Di matteo sacked!!!!

[kinboshi]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

Sums up the state of the PL (and top-level football across a wider scale) perfectly.

[The Camel]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

Sums up the state of the PL (and top-level football across a wider scale) perfectly.

Still, if I had to choose, I'd rather be an Arsenal supporter than a Chelsea fan.

[The Camel]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

Sums up the state of the PL (and top-level football across a wider scale) perfectly.

Still, if I had to choose, I'd rather be an Arsenal supporter than a Chelsea fan.

As long as Ian Wright is expunged from the club's history.

[Skippy]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

These are just outliers, surely? The trend is surely fewer management changes correlates with higher success.

Plus, I think you could argue that success is dependant on what club you manage (or what your budget is). Success for say West Brom is to stay in the Premier League. Success for Man Utd is to win at least a double. It's a different criteria. Given the money Everton has, I'd say David Moyes is highly successful manager, but he's won 0 trophies.

I reckon if you plot a graph with budget along the x axis, average league position for the last 5 years along the y axis, and highlighted all of the clubs having changed their managers once or not at all, they'd cluster better.

This trend is not a huge shock after all- why would you sack a successful manager? You only generally sack a manager after they've lost lots of games.

[Karabiner]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

Sums up the state of the PL (and top-level football across a wider scale) perfectly.

Still, if I had to choose, I'd rather be an Arsenal supporter than a Chelsea fan.

As long as Ian Wright is expunged from the club's history.

Has he got previous for thuggery?

[The Camel]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

These are just outliers, surely? The trend is surely fewer management changes correlates with higher success.

Plus, I think you could argue that success is dependant on what club you manage (or what your budget is). Success for say West Brom is to stay in the Premier League. Success for Man Utd is to win at least a double. It's a different criteria. Given the money Everton has, I'd say David Moyes is highly successful manager, but he's won 0 trophies.

I reckon if you plot a graph with budget along the x axis, average league position for the last 5 years along the y axis, and highlighted all of the clubs having changed their managers once or not at all, they'd cluster better.

This trend is not a huge shock after all- why would you sack a successful manager? You only generally sack a manager after they've lost lots of games.

By any criteria, the last 8 years at Arsenal have been a dismal failure.

A decent argument could be made that they are the second biggest club in England.

They have had one manager in the Abramovich era at Chelsea and zero trophies.

[Karabiner]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

These are just outliers, surely? The trend is surely fewer management changes correlates with higher success.

Plus, I think you could argue that success is dependant on what club you manage (or what your budget is). Success for say West Brom is to stay in the Premier League. Success for Man Utd is to win at least a double. It's a different criteria. Given the money Everton has, I'd say David Moyes is highly successful manager, but he's won 0 trophies.

I reckon if you plot a graph with budget along the x axis, average league position for the last 5 years along the y axis, and highlighted all of the clubs having changed their managers once or not at all, they'd cluster better.

This trend is not a huge shock after all- why would you sack a successful manager? You only generally sack a manager after they've lost lots of games.

By any criteria, the last 8 years at Arsenal have been a dismal failure.

A decent argument could be made that they are the second biggest club in England.

They have had one manager in the Abramovich era at Chelsea and zero trophies.

Although Arsenal have now got a state-of-the-art stadium which is pretty-much paid for.

It may have been paid partially by us not winning a trophy recently but the club is on a sound financial footing for the forseeable future and there are not many who can make that claim.

[The Camel]

Chelsea 7 managers in 8 years = 8 trophies

Arsenal 1 manager in 8 years = 0 trophies.

Kinds debunks the myth that stability equals success, doesn't it?

Stability only equals success if you have the best manager ever in British football and unlimited resources.

These are just outliers, surely? The trend is surely fewer management changes correlates with higher success.

Plus, I think you could argue that success is dependant on what club you manage (or what your budget is). Success for say West Brom is to stay in the Premier League. Success for Man Utd is to win at least a double. It's a different criteria. Given the money Everton has, I'd say David Moyes is highly successful manager, but he's won 0 trophies.

I reckon if you plot a graph with budget along the x axis, average league position for the last 5 years along the y axis, and highlighted all of the clubs having changed their managers once or not at all, they'd cluster better.

This trend is not a huge shock after all- why would you sack a successful manager? You only generally sack a manager after they've lost lots of games.

By any criteria, the last 8 years at Arsenal have been a dismal failure.

A decent argument could be made that they are the second biggest club in England.

They have had one manager in the Abramovich era at Chelsea and zero trophies.

Although Arsenal have now got a state-of-the-art stadium which is pretty-much paid for.

It may have been paid partially by us not winning a trophy recently but the club is on a sound financial footing for the forseeable future and there are not many who can make that claim.

I thought the aim of football clubs was to win stuff, not to be "on a sound financial footing for the forseeable future"

[redarmi]

Surely there is a balance here.  Would rather my club was around for the forseeable future than won trophies.  You can spend fortunes and still not win anything or win a cup or two and end up like Pompey, Leeds etc

[The Camel]

Surely there is a balance here.  Would rather my club was around for the forseeable future than won trophies.  You can spend fortunes and still not win anything or win a cup or two and end up like Pompey, Leeds etc

Of course, but it's hardly a brag that your club isn't run by a bunch of feckless neerdowells.

[Skippy]

Surely there is a balance here.  Would rather my club was around for the forseeable future than won trophies.  You can spend fortunes and still not win anything or win a cup or two and end up like Pompey, Leeds etc

Of course, but it's hardly a brag that your club isn't run by a bunch of feckless neerdowells.

It is in British football at the moment.

[Waz1892]

Pepe refusing to budge from his self-given holiday, so i guess Rafa until the summer. Pepe then walks in?!

Rafa will be back in the frame in the perm, working with an agenda, and CFC don't commit to any long term contract with the view to bringing on Pepe when he gets back into Football.

[redarmi]

Both/either will be a bust at Chelsea imo.

[Waz1892]

talk sport confirming rafa done until end of season

[Josedinho]

Great manager. Don't think it's a great fit though.