Mourinho gone from Chelsea

[Worthy4England]

So according to popular beliefs held on this board, Chelsea after this kneejerk should be favourites for the drop then?

My, his first six games have taken a while, haven't they?

I thought we were having the conversation about how a managerial change, 6 weeks into the season, would affect a Club?

Some pointed out that the 2 teams that stuck with their manager this time last year made Europe and the one that didn't got relegated (nothing to do with the length of time their respective Managers had been in post).

Can't have cake + eat it, either the length of time that the managers had been in post is a factor or it isn't. If it is, then last year, Charlton's manager had been in post about the same length of time as LSL, having been appointed in May of last year.

So in wrapping up the case for the prosecution, I contend that the parallels drawn between the scenario last year with Blackburn, Tottenham and Charlton don't hold water as their managers had been in post for substantially different periods of time and therefore it wasn't that the teams stuck with the manager that made the difference, it was the length of time that manager had been with the club that created the stability and enabled them to get out of the early season mire.

Or following the opposite logic through to its conclusion then Chelsea changing their manager after six games of a season should see them relegated as length of tenure for the manager isn't a factor.

If the answer is the former, then "stability" isn't something we can easily argue in the case of Sammy Lee, as he's not been in post long enough, so changing him as manager shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

If the answer is the latter is that Chelsea haven't immediately become relegation candidates, then dumping a manager after six games of a season doesn't necessarily mean automatic relegation so changing Sammy Lee as manger shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

[BWFC_Insane]

So according to popular beliefs held on this board, Chelsea after this kneejerk should be favourites for the drop then?

My, his first six games have taken a while, haven't they?

I thought we were having the conversation about how a managerial change, 6 weeks into the season, would affect a Club?

Some pointed out that the 2 teams that stuck with their manager this time last year made Europe and the one that didn't got relegated (nothing to do with the length of time their respective Managers had been in post).

Can't have cake + eat it, either the length of time that the managers had been in post is a factor or it isn't. If it is, then last year, Charlton's manager had been in post about the same length of time as LSL, having been appointed in May of last year.

So in wrapping up the case for the prosecution, I contend that the parallels drawn between the scenario last year with Blackburn, Tottenham and Charlton don't hold water as their managers had been in post for substantially different periods of time and therefore it wasn't that the teams stuck with the manager that made the difference, it was the length of time that manager had been with the club that created the stability and enabled them to get out of the early season mire.

Or following the opposite logic through to its conclusion then Chelsea changing their manager after six games of a season should see them relegated as length of tenure for the manager isn't a factor.

If the answer is the former, then "stability" isn't something we can easily argue in the case of Sammy Lee, as he's not been in post long enough, so changing him as manager shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

If the answer is the latter is that Chelsea haven't immediately become relegation candidates, then dumping a manager after six games of a season doesn't necessarily mean automatic relegation so changing Sammy Lee as manger shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

There was a stat on the BBC a year or so ago that showed clubs that kept managers for longer did better on average than those who had a constant trail of managers through their revolving doors.

[James B]

time for gartside to make josé an offer he can't refuse.......at gunpoint

[Worthy4England]

Wouldn't disagree at all BWFCI - the point I'm making is that LSL has been here such a short time as Manager, that the difference, were he to go would be more negligable now than say mid December when he would have been here longer...

[Backgammon]

Just read this story on the Beeb... Fairly shocked. I know they hadn't started brilliantly but they're still only a couple of points off the league leaders.

10million quid pay-off though. He can make a few omelettes with that...

[BWFC_Insane]

Wouldn't disagree at all BWFCI - the point I'm making is that LSL has been here such a short time as Manager, that the difference, were he to go would be more negligable now than say mid December when he would have been here longer...

Possibly but he has completely re-vamped the structure of the club behind the scenes and basically appointed a whole new backroom staff. That means that the change has already been extensive so yet more piled on top of that before things settle down could well be disastrous.

On the Mourinho issue, Chelsea have sacked (I don't believe he walked by choice alone) a champions league, UEFA cup, premiership, FA Cup winner, League cup winner and replaced him with Avram Grant, who has won precisely what in his career?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

So according to popular beliefs held on this board, Chelsea after this kneejerk should be favourites for the drop then?

My, his first six games have taken a while, haven't they?

I thought we were having the conversation about how a managerial change, 6 weeks into the season, would affect a Club?

I thought it was six weeks into a career, but it's still a bad time in the season to get shut. Do you think it's the ideal time for Chelsea to sack Mourinho? Do you, honestly?

Some pointed out that the 2 teams that stuck with their manager this time last year made Europe and the one that didn't got relegated (nothing to do with the length of time their respective Managers had been in post).

They may well have done. Is every single post which argues with your viewpoint somehow the same one? Or are you trying to shoehorn some kind of ridiculous logic into a completely different situation?

Can't have cake + eat it, either the length of time that the managers had been in post is a factor or it isn't. If it is, then last year, Charlton's manager had been in post about the same length of time as LSL, having been appointed in May of last year.

So in wrapping up the case for the prosecution, I contend that the parallels drawn between the scenario last year with Blackburn, Tottenham and Charlton don't hold water as their managers had been in post for substantially different periods of time and therefore it wasn't that the teams stuck with the manager that made the difference, it was the length of time that manager had been with the club that created the stability and enabled them to get out of the early season mire.

So we should get a time machine and appoint Sammy Lee three years ago? Really, is the crux of your argument that length of time in a job is relevant? If so, remind me again what happened to Charlton at the end of the season?

Or following the opposite logic through to its conclusion then Chelsea changing their manager after six games of a season should see them relegated as length of tenure for the manager isn't a factor.

Sir, you have made several good points on these boards, but you appear to have been on the electric soup this morning. Seldom can I have heard such a fatuous argument, and that includes the bickering between Fatshaft and Trotter58...

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Wouldn't disagree at all BWFCI - the point I'm making is that LSL has been here such a short time as Manager, that the difference, were he to go would be more negligable now than say mid December when he would have been here longer...

Possibly but he has completely re-vamped the structure of the club behind the scenes and basically appointed a whole new backroom staff. That means that the change has already been extensive so yet more piled on top of that before things settle down could well be disastrous.

And signed a dozen players. Don't forget the folks in boots, they're quite important.

[fatshaft]

So according to popular beliefs held on this board, Chelsea after this kneejerk should be favourites for the drop then?

[fatshaft]

Oh how the bookies are laughing at this one. All the money piled onto Lee and Hutchinhs pre-season, and Jol since, no idea what Jose's odds were, but I doubt they took a £ on it?

[BWFC_Insane]

Its all relative Chelsea's equivalent of relegation is not winning the premiership.

And how many people think they will win the premiership now?

[Worthy4England]

So according to popular beliefs held on this board, Chelsea after this kneejerk should be favourites for the drop then?

My, his first six games have taken a while, haven't they?

I thought we were having the conversation about how a managerial change, 6 weeks into the season, would affect a Club?

I thought it was six weeks into a career, but it's still a bad time in the season to get shut. Do you think it's the ideal time for Chelsea to sack Mourinho? Do you, honestly?

Some pointed out that the 2 teams that stuck with their manager this time last year made Europe and the one that didn't got relegated (nothing to do with the length of time their respective Managers had been in post).

They may well have done. Is every single post which argues with your viewpoint somehow the same one? Or are you trying to shoehorn some kind of ridiculous logic into a completely different situation?

Can't have cake + eat it, either the length of time that the managers had been in post is a factor or it isn't. If it is, then last year, Charlton's manager had been in post about the same length of time as LSL, having been appointed in May of last year.

So in wrapping up the case for the prosecution, I contend that the parallels drawn between the scenario last year with Blackburn, Tottenham and Charlton don't hold water as their managers had been in post for substantially different periods of time and therefore it wasn't that the teams stuck with the manager that made the difference, it was the length of time that manager had been with the club that created the stability and enabled them to get out of the early season mire.

So we should get a time machine and appoint Sammy Lee three years ago? Really, is the crux of your argument that length of time in a job is relevant? If so, remind me again what happened to Charlton at the end of the season?

Or following the opposite logic through to its conclusion then Chelsea changing their manager after six games of a season should see them relegated as length of tenure for the manager isn't a factor.

Sir, you have made several good points on these boards, but you appear to have been on the electric soup this morning. Seldom can I have heard such a fatuous argument, and that includes the bickering between Fatshaft and Trotter58...

Oh if only the electric soup was the correct assertion The whole point is if we were going to get shut of LSL, then I would favour doing it sooner rather than later...some people advocate giving it time, because it will be reet, some advocate giving it come time and if it isn't reet acting then and some people advocate getting shut now.

If it's going to be reet, then that's all well and good - no worries - but I'm not convinced and haven't seen much evidence that we're about to turn a corner - to the contrary after two weeks to prepare, the game against Brum was widely regarded to have been our worst attempt so far this season.

If we get shut now, it could remove the area of doubt that is "Is Sammy Lee good enough as a Manager" - but only if we replaced him with someone with proven track record and that's still no guarentee

I believe the middle course of action - lets see if it will be reet and if it isn't (say at 10 games or 12 or Christmas - they've all been suggested) - is in my opinion the most dangerous as it would leave anyone coming in less time to sort out the mess.

[hisroyalgingerness]

big loss to the league. we lost some big players recently - henry, robben, van noodle and for me just lost one of the biggest managers.
who's going to entertain us with their interviews now. no jewell with his best jumper - leather jacket combo, no mourinho and his eggs. just rafa with his clipped "we were playing midweek so are tired" shitness

[Tombwfc]

So according to popular beliefs held on this board, Chelsea after this kneejerk should be favourites for the drop then?

My, his first six games have taken a while, haven't they?

I thought we were having the conversation about how a managerial change, 6 weeks into the season, would affect a Club?

Some pointed out that the 2 teams that stuck with their manager this time last year made Europe and the one that didn't got relegated (nothing to do with the length of time their respective Managers had been in post).

Can't have cake + eat it, either the length of time that the managers had been in post is a factor or it isn't. If it is, then last year, Charlton's manager had been in post about the same length of time as LSL, having been appointed in May of last year.

So in wrapping up the case for the prosecution, I contend that the parallels drawn between the scenario last year with Blackburn, Tottenham and Charlton don't hold water as their managers had been in post for substantially different periods of time and therefore it wasn't that the teams stuck with the manager that made the difference, it was the length of time that manager had been with the club that created the stability and enabled them to get out of the early season mire.

Or following the opposite logic through to its conclusion then Chelsea changing their manager after six games of a season should see them relegated as length of tenure for the manager isn't a factor.

If the answer is the former, then "stability" isn't something we can easily argue in the case of Sammy Lee, as he's not been in post long enough, so changing him as manager shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

If the answer is the latter is that Chelsea haven't immediately become relegation candidates, then dumping a manager after six games of a season doesn't necessarily mean automatic relegation so changing Sammy Lee as manger shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

I made that point and i think you must have missed it. My point wasn't that anyone sacking a manager is going be relegated, just that knee jerk sackings rarely, if ever, work.

If Chelsea win the league/CL this season then this knee jerk sacking will have worked and feel free to quote it when we're playing Barnsley with Sammy Lee at the helm and Avram Grant is doing routine tickertape parades around London. However i don't think they are in any better position to win the league/CL now, than they were with Mourinhio, despite the world class managers they could attract. Similarly, i don't think we'd have any better chance of avoiding relegation by giving the job to any of the failures who we could attract.

[BWFC_Insane]

Chelsea have sacked what in my view is the best manager I have seen since Brian Clough!

[Nozza]

big loss to the league. we lost some big players recently - henry, robben, van noodle and for me just lost one of the biggest managers.
who's going to entertain us with their interviews now. no jewell with his best jumper - leather jacket combo, no mourinho and his eggs. just rafa with his clipped "we were playing midweek so are tired" shitness

And also Big Fat Sam.

"I brought Michael off cos he was tired"
"We lost as the internationals were 5 days ago"

Hilarious.

As for Jose, shame he has gone. But I wish SSN would talk about something else.

[Worthy4England]

So according to popular beliefs held on this board, Chelsea after this kneejerk should be favourites for the drop then?

My, his first six games have taken a while, haven't they?

I thought we were having the conversation about how a managerial change, 6 weeks into the season, would affect a Club?

Some pointed out that the 2 teams that stuck with their manager this time last year made Europe and the one that didn't got relegated (nothing to do with the length of time their respective Managers had been in post).

Can't have cake + eat it, either the length of time that the managers had been in post is a factor or it isn't. If it is, then last year, Charlton's manager had been in post about the same length of time as LSL, having been appointed in May of last year.

So in wrapping up the case for the prosecution, I contend that the parallels drawn between the scenario last year with Blackburn, Tottenham and Charlton don't hold water as their managers had been in post for substantially different periods of time and therefore it wasn't that the teams stuck with the manager that made the difference, it was the length of time that manager had been with the club that created the stability and enabled them to get out of the early season mire.

Or following the opposite logic through to its conclusion then Chelsea changing their manager after six games of a season should see them relegated as length of tenure for the manager isn't a factor.

If the answer is the former, then "stability" isn't something we can easily argue in the case of Sammy Lee, as he's not been in post long enough, so changing him as manager shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

If the answer is the latter is that Chelsea haven't immediately become relegation candidates, then dumping a manager after six games of a season doesn't necessarily mean automatic relegation so changing Sammy Lee as manger shouldn't necessarily see us relegated.

I made that point and i think you must have missed it. My point wasn't that anyone sacking a manager is going be relegated, just that knee jerk sackings rarely, if ever, work.

If Chelsea win the league/CL this season then this knee jerk sacking will have worked and feel free to quote it when we're playing Barnsley with Sammy Lee at the helm and Avram Grant is doing routine tickertape parades around London. However i don't think they are in any better position to win the league/CL now, than they were with Mourinhio, despite the world class managers they could attract. Similarly, i don't think we'd have any better chance of avoiding relegation by giving the job to any of the failures who we could attract.

I don't think you were not the only one to make the point or very similar. The broad thrust of the various points was look what happened to Charlton against look what happened to Blackburn and Tottenham. Given the amount of "sack LSL" threads, I think it was made on a number of them by different people. Anyhow the point was made - and reasonably so, it's a point more than worthy of some debate

I wouldn't fundamentally disagree that kneejerk sackings rarely work, and I would hope you would agree with the broad contention that promoting someone above their capabilities rarely works either. (Occasionally it can work "in-spite of" as opposed to "because of"....). So it's a damage limitation thing. We still have the three broad outcomes that can occur:

1) We keep LSL and we do exceptionally well and everyone's happy (or at least don't get relegated) - time will tell but no one can be certain at this stage

2) We take the view that we're deep in the doo doo now, because we have 3 points and LSL ain't ever going to turn it round - slightly less difficult to visualise than number 1) because a) we have 3 points and b) I'm not seeing anything yet - with Brum being our most recent attempt - to suggest things are stabilizing or improving - by LSL's admission Brum was the worst yet.

or

3) we wait and see and if it transpires 1) happens we're good but if 2) continues, we're just lost ourselves further games to give someone else a go at resolving the problem.

There isn't a right or wrong otherwise we'd all point to the formula to solve it.

All I'm saying is, I (personally) don't particularly want to follow option 3) as it adds more risk the longer you leave it, as any new manager still needs time to steady the ship and try and turn the corner against a backdrop of fewer games.

I'd be delighted with 1) but I'm not convinced LSL is the man for the job (I wasn't unhappy when he got chosen) but since then I've become less convinced by the week.

I believe wait and see is more dangerous than "kneejerk sacking" so I'm in the move now camp...but as you say, it depends on who we might be able to attract.

As has been mentioned by others, the situation between ourselves and Chelsea is a little different - my comment about them getting relegated was a somewhat tongue in cheek. For them a bad season might well be not winning a trophy. For us, it would have a direct effect on our "much more rickety" Balance Sheet if we got relegated. I don't want to go backwards as a Club - that's all.

[Salford Trotter]

Just read this story on the Beeb... Fairly shocked. I know they hadn't started brilliantly but they're still only a couple of points off the league leaders.

10million quid pay-off though. He can make a few omelettes with that...

Make that £25m and you'll be nearer the mark

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 004780.stm

[norm the jedi]

lets not go backwards as a club...
lets sack a bloke whose hardly bin int job 5 minutes and replace him with ....
Paul Jewel
or any one of 37 candidates currently out of work because they were shite at there last or in some cases all their clubs...

There's a step forward worth taking.. straight into the darkness..

[communistworkethic]

Just read this story on the Beeb... Fairly shocked. I know they hadn't started brilliantly but they're still only a couple of points off the league leaders.

10million quid pay-off though. He can make a few omelettes with that...

Make that £25m and you'll be nearer the mark

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 004780.stm

number plucked from the air. His basic contact is worth about 12.5 million for the remaining term. Why would Chelsea pay him double that?? Even with bonuses it's probably be no more than £15m.