Sleeping Dave

We can easily play 343 with a very attacking outlook but it's not sustainable because we don't have the numbers. Untilnwe have 5 serious AMs and 3 strikers it's merely an academic discussion. We are 3 players short (4 if you accept Bats is useless).

From your armchair, four years on. Why even bother Paul? You know what it takes for a player to play, he just didn't deliver.

Oh I'm not saying that the claim doesn't have merit. I do think that both Mourinho and Conte think they didn't have enough say or that the money men (woman) were too tight with money/we were too slow to close deals/whatever. I'm also fairly certain that Emenalo and (mainly) his scouts were responsible for keeping tabs on players across the continent so that they could add alternatives to the names the manager had identified. My perception of how this works (contacts with the scouting network at Chelsea through a friend in the business, reading beween the lines in interviews and connecting the dots with some logical reasoning) is that the club (Marina and her team) communicates what money the manager can spend. We have seen the loan army generating considerable funds over the last two summers. I imagine that goes into the pot of funds available. We should also remember the amortisation of player cost (transfer fee) plus wages which can be a considerable amount for a player like Morata. Then I imagine that the manager/first team coach and Emenalo talk about the squad on an on-going basis to identify areas where we need to buy outside talent. I imagine that both Conte and Emenalo proposes names to the list and that they simply rank them from top to bottom based on who's the first choice etc. Emenalo's names coming from the vast player database the Chelsea scouting team has amassed over the years while Conte's names comes from his experience of them in some way. Then the list is given to Marina and her team who then proceed, with or without help from Emenalo (some conflicting stories on this one - but the most common idea is that Emenalo has an active role in some negotiations with agents) while the manager/first team coach has nothing to do with this process unless it's to contact the player and convince him he's in his plans (Fabregas and Costa examples of this). I imagine that we negotiate with multiple parties for the same squad role in order to play them out over one another to get the best value. I also think that this is the reason why we leave it quite late in the windows these days. A strategy that isn't working great to be fair in this sellers market. Anyhow, that's my picture of this this works. Well worked to be honest, Emenalo isn't here so I'm not sure if there's anyone proposing names to Contes targets for the coming window. Or if that had already been done by Emenalo before he left. Maybe I'm off my rocker. Maybe I'm right or perhaps somewhere in between. But I'm fairly certain that the manager has a big say in who the actual targets are. Just look at the players we've bought since Conte signed. Alonso? Morata? Zappcosta? All three has Conte written all over it. Luiz, Bats, Kante, Drinkwater, Bakayoko fees more like "Emenalo" signings (for lack of a better word). Applying it to previous signings/managers... Scolari and Deco. Mourinho and Drogba/Carvalho/Ferreira/Tiago etc etc.

Emenalo got flack because he was ultimately responsible for the recruitment at the club. That much is clear. Was he alone? No of course not, Marina would have been telling the manager and Emenalo what funds were available and then Emenalo and his scouts would find the targets we should go after. Recruitment, the loan army and the scouting was his responsibilities. Not sure why people claim it's unclear. Conte keeps saying a lot of things that isn't necessarily relevant - like he doesn't have a big enough squad (while not using the players he does have in the first place). But maybe you are right. Maybe Emenalo had nothing to do with signings and maybe Conte (or whoever is the manager) doesn't either. I suppose it's Bruce Buck and Marina who travels around the world to find our next player. Or not.

So did JM. How many here are blaming the club for selling Lukaku, Salah or KDB? No one is the answer. Of course the manager has a say in who's signed and who's sold. Just because JM didn't want to sell them, doesn't mean he didn't agree to let them go after they made their feelings known.

Yes, yes of course. It's a no-brainer.

No I'm not. I just disagree with you. But everything has to be agenda-driven to you doesn't it? Chalobah has been our brightest academy product for years. He showed he was good enough (clearly good enough) to be a squad player for us. We didn't have any need to buy another CM and the only reason why we did was because we let go of Chalobah and Matic. Conte could have said to Nate that you'll be 4th choice CM and I'll play three DMs regularly. That would have meant playing time for him. Even in the 343 Nate would have gotten time as long as Conte would have decided to actually use his squad - something he still doesn't do while bitching about having a small squad. But Conte didn't want that did he? He wanted to send Nate on another pointless loan and obviously Nate didn't want part of that since he had already showed his credentials. You don't transfer and become a starting player for a mid-table team if you're not PL ready - he clearly is and PL ready players is something we don't really have an abundance of is it? Keeping Nate would have saved us at least £40m that we could have used for buying an attacker. Instead we have gotten rid of two academy products that are PL players and players that would be comparably cheap in salary. It's a derivative of the inane strategy of stock-piling CBs and DMs for no reason at all. Nothing you say will make me change my mind on this. It's a huge Conte blunder and a blunder that has had a big impact on the squad composition. Add Matic, Costa and very likely Luiz and a pattern starts to emerge. Next in line is surely Willian and maybe even Pedro. Why should they be content to sit on the bench when they are among our best players? I'm sure Conte will find a suitable DM and CB to replace them with. Edit: Regarding Ake - how can he be 6th choice CB when we only have five? Could we have saved £70m by not buying Bakayoko/Drinkwater and Rudiger? How much have those players actually played and could the £70m we spent on them have been spent on attacking players? How much has Drinkwater and Rudiger actually played and have either contributed more than Ake and Nate would have done and is that improvement (if any!) really worth £70m? The bleeding obvious answer is yes - £70m could have been spent much better and no, Rudiger and Drinkwater isn't £70m plus much higher wages better than Ake and Nate. It's hysterical cause you are the one who complains we don't spend enough. Maybe Conte should spend money on players who make a difference and keep the cheap PL players we already have. That's how you build a proper squad - not by replacing average players with other, much more expensive average players.

You know it's not the same thing at all. Conte didn't want to keep Chalobah - he wanted to send him on his what, 7th loan despite showing he was good enough to play for us. Its not the same situation. Ake the same. These are academy products. Of course they'd stayed if they thought they'd be squad players. But said players hardly play in a Conte squad - just ask Willian, Pedro or Bats. Or Drinkwater!

True - Luiz was spectacular last season as the CB in a middle three. Essentially the position is perfect for him. He gets time on the ball, doesn't have to man-mark anyone and is controlling the build-up phase from the back. Problem for Luiz is that Christensen quite clearly showed from day one that he is the future. He backed up his talent and promise with performances on the pitch. It would be criminal to play Luiz ahead of Christensen although I'd be sad to see him (Luiz) leave. But maybe he's too expensive to be a back-up CB and selling him would probably be the right thing to do (as long as the fee is re-invested in an AM and not another CB/DM).

Of course, makes sense now haha. I thought you were just listing various players and not started by "hey Dave listen" kind of thing. Agreed - no need to choose. The club has done that for us already and someday someone else will be chosen instead of Conte.

It's universal knowledge that both KDB and Lukaku left against the managers wishes. Both players and the manager has consistently told the same story. Lukaku reiterated them when he signed for United last summer. I find it hard to believe all three would lie about it. Mainly because they'd have no reason to do so.

You are just randomply plucking names out of a hat. Rashford is a much better player today compared to when José took over. Smalling? He was always useless and I have no idea who Dave is. But considering that José has improved United from 1.61 pts/game after 18 games in 2015-16 to 2.28 pts/game after 18 games in 2017-18 he must be doing something right. Let's turn it around - who has Conte improved at Chelsea? You say Bats? Seriously? Honestly, and I say this as a Conte fan, the only player Conte has improved is Moses and he was just placed in a new position. I don't think there is a single player that Conte has tangibly improved. Certainly none of the attacking players at the club during his stint. Not a single midfielder. Courtois? No. Defense? Maybe, just maybe Azpilicueta and then finding Moses a new position. I don't think you hate Mourinho because you like Conte. I like Conte and Mourinho. But when you say stuff like you do above it's hard to draw any other conclusion that your hate for Mourinho clouds your judgement. As for KDB - I agree he has something. I always thought he was a special talent. Just not a talent that can function properly in a side that is built on team work and his own work rate is very average. In a side like City, that has so much attacking talent that it's impossible to close one or two outlets down (because they have 5 others that can hurt you) it's a slightly different prospect. He gets time and space on the ball because his team mates are so good in their own right. If Hazard played for City he'd be scoring bucket loads of goals. Look at someone like Sterling. He's nowhere near Hazards level yet he's scoring for fun in that City side - ditto Jesus. I don't think he's all that but he's got a nose for finding the goal and playing for City he'll get a handful of chances per game. Regarding Bats... He's just as useless today as he was when he was signed. I can't see any improvement whatsoever and I don't think Conte sees it either considering he's got a grand total of 469 PL minutes over a season and a half. That's roughly 5 full PL games in 16 months. Roughly what KDB amassed in his first 6 weeks at the club. Yet your conclusion is that KDB never got a chance here while Conte is improving Bats. It's hard to have a sensible discussion about this (as I hope you can see from the last example).

So. Jose hasn't improved players at United then? Any other season and they'd likely be top (or within touching distance to the leaders). Almost as good as Fergies last season at this stage. And since we are talking about one player which you so bluntly manages to transform to "Jose never do this" based on KDB, should we draw the conclusion that Conte can't improve players because Bats is just as useless as he's been day one without giving him proper opportunities to develop?

So what type of player has Jose discarded at United? What creative player has he sold? Your post and conclusion is lazy and full of myths. Sorry to say, but there's no other conclusion to make. 20-20 is very easy - you are second guessing one of the worlds best manager 4 years after the decision was made. Surely you can see how stupid that is? KDB started our first three games, didn't perform and was ousted by a player that performed better. Basically what happens at all clubs evertyday of the year. When he was given chances he didn't perform while his competitors did. It really isn't difficult. The nail was surely the LC game away to Swindon where he was comfortably the worst player on the pitch. On that showing he wouldn't be a starter for Swindon let alone Chelsea. I remember that game well because I absolutely slaughtered him after that performance. It was pitiful and he basically said through his performance that he wasn't up for it. Took him two and a half years to get to an acceptable level. If you think any Chelsea manager can play an underperforming player for 2,5 years you must have been sleeping since 2003.

Yes REALLY Michael. there's not even guesswork needed. Just plain good old reading what player and manager said at the time when he left. But you seem intent on ignoring that and making up your own truth. I won't stop you as it seems important to you.