• Current Donation Goals

Harvz

Transfer Talk Topic

Recommended Posts

Compared with some, yes. But mostly not. If you think back to the sides fo the 60s, (Docs Diamonds and that), they largely came out of our own academy with a few add-ons. The likes of Venables, Hudson, Bonetti, the Harrises and so on. Osgood came a little later but was still quite young.Hutch we got from Derby. The pattern was to augment them with players from other sides (Cooke, Macreadie, etc.) In the 70s and 80s, we continued to base our sides on our own players (Wilkins, Langley, Walker, Fillery) but still augmenting them with what we needed form elsewhere. The likes of Dixon, Nevin and Speedie were brought in. But, I think its since the 90s that we started buying more. I think the academy went into the doldrums because it was under-funded. Players were brought in from other clubs, and later on, across the continent. Often they were players toward the end of their careers.

Hutch was born in Derby, but we got him from non-league Cambridge United. Ossie was also non-league and a teenager when he arrived.

Yes we did spend a bit after John Neal kept us up and suddenly McLoughlin, Dixon and Nevin (and most of all IMO Spackman) all arrived at once. But it was still a 2nd division team spending 2nd division money buying players for a maximum of £200k. Spackman cost just £40k. The first £1 million transfer had happened 4 years earlier.

Edited by Droy was my hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kev61   

To claim he's dismantling teams or can't build teams long-term though is about as ridiculous as it gets.

How can you back up that statement?.He has never built a team.Porto yes,a great conclusion to the cl,a tad lucky against utd don't you think?.napolean Said he would rather have a lucky general than a good one.do we have the formative?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you back up that statement?.He has never built a team.Porto yes,a great conclusion to the cl,a tad lucky against utd don't you think?.napolean Said he would rather have a lucky general than a good one.do we have the formative?

How I can back up that statement? Let's see...

He built a great team at Porto, winning the UEFA Cup in 2003 and the CL in 2004. He did it on a shoestring with Portuguese players and cheap Brazilians. He didn't dismantle that team at all but moved to a bigger job with Chelsea.

At Chelsea he immediately won our first league title in 50 years and also made it a double for good measure. In the three full seasons with us he won 5 titles - 2PL, 2 League Cups and a FA Cup. He didn't dismantle that team either, rather that team continued it's success with the core of the 2012 CL winning squad being Mourinhos old boys.

When he left Chelsea, he went to Italy, Of course, he won the Serie A in his first attempt but Europe had alluded the Italians for a long time (since 1962 actually). He sold their best player despite having a fantastic relationship with him and again built the best team in Europe for that money. He didn't dismantle Inter either, he left for Real Madrid. Benitez was responsible for dismantling them and he did it in record time - 6 months.

After coming to Madrid he finished second against the "best team the planet had ever seen" but finally made them progress past a CL QF which had not happened for quite a while. The season after he won La Liga in record style (still competing with the "best team this planet has ever seen"). He left after his third season (again taking them to CL semis - three seasons in a row). The team he left for Ancelotti was more or less the same squad that won it's 10th CL title.

He then came back here and took over a team of softies and pretenders that had not managed a better position than 3rd on the PL for a number of years. He sold the pretenders and swapped them for winners. He did it while making money for the club and won the PL and League Cup in his second season - something we hadn't been close doing since 2009/10.

Your turn now. Show me what team he "dismantled". Show me what team he didn't manage to build.

Edited by Sleeping Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To claim he's dismantling teams or can't build teams long-term though is about as ridiculous as it gets.

How can you back up that statement?.He has never built a team.Porto yes,a great conclusion to the cl,a tad lucky against utd don't you think?.napolean Said he would rather have a lucky general than a good one.do we have the formative?

Just check the record books of the teams he managed for the periods before and after he was there.

Chelsea 2007-2010 was one hell of a side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and our 2012 side was dubbed the "Last roar of Mourinho". The core carried us through several managers, largely those that were not good enough.

JT and Lamps were pre Jose, but he arguably made them into the super stars they were. Cech, Cole, Drogba, Mikel, Kalou, Malouda, Ferreira and Essien were all in the 18 man squad, all Jose purchases. 5 of the starting 11 were.

Edited by Curtis Brand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cech, Cole, Drogba, Mikel, Kalou, Malouda, Ferreira and Essien were all in the 18 man squad, all Jose purchases. 5 of the starting 11 were.

Cech was purchased on Ranieri's watch, not Mourinho's. The January window of what turned out to be Ranieri's last season at Chelsea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cech was purchased on Ranieri's watch, not Mourinho's. The January window of what turned out to be Ranieri's last season at Chelsea.

I don't want to discredit Ranieri, because he seems a genuinely fantastic man with dignity and good manners. An old school southern italian:)

When we knocked out Arsenal I cried a bit after seeing how much it meant to Claudio. I was very upset when he got fired but that quite quickly changed;)!

But there have been murmurs that Ranieri wasn't responsible for either Cech or Robben as Roman and the club knew he was on his way out regardless. That leaves two options - the club itself or Jose.

I think we can safely assume it wasn't Jose as I doubt the club had him tied up by that time. So for me, the logical choice must be someone within the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard the idiocy that Mourinho doesn't build for the 'long term' (whatever that is, seems to change depending on who is saying it) plenty of times and it's usually too pathologically ingrained to bother arguing against. But I've never heard he 'dismantles' teams ... I thought he didn't stay anywhere long enough?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jay Seal   

I've heard the idiocy that Mourinho doesn't build for the 'long term' (whatever that is, seems to change depending on who is saying it) plenty of times and it's usually too pathologically ingrained to bother arguing against. But I've never heard he 'dismantles' teams ... I thought he didn't stay anywhere long enough?!

Probably a question of semantics but I suppose he has to dismantle teams a little or it's hard to suggest he builds a new one. That being said, you'd be hard pressed to find an actual example of this being a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But there have been murmurs that Ranieri wasn't responsible for either Cech or Robben as Roman and the club knew he was on his way out regardless. That leaves two options - the club itself or Jose.

I think we can safely assume it wasn't Jose as I doubt the club had him tied up by that time. So for me, the logical choice must be someone within the club.

I thought it was generally understood that they were on the Man U shopping list that Kenyon still had in his back pocked when he arrived in 2003 - so we nipped in quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now