Since he took over in 2003, they’ve won 5 league titles, 5 FA cups, 3 league cups, 2 Europa Leagues and the Champions League. I’m not sure i’d call it a problem, lol.
That’s what I mean.
There is no real risk for Abramovich because he doesn’t build teams, he just buys them.
So hiring and firing Lampard means nothing to him.
It would be a novelty for Chelsea supporters to see one of their best players managing them, but if it goes wrong, it’s not as if Lampard would be ruining any sort of system or style of play because they don’t have any style, it’s just spend until it works.
It must be very tempting for him, but I think if he went back to Chelsea he’d be so emotionally invested, not to mention how emotionally invested the supporters would also be, that if it all came apart it would be some major damage to the club that would take years to repair.
They say ‘you can never go back’. I think that’s true here, not unlike OGS at United. Agreed DB10, he’d be better off at West Ham.
It’d be like Glenda at Tottenham as manager. That didn’t work out well
Yeah that’s why the Chelsea fans I know don’t want him. They don’t want to see one of their legends fail.
Having said that, if the transfer ban sticks then a manager like Lampard wouldn’t be the worst idea. They want someone who can get the best out of the youngsters.
It isn’t a problem when you have essentially limitless funds though, and it’s worked fairly well for them.
Let’s hope the scattergun approach eventually catches up to them, but it hasn’t yet.
As soon as Abramovich has had enough and leaves, they will be in the biggest mess any club has seen.
They are as self sustaining as us and, without his investment, they will have to scrimp and save like we do, but without the stadium or support to fund the sort of spending they’ve been used to.
Yeah I think there will be a few big roadblocks for them.
I wouldn’t expect them to sink that low though; at this point, they have enough support globally to bring the funds in, albeit not as much as other “top clubs” (I don’t really consider them one). The biggest issue they will have will be adjusting to not having Roman writing a cheque for everything.
All evidence suggests he hasn’t been putting his own money in for quite some time.
Edit: actually I looked this up again and seems he has started putting in again after a few years of not doing so. Interesting.
Lampard is only a viable option if they get Steve Holland in the set up for me. Not ruling out them getting the ban overturned yet though.
Interesting what way Chelsea go next season but think they will be in the mix for the 4 no matter what happens.
I feel it’s too soon for him to take that job. But I guess he has the transfer ban to fall back on as an excuse if they struggle next season.
I think it’s the right time for Lampard to manage Chelsea…no long-term experience, no promotion success for Derby…go for it Frank
I guess any other manager coming in will want a budget to spend. Lampard will be happy with the fact he gets to manage Chelsea. I think it’s a win win for both parties. If it doesn’t work out, they’ll get another bigger manager in the following season when their transfer embargo is lifted.
This bodes very well for us next season. We are Arsenal and can only marginally improve the team because we are trash. Nice to see our top 4 rivals willing sabotage themselves
Chelsea is an abhorrent club
He’s even overestimated tbh.