So, is Chelsea's process elite? Have Todd Boehly, the sporting directors, & the club learnt from their mistakes of the past?
Is Mauricio Pochettino the man to revive the club on the pitch through tactical acumen AND off the pitch with a clear vision?
Let's find out.
THREAD! π¨
Is Mauricio Pochettino the man to revive the club on the pitch through tactical acumen AND off the pitch with a clear vision?
Let's find out.
THREAD! π¨
Tactically, Pochettino has improved Chelsea tenfold in comparison to Potter and Lampard's tenures.
In most games, Chelsea will build in a 4-2-4 before transitioning into a 3-2-5 in settled attacks with one fullback high and wide & one tucked into defence.
In most games, Chelsea will build in a 4-2-4 before transitioning into a 3-2-5 in settled attacks with one fullback high and wide & one tucked into defence.
They will also press in a 4-4-1-1 where they will typically leave the opposition with a spare man in the build-up.
However, if they press with enough intensity and intelligence, they can do it very well.
Maatsen did it well, but Nkunku was lazy π
However, if they press with enough intensity and intelligence, they can do it very well.
Maatsen did it well, but Nkunku was lazy π
Chelsea will also utilise a back 3 to manage specific teams (like they did against Liverpool and like Pochettino did during his time at Spurs), but their squad will be built with the 4-2-4 and 3-2-5 shape in mind.
After spending Β£900m+, this leaves their squad in this condition.
After spending Β£900m+, this leaves their squad in this condition.
Caicedo and Enzo is a world class double pivot partnership.
Their only flaw is a lack of height, but that is largely compensated for by the aerial traits of the centre backs and Reece James when in the back 3.
Lavia is also a fantastic back up for Enzo. His on-ball game is TOP.
Their only flaw is a lack of height, but that is largely compensated for by the aerial traits of the centre backs and Reece James when in the back 3.
Lavia is also a fantastic back up for Enzo. His on-ball game is TOP.
Gallagher is also very underrated defensively, so he can replicate what Chelsea miss mobility-wise when Caicedo is not available, even if his on-ball quality is not quite as secure.
Pochettino's Spurs were so good because of their double pivot. It seems Chelsea will be similar..
Pochettino's Spurs were so good because of their double pivot. It seems Chelsea will be similar..
I could go through each position and assess the quality in Chelsea's squad (most of which is excellent), but what truly determines the short and long-term trajectory of the project is the quality of the system & squad building that has been done.
As a whole, it has been subpar..
As a whole, it has been subpar..
Very rarely do Chelsea sign bad players. If you look at their business done under Boehly or even during the tail-end of the Lampard, Tuchel, & Potter era, the club consistently signed good players.
The problem was the lack of specificity in the signings relative to a top tactic.
The problem was the lack of specificity in the signings relative to a top tactic.
This is undeniably less so the case than under Poch as it is clear where Caicedo, Lavia, Olise, and others will play in *his* system, but the squad building still hasn't been optimal.
They have signed lots of young players for big money when the first team isn't even ready yet.
They have signed lots of young players for big money when the first team isn't even ready yet.
Chelsea spent just under β¬80m on Ugochukwu, Washington, Paez, and Angelo.
Not only that, but the first-team signings haven't necessarily been incredibly obvious first team ceiling raisers. Olise is a great talent, but is there much of a difference between him and Madueke?
Not only that, but the first-team signings haven't necessarily been incredibly obvious first team ceiling raisers. Olise is a great talent, but is there much of a difference between him and Madueke?
The same can be applied to Robert Sanchez in comparison to Kepa, or Disasi as as replacement for the injured Fofana.
Are these guys end-game players that will start for the optimal version of Chelsea?
Similar can be applied to Lavia.
Chelsea have spent Β£60m on a back up #6...
Are these guys end-game players that will start for the optimal version of Chelsea?
Similar can be applied to Lavia.
Chelsea have spent Β£60m on a back up #6...
That type of expenditure cannot be excused when Chelsea's first XI still has holes in it. They don't have a natural #10 to play between the lines in their settled attacking structure.
Sanchez is their goalkeeper but he's not end-game material.
Β£900m spent, yet they need more...
Sanchez is their goalkeeper but he's not end-game material.
Β£900m spent, yet they need more...
Pep, Arteta, and Klopp have demonstrated in their successful rebuilds that the only way to conduct business is by replacing current first team players with end-game first team players (or at least ceiling raisers in the short-term if necessary).
Chelsea aren't focusing on that.
Chelsea aren't focusing on that.
What Chelsea are doing is stockpiling young talent when their first team isn't even set.
That means they are going to have to spend hundreds of millions on top of what they have already spent to reach 'end-game'.
There is an improvement under Poch vision-wise, but is it enough?
That means they are going to have to spend hundreds of millions on top of what they have already spent to reach 'end-game'.
There is an improvement under Poch vision-wise, but is it enough?
I'm pretty sure it's not. The squad building hasn't been good enough. Most of Chelsea's signings are good players that don't necessarily elevate the group massively in comparison to what they already have.
The goal after spending Β£900m (and likely more) shouldn't be 4th, either.
The goal after spending Β£900m (and likely more) shouldn't be 4th, either.
Arsenal have only spent Β£526m (or so) under Arteta and look where they are.
Klopp has also been at Liverpool for just under a decade and hasn't even spent that much.
With the money spent, Chelsea should be challenging for the title, but we all know that won't happen..
Klopp has also been at Liverpool for just under a decade and hasn't even spent that much.
With the money spent, Chelsea should be challenging for the title, but we all know that won't happen..
Pochettino and Chelsea will have a Lampard-esque first season at the club where things improved & there was excitement at the club, but next season there will be pressure to challenge at the top of the Premier League.
Will that occur?
The current process suggests that it won't.
Will that occur?
The current process suggests that it won't.
Pochettino's tactics may be vastly superior to those in which Potter and Lampard utilised, but will they prove to be so good that Chelsea compete with City, Arsenal and the other teams that will only further improve next season?
Currently, the evidence is that they won't be.
Currently, the evidence is that they won't be.
Although I am a fan of Chelsea's new structure on and off the ball, it is *not* 'end-game' material.
Attacking with one fullback high and wide on the flank is only possible if the team dominates the opposition via sustained pressure, otherwise the positional play isn't rigid.
Attacking with one fullback high and wide on the flank is only possible if the team dominates the opposition via sustained pressure, otherwise the positional play isn't rigid.
As Chelsea won't control games technically like City do, it means they will lack a natural wide outlet on the wing in transition as the fullback has to recover to defend deep.
Not only that, but even when James or Chilwell are high, they don't have the 1v1 skills of a winger..
Not only that, but even when James or Chilwell are high, they don't have the 1v1 skills of a winger..
When you combine that with the fact that Chelsea have a very direct set of profiles in attack and no natural #10, then it's clear that will result in lots of turnovers and Chelsea games will be quite chaotic.
The pressing schemes also require a lot of aggression.
The pressing schemes also require a lot of aggression.
Guys like Nkunku and Mudryk havenβt that showcased optimally so far work-rate wise, and that is a concern too despite their undeniable quality and talent.
If Chelsea leave the opposition with an overload in the build-up *and* lack intensity in the press then they will suffer.
If Chelsea leave the opposition with an overload in the build-up *and* lack intensity in the press then they will suffer.
However, despite noting all of this as clear concerns, I have still been impressed with Pochettino's tactics, and there is no reason why he can't eventually evolve and reach a stage where Chelsea attack with two wingers high and wide whilst improving the intensity of their press.
That's the end-goal for Pochettino, and if he wants to spend this season playing with Chilwell or James high before evolving into a superior system next season, then that approach makes sense in the short-run when considering Chelsea's lack of natural options between the lines.
The problem with that logic, though, is it is hypothetical and hopeful as Pochettino has never showcased the he has played that way in his entire career to date.
He may have that long-term plan in mind and improved tactically during his sabbatical, but we just don't know that.
He may have that long-term plan in mind and improved tactically during his sabbatical, but we just don't know that.
However, Pochettino is the least of Chelsea's concerns right now. He is one of the main reasons to be positive (even if his ceiling is uncertain).
The overall squad building and money spent, though, has been suboptimal, & with Β£900m spent, Chelsea should be way further advanced.
The overall squad building and money spent, though, has been suboptimal, & with Β£900m spent, Chelsea should be way further advanced.
Loading suggestions...