go and purchase players in the exact same positions that they brought these youngsters through and unsettled the squad lol
posted on 25/1/21
Mount and James have been successful.
I wonder if they have abandoned this approach though really with the signings of Werner, Havertz and Ziyech for instance which puts Hudson-Odoi's place in some doubt now as well as shipping Tomori out on loan to AC Milan.
I wonder if the directors at Chelsea looked at the youngsters last season and said "these won't be good enough for us to win the league". That seems like the only logical explanation really.
posted on 25/1/21
There are limits to what is acceptable in a transition. Chelsea’s performances and results haven’t been acceptable.
But it’s more than that. When the atmosphere, and relationship between the higher ups and the manager, and the manager and his players, become strained then you cannot see through a longer term approach with that manager.
Long term rebuilds only work if you’ve got the right man. Lampard obviously wasn’t the right man.
posted on 25/1/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 25/1/21
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 6 minutes ago
Was interesting that when Frank was appointed there were those saying that Chelsea should prepare for a few years of transition and others saying that Roman wouldn't accept it... and so the latter has been proven right.
A shame really, as I felt it may be a chance for Chelsea to move past that short term approach.
Unlikely to bode well for English youngsters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All get sent out on loan
posted on 25/1/21
comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 52 seconds ago
There are limits to what is acceptable in a transition. Chelsea’s performances and results haven’t been acceptable.
But it’s more than that. When the atmosphere, and relationship between the higher ups and the manager, and the manager and his players, become strained then you cannot see through a longer term approach with that manager.
Long term rebuilds only work if you’ve got the right man. Lampard obviously wasn’t the right man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Equally though, you could argue that it's absurd to accept a period of pain/transition and then give up at the first sign of trouble.
We have no idea what the board expected though.
It seems the fans knew they'd be in for a bumpy ride, although some have quickly changed their minds on whether they can tolerate that, but maybe Roman never saw this as a period of transition at all.
posted on 25/1/21
I heard it was meant to be a 3 year plan under Lampard. In the 2nd year he was supposed to close the gap to the top of the table for Chelsea and achieve more consistency with results. Considering half the season is gone and he failed to do that, it's understandable and completely fair him being fired. If he wasn't likeable English boy Frank Lampard and someone else, no one would complain.
posted on 25/1/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 25/1/21
Sideshow, from what’s being reported about Lampard he didn’t even speak to some players for months. There’s making them feel part of the squad and then there’s just being a bit of a cuuuunt.
But it’s not absurd when there’s so much tension around the manager at the club. You don’t just stick with a manager because transition.
If a manager is at odds with the board and the players there’s only one solution.
posted on 25/1/21
comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 12 seconds ago
Sideshow, from what’s being reported about Lampard he didn’t even speak to some players for months. There’s making them feel part of the squad and then there’s just being a bit of a cuuuunt.
But it’s not absurd when there’s so much tension around the manager at the club. You don’t just stick with a manager because transition.
If a manager is at odds with the board and the players there’s only one solution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'If' being the operative word here.
posted on 25/1/21
And from everything being reported that was the case. It’s not a shock that’s happened, happens all the time at every club.
posted on 25/1/21
What reports?
posted on 25/1/21
comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 16 minutes ago
There are limits to what is acceptable in a transition. Chelsea’s performances and results haven’t been acceptable.
But it’s more than that. When the atmosphere, and relationship between the higher ups and the manager, and the manager and his players, become strained then you cannot see through a longer term approach with that manager.
Long term rebuilds only work if you’ve got the right man. Lampard obviously wasn’t the right man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When have Chelsea done anything `long term`?
posted on 25/1/21
Loads from the Athletic.
posted on 25/1/21
Okay.
posted on 25/1/21
https://twitter.com/thespursweb/status/1353710020995788801
posted on 25/1/21
comment by Phendompelé (U20037)
posted 8 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/thespursweb/status/1353710020995788801
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's cheap but I like it.
posted on 25/1/21
https://mobile.twitter.com/FootballCliches/status/1353670146481643525
posted on 25/1/21
https://mobile.twitter.com/stevehitchen76/status/1353674392816021506
posted on 25/1/21
comment by Roy's Keane (U11635)
posted 6 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Mike. (U1170)
posted 16 minutes ago
After taking Derby from 6th to 6th and then Chelsea in his first season from 3rd to 4th, following it up by spending £200m+ and guiding them down to 9th, this has come as a big surprise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Wednesday
posted on 25/1/21
https://twitter.com/thatguysjokes/status/1353768105982504962?s=19
posted on 25/1/21
comment by Phendompelé (U20037)
posted 2 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/thatguysjokes/status/1353768105982504962?s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 5 of 5