Frank Lampard is bookies favourite

[Jsim1986 149]

1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

Derby were in the playoffs the season before under Rowett so there was already a strong basis to build on. And despite all that "experience", contacts, and backroom he still couldn't get a consistent tune out of that Chelsea defence. A set of defenders that Tuchel turned into a formidable unit very quickly and got a Champions League out of them. Playing experience is not remotely the same as managerial experience. Otherwise Pirlo at Juve would have killed Serie A. The Zidane scenario is very rare indeed.

Agreed that there's no rocket science degree needed here though. Why replace a manager who was excellent at developing youth but usually had teams that were vulnerable in defence with a manager with less experience who appears to be fairly good at developing youth and definitely can't organise a defence?

Lampard is a potentially promising young manager, but he has similar flaws to Farke and on a bigger scale. The only thing he's ahead of Farke in is his level of playing experience and his contact list. He might be useful for Villa with their cash. He's not the man for us.

Why do people keep saying he failed at Derby and Chelsea, I see it as completely the opposite quite Frankly! 

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

Just now, Jsim1986 said:

Why do people keep saying he failed at Derby and Chelsea, I see it as completely the opposite quite Frankly! 

Who said he failed? They say he didn't do all that well. Tuchel's made it crystal clear how Lampard hasn't done that well as with the same team he's got a Champions League out of them and sorted out their Achilles heel, namely their defence, at the same time.

And that Derby side should really have been at the thick end of the title race. They had a settled team that came sixth the previous year under Rowett, added top-tier promising youngsters with Mount, Tomori and Wilson on loan, then got Ashley Cole in on a free halfway through the season for extra experience to reinforce the defence, and still only came sixth. That was twenty points (with only three fewer goals conceded) behind a Norwich side, cobbled together under Farke who had sold Maddison and everyone was wondering where the heck the creativity and indeed goals would come from.

Their subsequent collapse is due to their financial affairs catching up with them. That's mismanagement at board level.

 

[The Bristol Nest 513]

That.

[Google Bot 3,259]

1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

Agreed that there's no rocket science degree needed here though. Why replace a manager who was excellent at developing youth but usually had teams that were vulnerable in defence with a manager with less experience who appears to be fairly good at developing youth and definitely can't organise a defence?

Because we can't compete defensively in this league without resorting to a change of playing staff and taking the Burnley/Bruce/Big Sam route.  Look at our squad, The players in this league turn on you and it's in the back of the net in the blink of an eye, we need the replacement to focus on our threat, pressing and asking questions further up the pitch to prevent being overwhelmed

If we want to attract players of the quality to play football and defend resolutely you either pay in money we don't have, or you have an attracter at the club who can perhaps sway in our favour.

We currently have a wealth of midfielders here who need coaching in ball winning and retention, defensive vulnerabilities is something that's done over time as part of the entire management team, not just head coach.

This is something Lamps will get as he's been that team ripping us apart, but Farke never did, totally clueless.  No press whatsoever in a system which is screaming out for it, even bringing Sargent on who just sat out wide a million miles from anyone. That level of performance would not be accepted under a different regime.

Injury forced him into changes vs Burnley, but even then we completely fell apart in second half inviting pressure.

All we need is a manager who recognises that and isn't so hell bent on developing a style of play that precedes him and doesn't sit idle when it's going pear shape, 88 min subs when chasing the game vs Leeds?.   Lamps has the expectations as a winner, has the backroom to support him, and reputation that earns players respect and willingness to perform.    That's why you would replace for Farke.

Referring to him as "Farke-light" just shows your over willingness to place a shadow.  Using your comparative choice of words that Farke is "Excellent" at developing youth, but Lampard is only "Fairly good".  Farke is "vulnerable" defensively, but Lampard 'Definitely' can't organise defence really shows your bias.

If we're to play the word association game, we've currently got "Gilmour-lightweight", "Cantwell-Gone missing", "Tzolis-NaughtyStep", "Sorenssen-Wont be played" and "Dimi-Scapegoat" at the club after 4.5 years.  Hardly what I'd brand "Excellent".  That's why he's being replaced.

Edited November 10, 2021 by Google Bot

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

Referring to him as Farke-light is accurate. Two Championships against... what? Farke's development of youth - well, Maddison, Aarons, Godfrey, Lewis, Omobamidele, Buendia, Cantwell straight off the bat and we got a team with a backline barely over 20 into the top flight. Lampard is fairly good at this as we've not seen as much yet, but there is potential to go further. Sure, he's brought Mount, Abraham and James along, and also been formative with Tomori. Show me a couple more and he can go up a tier or two.

As for definitely being unable to organise a defence, his defensive record with Chelsea compared to Tuchel, with the same personnel, speaks volumes.

The only shadow being cast is Lampard's record compared to Farke. No-one has said Lampard is no good. They've simply said he's not in Farke's league as a manager based on what he's done so far. And when you say we need a press (where I do agree), then that's arguing for Knutsen over Lampard as his Bodo sides are relentless in it. Lampard's sides were often more ponderous.

[Ken Hairy 3,760]

A slight reminder for everyone knocking Lampard due to suggesting his manager record is poor (a harsh accusation imo), everyone said the same in the summer when Palace appointed Vieira. 

[Jsim1986 149]

5 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Referring to him as Farke-light is accurate. Two Championships against... what? Farke's development of youth - well, Maddison, Aarons, Godfrey, Lewis, Omobamidele, Buendia, Cantwell straight off the bat and we got a team with a backline barely over 20 into the top flight. Lampard is fairly good at this as we've not seen as much yet, but there is potential to go further. Sure, he's brought Mount, Abraham and James along, and also been formative with Tomori. Show me a couple more and he can go up a tier or two.

As for definitely being unable to organise a defence, his defensive record with Chelsea compared to Tuchel, with the same personnel, speaks volumes.

The only shadow being cast is Lampard's record compared to Farke. No-one has said Lampard is no good. They've simply said he's not in Farke's league as a manager based on what he's done so far. And when you say we need a press (where I do agree), then that's arguing for Knutsen over Lampard as his Bodo sides are relentless in it. Lampard's sides were often more ponderous.

Lampard got Chelsea in to the champions League under a transfer embargo, that is impressive when everyone else around you spent. The next year I feel a little sorry for him because there main signings that year in Havertz and Werner are still now squad players under Tuchel, Frank was under more pressure to play them as they were the main signings the club made. Where as Tuchel can easily discount them.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

7 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

A slight reminder for everyone knocking Lampard due to suggesting his manager record is poor (a harsh accusation imo), everyone said the same in the summer when Palace appointed Vieira. 

Worthington had a first job to forget when he was sacked at Blackpool.

Did a cracking job building a side on peanuts and taking us up.

Would have kept us up too if Neil Doncaster had loosened the purse strings in the summer and we'd not waited until January to bring in Dean Ashton.

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

4 minutes ago, Jsim1986 said:

Lampard got Chelsea in to the champions League under a transfer embargo, that is impressive when everyone else around you spent. The next year I feel a little sorry for him because there main signings that year in Havertz and Werner are still now squad players under Tuchel, Frank was under more pressure to play them as they were the main signings the club made. Where as Tuchel can easily discount them.

It's a good show, certainly, but they still had a tremendous amount of talent in that squad and several youngsters who transpired were good enough to make the leap when given their chance. Mount was, James was, Abraham looked like he could for a while and fell a little short, but still made the club plenty of money on his sale.

However, he's then had the option of putting his team together... and things took a tailspin. A tailspin that seemed rather easily remedied when Tuchel took the reins. Lampard's failings appeared similar to Farke there, as the likes of Rudiger were cast out and it's turned out he's probably their best defender!

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

3 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

It's a good show, certainly, but they still had a tremendous amount of talent in that squad and several youngsters who transpired were good enough to make the leap when given their chance. Mount was, James was, Abraham looked like he could for a while and fell a little short, but still made the club plenty of money on his sale.

However, he's then had the option of putting his team together... and things took a tailspin. A tailspin that seemed rather easily remedied when Tuchel took the reins. Lampard's failings appeared similar to Farke there, as the likes of Rudiger were cast out and it's turned out he's probably their best defender!

I very much doubt Werner and Havertz were Lampard signings.

Abramovich has always decided who to buy at Chelsea, it wasn't the manager of the day who wanted Fernando Torres.... it was Abramovich.

That said, similar problem here isn't it, with Webber signing a striker who can't shoot and then expecting Farke to win games.

 

Edited November 10, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

Look at those odds! 

[The Bristol Nest 513]

2 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Look at those odds! 

Hard to see past those odds...

[The Bristol Nest 513]

It appears that bookies knew from the beginning. No smokescreen after all.