I don't think Chelsea's squad is that bad and I'm quite surprised about how their season has gone. But I think the biggest mistake Chelsea made was that when you spend a huge fee on a player like Enzo Fernandez who is technically very good on the ball but not the most agile of players out of possession, it will create a problem for a coach like Pochettino who isn't really a coach who places emphasis on build up play from the back and has built his previous reputation on playing a high pressing game by winning the ball high and creating high turnovers with his teams having the physicality and intensity to back that up.
It's mind boggling how they chose Pochettino after signing the players they did. The coach Chelsea should've appointed was someone who placed emphasis on deeper build up with aim of dominating the ball in possession with players like Enzo and Caicedo who was among the very best players in the league at keeping and progressing the ball against the opponent's press in confined spaces. How they signed those two players and paired them up with a coach like Pochettino is beyond stupid. Now it remains to be seen if Pochettino gets the time and also if he adapts to the players that were signed by the likes of Winstanley and Stewart.
Like I said a couple of years ago, Pochettino is a coach who arrived in the EPL at a time when there wasn't a big emphasis on playing a high pressing game and he along with Brendan Rodgers took advantage of a method of coaching which built up their reputation. But as the league evolved with more and more coaching talent arriving, Pochettino's influence and tactics got weaker imo.
Someone asked the question above about if the roles were reversed with ten Hag being Chelsea coach and Pochettino being United's and if there would be a difference. I say there would be because ten Hag would utilise the likes of Caicedo and Fernandez far better because if you give him the tools he has shown that he can coach a deeper build up phase far better than Pochettino who prefers the high pressing/high turnover method. Pochettino on the other hand may well have done better with the players he would've inherited at United but I very much doubt his methods would've got us close to challenging the likes of Klopp and Guardiola.
I feel if Chelsea are to make a change when it comes to the head coach, then the next chap has to be someone like a Michel (Girona) or Thiago Motta currently at Bologna. Both the aforementioned coaches would imo get the best out of the players Chelsea have bought due to their vision and philosophy.
It's mind boggling how they chose Pochettino after signing the players they did. The coach Chelsea should've appointed was someone who placed emphasis on deeper build up with aim of dominating the ball in possession with players like Enzo and Caicedo who was among the very best players in the league at keeping and progressing the ball against the opponent's press in confined spaces. How they signed those two players and paired them up with a coach like Pochettino is beyond stupid. Now it remains to be seen if Pochettino gets the time and also if he adapts to the players that were signed by the likes of Winstanley and Stewart.
Like I said a couple of years ago, Pochettino is a coach who arrived in the EPL at a time when there wasn't a big emphasis on playing a high pressing game and he along with Brendan Rodgers took advantage of a method of coaching which built up their reputation. But as the league evolved with more and more coaching talent arriving, Pochettino's influence and tactics got weaker imo.
Someone asked the question above about if the roles were reversed with ten Hag being Chelsea coach and Pochettino being United's and if there would be a difference. I say there would be because ten Hag would utilise the likes of Caicedo and Fernandez far better because if you give him the tools he has shown that he can coach a deeper build up phase far better than Pochettino who prefers the high pressing/high turnover method. Pochettino on the other hand may well have done better with the players he would've inherited at United but I very much doubt his methods would've got us close to challenging the likes of Klopp and Guardiola.
I feel if Chelsea are to make a change when it comes to the head coach, then the next chap has to be someone like a Michel (Girona) or Thiago Motta currently at Bologna. Both the aforementioned coaches would imo get the best out of the players Chelsea have bought due to their vision and philosophy.