Premier League 22-23

[chaddyrovers]

13 minutes ago, Silas said:

2nd favourite with the bookies after Lampard Chaddy.

Both of them need some positive results soon or can see both gone before the season's over.

Never know Potter may turn this match round in the 2nd half. Unlikely though, Fulham look a good Prem outfit at the moment. And Chelsea are very disjointed. No flow to their play. 

Chelsea paid 20 mil to get Potter as the new head coach. Surely they need to back him. Chelsea are at the start of new ownership spend where they are buying good young talented players(from what I have read about them) and Potter has a history of developing and improving players. I would say Chelsea need to back the guy they appointed 4 months ago and allow the time they need. Bohely need to stick to his guns and from what I have read He will. 

Everton's owner has backed Lampard today on Talksport

I don't worry about Bookies favourite. Rodgers, Cooper and Moyes have all been favourites for the sack this season and still in post. 

[Mattyblue]

1 minute ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Everton's owner has backed Lampard today on Talksport

 

That’s that then, bet he’s relieved.

[simongarnerisgod]

shocking defending by chelsea,are they trying to get potter sacked😁

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

Far to early to even sack Potter. They need to continue to back him and the fact that Chelsea are in transition where Chelsea are buying young talent and aren't the Chelsea under Roman Abramovich

I would give him this season and next season to show his worth. I would give people look at Areata at Arsenal who 12/14 months ago want him out. Now look at them

Out of interest, would Potter get an extra 18 months regardless of results? If they finished 10th this season and you was the owner, would he continue? If he finished 12th? Surely no sane owner would give any manager such a specific and lengthy period of time regardless of results.

[chaddyrovers]

20 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Out of interest, would Potter get an extra 18 months regardless of results? If they finished 10th this season and you was the owner, would he continue? If he finished 12th? Surely no sane owner would give any manager such a specific and lengthy period of time regardless of results.

I would back Potter for the rest of the season. You have just paid 20 million to bring him in and his staff. Plus signing some exciting young players plus a new Director of football. You need to give it time and patience. 

If they finished 10th at the end of the season I would still keep Potter on. 

You appointed him in September cos of thought he was the right man to take the club forward. Also factor in the injuries you got plus a number of young signings made recently. 

 

[roversfan99]

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I would back Potter for the rest of the season. You have just paid 20 million to bring him in and his staff. Plus signing some exciting young players plus a new Director of football. You need to give it time and patience. 

If they finished 10th at the end of the season I would still keep Potter on. 

You appointed him in September cos of thought he was the right man to take the club forward. Also factor in the injuries you got plus a number of young signings made recently. 

 

So essentially he stays for a pre determined and lengthy amount of time regardless of results. 

I dont get why managers still warrant time and patience regardless of results.

Coyle should have been given 2 years because he had massive budget cuts to deal with, ignore how bad the results are. Surely?

[chaddyrovers]

13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

So essentially he stays for a pre determined and lengthy amount of time regardless of results. 

I dont get why managers still warrant time and patience regardless of results.

I don't you totally lack of patience and time you are willing to give managers and you would be hiring and sacking managers every other week base on results. Chelsea owner Todd Bohely sacked Tuchel cos he lost faith in him and problems behind the scenes. They appointed Potter who they paid 20 million pounds to get him and team. Potter has had 19 games in charge. You completely changed the club management and you would expect have a year or 2 transition between the club was like under previous owner to this owner and how he wants to run the club. 

Look at Arteta record at Arsenal with their league positions were they finished 8th in his first 2 season and 5th last season. Now this season they are top, have a good squad and team that understand how Arteta want to play now.  

[SuperBrfc]

I think we can stick a fork in Chelsea. They are done, IMO. The signs are recognisable and all too familiar, relatively speaking. They can't buy a win, the owner can't get anything right, money being blown all over the show, the embarrassments are piling up, they are already (so quickly) a shadow of what they were, and the new signing who they've shelled out a huge loan fee on gets sent off on his debut. This stuff is right out of Barry's "Owning a Football Club for Dummies" handbook.

Project, give him time, building. Yeah, alright. That doesn't wash at clubs that are alive and kicking, and with fans who refuse to accept "this is our level" and "it isn't 2003 anymore". When results go downhill, those clubs act. I think Potter hasn't got long left there, their fans aren't having him and I don't blame them.

[roversfan99]

33 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I don't you totally lack of patience and time you are willing to give managers and you would be hiring and sacking managers every other week base on results. Chelsea owner Todd Bohely sacked Tuchel cos he lost faith in him and problems behind the scenes. They appointed Potter who they paid 20 million pounds to get him and team. Potter has had 19 games in charge. You completely changed the club management and you would expect have a year or 2 transition between the club was like under previous owner to this owner and how he wants to run the club. 

Look at Arteta record at Arsenal with their league positions were they finished 8th in his first 2 season and 5th last season. Now this season they are top, have a good squad and team that understand how Arteta want to play now.  

I have a very strange viewpoint where manager need to warrant more time, not just be given it unconditionally.

And that isnt specific to Potter, he may turn things round. 

We gave Kean loads of time, similar example to Arteta. Time doesnt automatically lead to improvement. You also cant continue regardless of results to try and justify the outlay, miss out on the top 4 and they will lose far more than £20m.

[jim mk2]

The fans will decide Potter's fate. If the booing and abuse increase he will be potted. Same with Lampard

Potter was a poor appointment and he should have stayed at Brighton, a perfect club for him. 

[Silas]

 

😂😂

 

 

[K-Hod]

Just because Chelsea and Everton’s owners backed Potter and Lampard, doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.

Our owners backed Steve Kean…

[Blue blood]

With Potter I have some sympathy as he:

a) has done well in his precious job.

b) has a horrible injury list (Yes it's Chelsea and he still has a ton of talent but even so it's a long list and losing your no 1 keeper, your summer marquee signing and a raft of others is not ideal.)

C) the owner is acting like a kid playing football manager. I get the impression that Potter isn't too involved in signings as it's such a scattergun approach and counter to what he has done previously. That can't help him build a team and style whatsoever. 

 

I get it's still a situation most managers would love to be in - all that talent and the owner signing a ton of players - and that's a strong argument against him. It's quite a flip side! But I do think said context perhaps warrants Potter a bit more time, albeit not irrespective of results for the rest of the season. 

[DE.]

I was reading it would cost Chelsea an absolute fortune to get rid of Potter, so I think they'll back him for a while yet.

[Sweaty Gussets]

3 minutes ago, DE. said:

I was reading it would cost Chelsea an absolute fortune to get rid of Potter, so I think they'll back him for a while yet.

It must be a lot because qualifying alone for the group stages of the CL brings in £13m and then it's £2m for a win in the group stages. A few years of not qualifying for the CL and not sacking Potter will look a huge mistake. 

[DE.]

2 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

It must be a lot because qualifying alone for the group stages of the CL brings in £13m and then it's £2m for a win in the group stages. A few years of not qualifying for the CL and not sacking Potter will look a huge mistake. 

I believe I read it was to the tune of £60m, so yeah, it's a lot.

[chaddyrovers]

14 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

I have a very strange viewpoint where manager need to warrant more time, not just be given it unconditionally.

And that isnt specific to Potter, he may turn things round. 

similar example to Arteta. Time doesnt automatically lead to improvement. You also cant continue regardless of results to try and justify the outlay, miss out on the top 4 and they will lose far more than £20m.

I don't think Chelsea will get top 4 but even if they don't I would stand by Potter and what their plan is for Chelsea. They were only going to be a season of transition or 2 there. New owners with different ideas, new DoF, new head coach and new boardroom. 

  

2 hours ago, DE. said:

I was reading it would cost Chelsea an absolute fortune to get rid of Potter, so I think they'll back him for a while yet.

Its cost them 20 million to get Potter and his team in September 

[roversfan99]

They should judge as they go and stick with/sack Potter based on results, like any sane club.

[chaddyrovers]

24 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

They should judge as they go and stick with/sack Potter based on results, like any sane club.

would you sack Potter then right now? 19 games ago you appointed Potter who cost 20 million pounds and surely you back your judgement and why you appoint in the first place. 

[K-Hod]

If you don’t get results, your job is under threat as a football manager. Potter knows this and knows that Chelsea are trigger happy as it is.
Doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks but the board at Chelsea. They sacked Tuchel after he’d won the CL, so they aren’t frightened to wield the axe…

 

[ben_the_beast]

For me Potters future should depend on whether he has lost the dressing room. Those within the club will know whether or not that is the case. He's got credit in the bank after his achievements at Brighton, the injury list is huge and many of their current problems were apparent under Tuchel at the beginning of the season. 

If he's not lost the dressing room I'd continue to back him. If players are openly expressing dissatisfaction with his methods, then writing is on the wall.

[chaddyrovers]

7 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

If you don’t get results, your job is under threat as a football manager. Potter knows this and knows that Chelsea are trigger happy as it is.
Doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks but the board at Chelsea. They sacked Tuchel after he’d won the CL, so they aren’t frightened to wield the axe…

 

Todd Bohely sacked alot more than Tuchel tho who were key parts of the footballing structure like Maria Granovskaia who ran the club and Pete Cech who was Director of football who he got rid off too quickly and should have kept in position until they new replacements were in.

I would say the old Chelsea was trigger happy but we don't much about Bohely is like yet. 

[roversfan99]

3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

would you sack Potter then right now? 19 games ago you appointed Potter who cost 20 million pounds and surely you back your judgement and why you appoint in the first place. 

Erm probably not no, he would be creeping into dangerous territory and needs to improve soon but not yet.

My main point is that it is stupid to give a manager such a lengthy and specific period of time REGARDLESS of results/progress.

You can risk acting irrationally by trying to justify an initial decision. 

Why did Coyle not warrant further time then, he had not much more than 19 games, why didn't he get at least a season?

[chaddyrovers]

55 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Erm probably not no, he would be creeping into dangerous territory and needs to improve soon but not yet.

My main point is that it is stupid to give a manager such a lengthy and specific period of time REGARDLESS of results/progress.

You can risk acting irrationally by trying to justify an initial decision. 

That's all I want to know and you have agree with me that Potter shouldn't be sack. Thanks. 

55 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Why did Coyle not warrant further time then, he had not much more than 19 games, why didn't he get at least a season?

The Coyle situation is a very different one to the Potter situation and you should already know that before posting about Coyle or the other one you mentioned before yesterday. 

[roversfan99]

13 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

That's all I want to know and you have agree with me that Potter shouldn't be sack. Thanks. 

The Coyle situation is a very different one to the Potter situation and you should already know that before posting about Coyle or the other one you mentioned before yesterday. 

The point was not about Potter being sacked as far I was concerned, it was about giving any manager 18 months regardless of results.