Frank Lampard | New Diary of a CEO interview

2 man midfield

Last Man Standing finalist 2021/22
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
46,077
Location
?
17? 17 years is an odd timeframe I suspect you've used to be as unflattering as possible.

If you do 20 then Chelsea have 5 compared to Man City's 6.

If you do 10 then we have 2 compared to Man City's 5.

Obviously we're shite at the moment, utter hot steaming garbage but if we've been a "cup team" over the past 1 or 2 decades then so has everyone else bar Man City.
Yeah, but these stats usually are aren’t they. Like stats that say ‘so and so have only lost 2 of the last 18 games’ - it’s because if they went back to 19 there’d be another loss in there. It works both ways too - it’s 5 titles in the last 20 years, but also 5 in the last 67 years.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
17,414
Supports
Chelsea
Usually i would agree but it would be a great chance to get our first trophy of the new regime (which we need before it comes a 'thing' like it did for United before this season or Arsenal circa 05-14).
Not bothered about that tbh. Would rather just enjoy a season of one game a week.
 

SirReginald

New Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
2,295
Supports
Chelsea
Do wish they were in serious danger of getting relegated.
Honestly If it would speed up removing the toxic players like Ziyech and Pulisic and the utterly useless ones like Havertz then I’d take a season in the championship. It would affect us financially but at this point who gives a flying feck. As for managerial appointments, even in the championship we would still be more desirable than spurs.
 

JPRouve

can't stop thinking about balls - NOT deflategate
Scout
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
65,950
Location
France
Honestly If it would speed up removing the toxic players like Ziyech and Pulisic and the utterly useless ones like Havertz then I’d take a season in the championship. It would affect us financially but at this point who gives a flying feck. As for managerial appointments, even in the championship we would still be more desirable than spurs.
Ziyech and Pulisic are toxic?
 

BerryBerryShrew

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
1,534
Why not just hire another Chelsea legend till the end of the season? Fat Frank is going to have to manage some players who experienced him crashing and burning previously.

Is Zola free? DiMatteo? Drogba? Hell, even Lionheart Terry would be a better option.
 

TheRedHearted

Full Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
2,671
Location
New York, NY
It doesn't, just amplifies your original point. They are worse than their bad season 6 years ago or so. After the investments they made the past 2 windows, they are just as bad. Boehly may end up getting it right, but their squad is extremely bloated and their most threatening forward is a loanee.
Lukaku or who is the loanee?
 

Wing Attack Plan R

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
10,658
Location
El Pueblo de la Reyna de los Angeles
Yeah, but these stats usually are aren’t they. Like stats that say ‘so and so have only lost 2 of the last 18 games’ - it’s because if they went back to 19 there’d be another loss in there. It works both ways too - it’s 5 titles in the last 20 years, but also 5 in the last 67 years.
I prefer to say Chelsea have won it only 6 times in all of recorded history.
 

OrcaFat

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,672
Lampard really is a dick. He says he can’t solve all Chelsea’s problems in one day, as if anybody on the planet thought he might. He’s less than half the coach Potter is so I am expecting Chelsea to do worse under Lampard.

To his credit, Lampard did say he doesn’t want to get ahead of himself and claim the job on a permanent basis. That’s very sweet of him.
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
12,787
I disagree. I think we should have kept Potter but once the decision was made to fire him, getting Lampard in to manage the final 45 days or so was sensible. He’ll see the season in a way we probably would have done anyway had we kept Potter so he’s just a placeholder to keep the fans happy until the find a permanent manager.
I don’t see how bringing in Lampard for any amount of time is sensible. He’s literally a banter manager with absolutely nothing to show he would be a good appointment. It really isn’t hard to find an interim manager of higher quality than Lampard.
 

Loon

:lol:
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
9,217
Location
No-Mark
Boehly (addressing board): "I want no fecking Lidl European competitions next year and our manager can start with a clean slate."

Board (in unison): "GET LAMPARD"
 

bludsucker

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
785
Can we at least now have ‘sack watch’ in the title as i don’t think lampard will last till the end of the season.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,746
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
His post match comments are gas. This is going to get very funny indeed. And it will not end well for Chelsea.
What did he say? I still haven’t got a clue what the hell they are playing at. It doesn’t work on any level, in fact it’s the opposite of not working on every single level and completely illogical.
 

justsomebloke

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Messages
5,962
We sacked Potter in order to be able to do a proper search for his replacement. Potter's assistant agreed to stay on for a game but not more than that.
We sacked Potter in order to be able to do a proper search for his replacement. Potter's assistant agreed to stay on for a game but not more than that.
What, Lampard was the only person in the country willing to take the job?
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
17,414
Supports
Chelsea
I don’t see how bringing in Lampard for any amount of time is sensible. He’s literally a banter manager with absolutely nothing to show he would be a good appointment. It really isn’t hard to find an interim manager of higher quality than Lampard.
You rival fans care way more about the fact that it’s Lampard than Chelsea fans which says a lot because most of us are happy that he’s here. Would you have argued for a better quality caretaker if it was Bruno Saltor or some other random coach no one’s ever heard of? Our season is 99% done and we’re on the search for a new manager and we’ve hired an interim that fans love in the meantime. Seems sensible to me.
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
12,787
You rival fans care way more about the fact that it’s Lampard than Chelsea fans which says a lot because most of us are happy that he’s here. Would you have argued for a better quality caretaker if it was Bruno Saltor or some other random coach no one’s ever heard of? Our season is 99% done and we’re on the search for a new manager and we’ve hired an interim that fans love in the meantime. Seems sensible to me.
Chelsea fans being happy with it isn’t really a qualifier for it being a sensible decision. A lot of Chelsea fans including yourself were happy when Potter got appointed and defiant he wouldn’t get sacked any time soon because it was a long term project. That was a terrible appointment too but not as bad as removing him and appointing Lampard.
 

The Firestarter

Full Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
28,238
We sacked Potter in order to be able to do a proper search for his replacement. Potter's assistant agreed to stay on for a game but not more than that.
What prevents you from doing a "proper search" while there is a manager in place, and sack him at the end of the season?
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
17,414
Supports
Chelsea
Chelsea fans being happy with it isn’t really a qualifier for it being a sensible decision. A lot of Chelsea fans including yourself were happy when Potter got appointed and defiant he wouldn’t get sacked any time soon because it was a long term project. That was a terrible appointment too but not as bad as removing him and appointing Lampard.
Let’s just reiterate we’re talking about a caretaker on a 7 week contract. What would be a sensible option for you? Would Bruno Saltor be that? A coach from the youth teams? What would a sensible caretaker choice look like to you?
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
12,787
Let’s just reiterate we’re talking about a caretaker on a 7 week contract. What would be a sensible option for you? Would Bruno Saltor be that? A coach from the youth teams? What would a sensible caretaker choice look like to you?
Not sacking Potter and giving him till the end of the season is more sensible. Despite not being up to the job, he’s still a better option than Lampard.
 

Gazza

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2000
Messages
32,644
Location
'tis a silly place
Not wishing to defend Chelsea's decision making, but if they'd kept Potter til the end of the season whilst conducting a public search for a new manager then they'd have been accused of showing disrespect to Potter, kinda like what happened pre-Mourinho when Claudio Ranieri was a goner long before the end of the season and they were clearly speaking to other managers. So either way they'd have been criticized.
 

SirReginald

New Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
2,295
Supports
Chelsea
Not sacking Potter and giving him till the end of the season is more sensible. Despite not being up to the job, he’s still a better option than Lampard.
Absolutely. Factor in there is still players at the club that didn’t like Lampard the previous time and it’s not remotely clever.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,289
Bringing in a guy who failed horribly before, even on a 10 game or so short spell, just screams bizarre doesn't it?
 

lysglimt

Full Member
Scout
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
15,315
Lampard really is a dick. He says he can’t solve all Chelsea’s problems in one day, as if anybody on the planet thought he might. He’s less than half the coach Potter is so I am expecting Chelsea to do worse under Lampard.

To his credit, Lampard did say he doesn’t want to get ahead of himself and claim the job on a permanent basis. That’s very sweet of him.
In fairness - the Chelsea-job is never on a permanent basis. Only Mourinho has lasted more than 2 seasons in the entire history of the Premier League. So basically being the manager of Chelsea is a temporary position
 

Dominant

Full Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2002
Messages
4,852
Has any club sacked 3 managers in a season? Chelsea already sacked 2. Is that a record already?
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,762
Has any club sacked 3 managers in a season? Chelsea already sacked 2. Is that a record already?
Serie A clubs sacked probably fifty managers in same season and same manager twice in the same season.

50 is exaggeration but rest are all true.
 

DJ_21

Evens winner of 'Odds or Evens 2022/2023'
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
12,303
Location
Manchester
Bring back Frank to try and improve you. Can’t see it happening. They’ll drop even further down. Bet they’re an horrible club to manage. I thought we was the toughest job in the world but now I actually think Chelsea’s might be. If you don’t get it right straight away then you’re gone. No time.
 

justsomebloke

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Messages
5,962
Let’s just reiterate we’re talking about a caretaker on a 7 week contract. What would be a sensible option for you? Would Bruno Saltor be that? A coach from the youth teams? What would a sensible caretaker choice look like to you?
Well, that's a rethorical question that falls flat on its face. Normally in these cases, a club uses one of the first team coaches. You know this. It's not like Chelsea uniquely lacked that option. And yeah, that would be the sensible option, at least compared to hiring Frank Lampard, which just manages to reinforce the aura of incompetence created by the Potter mess.
 

ThatsGreat

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
1,654
Supports
Arsenal
Let’s just reiterate we’re talking about a caretaker on a 7 week contract. What would be a sensible option for you? Would Bruno Saltor be that? A coach from the youth teams? What would a sensible caretaker choice look like to you?
Ideally a caretaker would be someone who has a genuine chance to manage long term. Its like a loan player, you get a good look at him before making a permanent offer. Lampard we already know isn't the answer.