Of course Benitez would be better, even Di Matteo again or perhaps an international coach who can dual role for a bit.
Some are suggesting there’s literally not one other option bar Lampard which I don’t really get.
Frank Lampard | Burnley?
- Thread starter MalaysianRed7
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Some are suggesting there’s literally not one other option bar Lampard which I don’t really get.
You should be ashamed of yourself, ready to exploit your favorite club.
But seriosuly, I agree with your points. Even if people think that the season isn't over due to the CL, a manager that has lost the trust of his players is unlikely to be the one galvanizing them for a cup run.
No I wouldn't random twitter guy
He's not there to "command the dressing room". He's there because someone has to put the cones out and pick the team for the next few weeks while they pick a new manager.
What did any of the current players say which was critical of Lampard? Not calling you a liar, just don't know who said what of the current lot.
As for Everton players saying they prefer the current manager, what else are they going to say? Has any player ever said they preferred a previous manager to the current one? Even when Moyes replaced Fergie, none of the players said it was better under Sir Alex (whilst Moyes was boss).
If he is there to just put cones out why not leave Bruno in until summer? Makes zero sense.
The Everton bunch were talking about discipline. You don’t think your dressing room needs and of that? The Athletic piece on Potter being sacked suggests otherwise and that there’s a few bad eggs knocking about. Managing a bloated squad is obviously hard but being soft isn’t really going to work as Potter found out.
@SirReginald mentioned in an other thread that Kepa, Pulisic and Kovacic had gone public on Lampard when he left and he suggested others had too.
It was reported that he didn’t want to be the caretaker, presumably because he wanted to stay part of Potter’s staff. I don’t know, I think people are reading way too much into what essentially just a 45-50 day contract. We were in free fall under Potter, there’s nothing Lampard can do that would be worse than what we were getting from Potter.
Bruno wanted out, he only stayed for that one game as a favour.
The Everton bunch were talking up kissing their current managers arse, as all players do.
I have done a quick google search and can't find anything negative from Pulisic or Kova. Kepa did have a dig at the time but that's because Lampard dropped him for Mendy.
You can call it elitist but I’d definitely rather have no Europe than qualify for the conference league.
Yeah the conference League would be a nuisance
The European Conference really is a comp you put the kids in.
Sorry didn’t know that about Bruno. Odd he didn’t fancy it but that makes it more tricky and the need to get someone in quickly if he literally wouldn’t stay in post past the one game.
I definitely think it’s the right thing to take your time with the next appointment.
EL offers an easier route to the CL. Unless you are really confident of top 4 next season.
The conference league doesn’t.
No one cares about conference league, not even west ham.
that’s what @WeePat was saying!
Mad how this same team won the champions league less than 2 years ago.
The "no europe" thing has been parroted by many Chelsea fans, not just him. Gives the feeling that they are still in denial about the crisis their club is in. No europe only makes sense if they are very confident of top 4, or winning the CL. Otherwise it could mean several years out in the wild because I look at the table and I dont see them getting anywhere near top 4 next season.
Yeah feck the conference league. I think we’re too far out to qualify for the Europa League.
Surely without any European football they will need to radically change to meet the prem ffp guidelines?
Yeah I think they’ll be struggling
Last time we had "no europe" we won the league, partly because the players weren't knackered.
Not saying we'll win the league next year but being in the Conference league will be more of a hindrance to finishing top 4, I'm absolutely sure of that.
You get about £500 per season for being in the Conference League.
How do I join?
What has Fat Frank ever done to warrant the job? - He has a great track record in managerial failure
And then spend obscene money (£550m just this season) on top of it ending up with the same manager with whom they massively underachieved just before they won that same CL.
To say the whole situation is absolutely absurd would be understatement.
Conference and even Europa hardly bring you any money. CL has all the money.
Being in Europa while annoying is still somehow just ok.
But every remotely big club should try to avoid the Conference.
Being in Europa while annoying is still somehow just ok.
But every remotely big club should try to avoid the Conference.
Yeah that makes sense, ECL should never have been in the discussion at all, its just a minor trophy with no additional benefits. EL is dfferent though, you guys took it seriously 3 years ago, think you'd kill for a spot right aboutnow.
Sol Campbell has entered the chat.
It doesn't, just amplifies your original point. They are worse than their bad season 6 years ago or so. After the investments they made the past 2 windows, they are just as bad. Boehly may end up getting it right, but their squad is extremely bloated and their most threatening forward is a loanee.
Odds defying, fluky things happen in tournament football especially when that's all you realistically are playing for. That's why domestic campaigns are more of a barometer of the team.
Chelsea have been a cup team for years now.
Yup. 3 league titles in 17 years. They’ve reached 3 champions league finals in that same time frame.
17? 17 years is an odd timeframe I suspect you've used to be as unflattering as possible.
If you do 20 then Chelsea have 5 compared to Man City's 6.
If you do 10 then we have 2 compared to Man City's 5.
Obviously we're shite at the moment, utter hot steaming garbage but if we've been a "cup team" over the past 1 or 2 decades then so has everyone else bar Man City.
Looking at their fixtures he’s going to come out of this looking even worse than he did going into Chelsea I can’t see many wins at all
Thankfully for him, there is an 8 point gap down to their closest follower. I don't think it's likely that they drop much lower than where they are right now.
Usually i would agree but it would be a great chance to get our first trophy of the new regime (which we need before it comes a 'thing' like it did for United before this season or Arsenal circa 05-14).
never argued Potter shouldn't be sacked.
Didn't look like the dressing room atmosphere improved much to me...
Nonsensical reasoning. You already had someone to put the cones out, so why hire Lampard?
yep. They actually looked a lot better in the 0-2 loss to Villa.Probably the worst I've seen Chelsea play this season
We sacked Potter in order to be able to do a proper search for his replacement. Potter's assistant agreed to stay on for a game but not more than that.