Pochettino | Agrees to be US National Team Coach

Powderfinger said:
Yeah, I think its a mistake to see some grand strategic rationale in this decision. Journalists like Ben Jacobs are going to say that kind of thing because their job depends on the access provided by club officials so they'll say whatever they need to say to make Boehly et al look good.

The club's financial shell games require them to sell players like Gallagher and Chalobah this summer to book the accounting profit. Poch naturally doesn't want to sell them because Gallagher has been a pillar of his side and a leader on the pitch, while Chalobah has been arguably the side's best CB since coming back from injury. So, manager sacked, new manager found.
Click to expand...

It feels like it’s goes to the other end of the extreme to simply suggest they needed to sell Gallagher and they needed to fire Poch because he disagreed. Especially when Gallagher can simply refuse to leave. They tried to sell him for Everton last year but he said nah I’m not going there. They’re going to have to give him a new deal eventually because he only has a year left on his deal and they’re obviously not going to let him walk for free when he’s valued at £50m. The ball is completely in Gallagher’s court. The new manager will find him very useful and play him, so he has no incentive accept a move to fecking Tottenham, of all teams.
 
Like I said earlier in the season, players like Enzo just don't fit into the way Pochettino wants to develop the team. It's no surprise Chelsea started playing better once Enzo was unavailable. I think the decision to spend huge money on Enzo and then to go out and appoint Pochettino was a stupid one.

I was apprehensive about Enzo Fernandez in the EPL due to his litimitations out of possession. I think from a Chelsea POV, they need a coach who doesn't overly rely on the physical and athletic aspects of his team but also combines a strong build up phase from the back. The amount of money spent by Chelsea has been staggering and I think Pochettino unlike Graham Potter had a full preseason at the club and should've done better.
 
It is surprising on one hand but also not. About 10 days ago he said in that press conference that we'll all know the decision when season ends and that felt odd and as something was happening despite good form recently.

You can't say it was catastrophe this Poch at Chelsea story but it's the one that'll be pretty much forgotten in a few years probably.

We can rate Pochettino or not but think we can definitely agree that clubs like PSG and Chelsea don't suit him.
 
Adnan said:
Like I said earlier in the season, players like Enzo just don't fit into the way Pochettino wants to develop the team. It's no surprise Chelsea started playing better once Enzo was unavailable. I think the decision to spend huge money on Enzo and then to go out and appoint Pochettino was a stupid one.

I was apprehensive about Enzo Fernandez in the EPL due to his litimitations out of possession. I think from a Chelsea POV, they need a coach who doesn't overly rely on the physical and athletic aspects of his team but also combines a strong build up phase from the back. The amount of money spent by Chelsea has been staggering and I think Pochettino unlike Graham Potter had a full preseason at the club and should've done better.
Click to expand...

I've not been impressed by him either and said so this season. He was visibly a weakness in most games. The only thing that's put doubt in my mind is that he himself has come out and said exactly this, and that is why he went for surgery as he knew he was letting the team down. I didn't see much at Benfica, but unless he gets a lot better or finds a different role/ system there, then he won't work out. They looked a lot better with the industrious players like Gallagher, Caicedo and even Cucurella tucking into midfield. Even if they're more limited on the ball. Enzo just seemed too easily bypassed at times.
 
Adnan said:
Like I said earlier in the season, players like Enzo just don't fit into the way Pochettino wants to develop the team. It's no surprise Chelsea started playing better once Enzo was unavailable. I think the decision to spend huge money on Enzo and then to go out and appoint Pochettino was a stupid one.

I was apprehensive about Enzo Fernandez in the EPL due to his litimitations out of possession. I think from a Chelsea POV, they need a coach who doesn't overly rely on the physical and athletic aspects of his team but also combines a strong build up phase from the back. The amount of money spent by Chelsea has been staggering and I think Pochettino unlike Graham Potter had a full preseason at the club and should've done better.
Click to expand...

Enzo has never been the problem. He's been playing with a hernia problem for months - yet instead of leaving Enzo higher when he has a valuable skillset in the final third despite limited mobility Poch has persisted with Gallagher higher up the pitch, even going so far as to play him at left wing at times. It all stems from Poch being obsessed with maximising high turnovers at the cost of anything resembling a midfield structure - simply not a viable tactic in the modern game.
 
There was inconsistency and he hadnt done well by Chelsea standards but looked like it was clicking towards end of season and he’d found his best team
 
Chelsea manager does well, Chelsea manager does bad, has a blip, has an upturn, they just sack them whatever they do.

Maybe Boehly wants to give it a go.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Enzo has never been the problem. He's been playing with a hernia problem for months - yet instead of leaving Enzo higher when he has a valuable skillset in the final third despite limited mobility Poch has persisted with Gallagher higher up the pitch, even going so far as to play him at left wing at times. It all stems from Poch being obsessed with maximising high turnovers at the cost of anything resembling a midfield structure - simply not a viable tactic in the modern game.
Click to expand...

I thought he was poor whenever I watched you play (i did read recently about his injury which i didn't know about when watching him), and he didn't bring much even when he was further up the pitch. Perhaps Poch didn't want to sacrifice pressing and energy in the forward line for perhaps more creative outlet in the final third. In the end he did sacrifice Gallagher there and played him deeper, probably because he knew Palmer would bring output through the middle and Madueke finally started to show up.

You should know better than me though, what do you think Enzo brings in that role that Gallagher or Palmer don't?
 
Adisa said:
Sacked him as soon as it was looking to click.
Click to expand...
Agree. Now when they were finally finding the way they fire him. But remember that these are the people that are going to disrupt football with their modern methods that us mortals on this side of the Atlantic cannot comprehend.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Enzo has never been the problem. He's been playing with a hernia problem for months - yet instead of leaving Enzo higher when he has a valuable skillset in the final third despite limited mobility Poch has persisted with Gallagher higher up the pitch, even going so far as to play him at left wing at times. It all stems from Poch being obsessed with maximising high turnovers at the cost of anything resembling a midfield structure - simply not a viable tactic in the modern game.
Click to expand...
Enzo was always the problem when you made the decision to hire Pochettino because anyone that understands Pochettino's coaching principles will know that he wants to get the ball forward with a minimal amount of passes to implement a higher defensive line to force high turn overs. Enzo Fernandez as good as he is on the ball severely lacks the physical and athletic ability to play the system Pochettino wanted to implement. And I don't believe Pochettino wanted to play Gallacher higher up the pitch, but rather he had to fit Enzo Fernandez into the first 11 which I predicted would be a problem for him as early as last year.

Even myself when watching Enzo Fernandez at Benfica, it was clear to see that he lacked the running power as a central midfielder and I wasn't sure his ability to pass the ball would be enough to negate his deficiencies out of possession. But what seems to happen is that too many people only focus on what a player can do on the ball but forget that if the aim is to play on the front foot in a proactive manner, then defending large space on the counter by eating up ground quickly is a real advantage and really helps maintain control and helps the team sustain attacks.
 
Adisa said:
Sacked him as soon as it was looking to click.
Click to expand...

Look at it this way. Poch spent 32 out of 38 games in 10-12th place. Yeah nice vibes to end the season but is that enough to keep him if the season overall was an awful one?
 
WeePat said:
It feels like it’s goes to the other end of the extreme to simply suggest they needed to sell Gallagher and they needed to fire Poch because he disagreed. Especially when Gallagher can simply refuse to leave. They tried to sell him for Everton last year but he said nah I’m not going there. They’re going to have to give him a new deal eventually because he only has a year left on his deal and they’re obviously not going to let him walk for free when he’s valued at £50m. The ball is completely in Gallagher’s court. The new manager will find him very useful and play him, so he has no incentive accept a move to fecking Tottenham, of all teams.
Click to expand...

Fair enough on Gallagher and the ball being in his court.

I think the broader point I was trying to convey, which maybe didn't come across very clearly, is that Boehly et al have a financial strategy and a player asset accumulation strategy, not a footballing vision. The issue with Poch isn't that the club have this grand footballing vision and Poch's football doesn't really fit. Its that Poch wants a level of control over transfers that isn't unusual for a manager but that the financial strategy and asset accumulation strategy won't allow.

I imagine the club aren't all that happy with Poch's performance but if this was just about performance then for a replacement they wouldn't only be looking at very experienced managers who lack the leverage and gravitas to demand a greater level of control over transfers.
 
pocco said:
I thought he was poor whenever I watched you play, and he didn't bring much even when he was further up the pitch. Perhaps Poch didn't want to sacrifice pressing and energy in the forward line for perhaps more creative outlet in the final third. In the end he did sacrifice Gallagher there and played him deeper, probably because he knew Palmer would bring output through the middle and Madueke finally started to show up.

You should know better than me though, what do you think Enzo brings in that role that Gallagher or Palmer don't?
Click to expand...

Personally I don't think it makes any sense at all to choose a 10 on the basis of their pressing at this point, yet that is consistently what Poch did. Gallagher is a player who only makes sense in a team where you assume you will be overmatched. He is a chaotic player who can help you when things are chaotic, but making him the most influential midfielder in the final third has never made a lick of sense and the fact that he was effectively the player our midfield was built around was completely antiquated.

The broader point is that Chelsea should be trying to build an effective modern side that controls the midfield - and it is in that capacity that Enzo is hugely valuable. Yes - if Poch is insistent on being a fecking Sith lord when it comes to the midfield and adhering dogmatically to the notion that there can only be 2 then Gallagher makes more sense - but this approach to football is antiquated. If you want a midfield that exerts control from deep and advanced positions then you want to build a structure where both Enzo and Palmer are featured in the final third - and there is honestly no place for someone with Gallagher's skillset.
 
Don't really follow Chelsea enough to judge this but that's basically everyone other than City and Arse changing managers this summer? I really hope we take the chance and change too. The next manager could benefit from the environment.
 
Adnan said:
Enzo was always the problem when you made the decision to hire Pochettino because anyone that understands Pochettino's coaching principles will know that he wants to get the ball forward with a minimal amount of passes to implement a higher defensive line to force high turn overs. Enzo Fernandez as good as he is on the ball severely lacks the physical and athletic ability to play the system Pochettino wanted to implement. And I don't believe Pochettino wanted to play Gallacher higher up the pitch, but rather he had to fit Enzo Fernandez into the first 11 which I predicted would be a problem for him as early as last year.

Even myself when watching Enzo Fernandez at Benfica, it was clear to see that he lacked the running power as a central midfielder and I wasn't sure his ability to pass the ball would be enough to negate his deficiencies out of possession. But what seems to happen is that too many people only focus on what a player can do on the ball but forget that if the aim is to play on the front foot in a proactive manner, then defending large space on the counter by eating up ground quickly is a real advantage and really helps maintain control and helps the team sustain attacks.
Click to expand...

But Enzo doesn't lack that ability to play Poch's system unless he is dealing with a hernia - and especially then he would have been perfectly capable of playing further up. Also why wouldn't Poch just swap Enzo and Gallagher if Enzo was apparently a mandate? It's blindingly obvious that Enzo is a better player in the final third and would have been a far more effective 10 than Gallagher. I think you're correct to say that Enzo doesn't have what it takes to be an 8 in Poch's system but it's also true that Poch chose to play him there for some reason when there were obvious alternatives.
 
insane. As an american, I had didn't know what Boehly would be like as a club owner but I assumed he'd be less crazy than abramovich just because that's such a low bar to reach and because of Boehly's experience with the dodgers. But it looks like he's even more insane transer and managerial turnover wise than abramovich but without the results to back it up.

I think Poch did a decent job given the circumstances. And he's the type of guy that is willing to invest his time into a project. So it must just be a very big disagreement with ownership. Weird stuff. Gotta think De Zibri will only last 1 season too.
 
Enzo is a fantastic footballer and will show his quality once again in a role more suited to him. For me he suffered from the exact same issue Jorginho did when he was here in that defensively he was getting cooked in the quick transition. You cannot play him as the deepest midfielder. The problem was further exacerbated by Caicedo also being badly out of form early on in the season. People here may not remember it but I remember a Liverpool game early on this season where Enzo was sensational and dominated the game. That’s the sort of thing he can do when comfortable. We need the right manager to get the best out of him.

People were slaughtering Caicedo and labeling him a massive flop at points this season but he has been immense these last couple of months. Some players just need time to settle at a new club. Not everyone instantly clicks. No reason Enzo can‘t do the same.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
But Enzo doesn't lack that ability to play Poch's system unless he is dealing with a hernia - and especially then he would have been perfectly capable of playing further up. Also why wouldn't Poch just swap Enzo and Gallagher if Enzo was apparently a mandate? It's blindingly obvious that Enzo is a better player in the final third and would have been a far more effective 10 than Gallagher. I think you're correct to say that Enzo doesn't have what it takes to be an 8 in Poch's system but it's also true that Poch chose to play him there for some reason when there were obvious alternatives.
Click to expand...
I think to buy Enzo Fernandez and to then play him in a more advanced midfield position is again a bad idea. Like I said earlier in the season, Pochettino surely had to fit him into his team due to the money spent on signing the player. But to sign one of the best deeper lying midfielders in the EPL in Caicedo who was statistically amongst the best players against the opposition press and to then also spend a vast amount of money on Enzo was daft from Chelsea if the idea is to then hire a coach who wants to go direct and force high turn-overs in a higher defensive line. And the funny thing is, I predicted Pochettino's down fall and I do believe Chelsea have made the right decision because if you want to get the best out of both Caicedo and Fernandez, then you need to hire a coach with a more varied approach to implementing a attack minded plan. But it'll be interesting to see how the next head coach works around Enzo's deficiencies out of possession where I believe the opposition can target him in the EPL.
 
Tom Van Persie said:
Click to expand...

This leads me to believe Pochettino might have outright told them that selling certain players (most namely Gallagher) would be a non starter for him.

People thought players like Mount were part of the spirit of the club… but he was always a guy who would take his toys and pout on the sidelines if he didn’t get what he wanted.

That full field sprint into a goal saving slide tackle against Bournemouth is all you need to know about Gallagher. You would have to carry him if the field before he’d quite. You can dangle him in front of teams as sale bait for years, and he still won’t give up giving everything he has for the club.

Pochettino knows you need people like that. A better footballer doesn’t mean better for our team necessarily. And I don’t know that we go in that run or come together like we did as a team without Conor.

So Chelsea fans need to understand we aren’t just saying goodbye to Poch; we are saying goodbye to many of the elements that had finally helped us gel into a team.

Starting from scratch next year with mostly young players ….again.
 
Bluelion7 said:
This leads me to believe Pochettino might have outright told them that selling certain players (most namely Gallagher) would be a non starter for him.

People thought players like Mount were part of the spirit of the club… but he was always a guy who would take his toys and pout on the sidelines if he didn’t get what he wanted.

That full field sprint into a goal saving slide tackle against Bournemouth is all you need to know about Gallagher. You would have to carry him if the field before he’d quite. You can dangle him in front of teams as sale bait for years, and he still won’t give up giving everything he has for the club.

Pochettino knows you need people like that. A better footballer doesn’t mean better for our team necessarily. And I don’t know that we go in that run or come together like we did as a team without Conor.

So Chelsea fans need to understand we aren’t just saying goodbye to Poch; we are saying goodbye to many of the elements that had finally helped us gel into a team.

Starting from scratch next year with mostly young players ….again.
Click to expand...
Sounds just like a lot of your most venerated players.
 
Adnan said:
I think to buy Enzo Fernandez and to then play him in a more advanced midfield position is again a bad idea. Like I said earlier in the season, Pochettino surely had to fit him into his team due to the money spent on signing the player. But to sign one of the best deeper lying midfielders in the EPL in Caicedo who was statistically amongst the best players against the opposition press and to then also spend a vast amount of money on Enzo was daft from Chelsea if the idea is to then hire a coach who wants to go direct and force high turn-overs in a higher defensive line. And the funny thing is, I predicted Pochettino's down fall and I do believe Chelsea have made the right decision because if you want to get the best out of both Caicedo and Fernandez, then you need to hire a coach with a more varied approach to implementing a attack minded plan. But it'll be interesting to see how the next head coach works around Enzo's deficiencies out of possession where I believe the opposition can target him in the EPL.
Click to expand...

Sure - but if we accept that Poch had to play him then surely you'd agree that he would be better used further up, doubly so after he had the hernia problem? Especially since Enzo's pressing numbers have been very good.

I don't disagree that Poch and Enzo are an awkward fit but I think it's entirely fair to point out that the way Enzo has been deployed has been pretty fecking stupid all things considered
 
Abizzz said:
Don't really follow Chelsea enough to judge this but that's basically everyone other than City and Arse changing managers this summer? I really hope we take the chance and change too. The next manager could benefit from the environment.
Click to expand...
City, Arsenal, Spurs, Villa and probably Newcastle are set. I think next season will look exactly the same for United and Chelsea, struggling around 6-8th.
Plus with the Euro, it's not a great time to apply so many changes.
 
You wouldn't have been shocked to see this a few months back, but it did feel like he had gotten a handle on what is a mess of a club and had started to move them in the right direction. So odd timing for me, not sure it's a great decision but time will tell I suppose. It all depends who they get next and what they can do.
 
Chelsea are such a joke of a club. All the change and uncertainty made shite of their season. They finally start to show a bit of consistency, win a few games and they tear the whole thing up again. I guess we should be grateful there’s another big club that’s even more of a laughing stock than us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.