I do not think CHO and no Mount is an overall positive for CFC. Mount is not a winger true, but CHO is not a CFC level footballer at this point in his career. CFC basically panicked and was scared to let a possible Sancho got to Germany and blow up, so they signed him to a ridiculous contract for his skill level. IMO CHO has some skillz and a bit of game that needs to grow and get more refined.There may be a CL level player there, we shall have to wait and see. He is an expensive sub but he is useful in spots. I don't think supah Frank Lampard makes many concessions to people because of "talent." He may overlook some flaws for players that play their spot the way he wants it played.The philosophical about whether that is correct man management with professional players notwithstanding, I think it is Frank's style.
Problem with Mount is that he’s an AM who thinks he’s a winger. I’ve seen people complain about Alonso not passing to Pulisic but Mount is worse. Not only does he not pass to CP except as a last resort he’s also always running into his space, making the same runs, or generally just clogging things up without adding any creativity. Lampard likes him for his hustle but Havertz wasn’t brought in to play the wing.
Please stop with the "Mount won't pass to Pulisic" nonsense. They are friends FFS. The two of them, along with Tomori and Tammy, went on vacation to Greece together! I guarantee that wouldn't have happened if they have problems with each other, on or off of the field... https://www.thechelseachronicle.com/club-news/four-chelsea-stars-spend-holiday-together-in-greece/
Wait. You mean Reyna and Pulisic aren't jealous of one another and fighting to play the same position on our national team? But that's what I read on this forum. It's never lied to me before!
Didn't CHO also have a...problematic lockdown period? If the reports about him getting into trouble and also breaking lockdown were true, that could lead to the coaching staff cooling on him.
Munich are really good at finding undervalued/underused/underdeveloped talent and getting them for good prices. See: Gnabry, Serge.
The problem the coaching staff has with him is his lack of productivity. Lampard has shown little patience with his attacking players. You get maybe two bad games before you are benched. Then the next man up gets maybe two games to produce. It lit a fire under Pulisic. So far, it has not done the same for CHO. But if he ever does produce consistently his professionalism will not be questioned.
Sports are replete with examples of teams thinking a change of scenery will benefit a precocious talent.
You apparently haven't seen the documentary involving Bill Parcells and Lawrence Taylor recounting these issues. Nor have you accepted at face value my later posts. I suppose that's normal in these debates; everyone thinks the other person has some ulterior motive. Oh well.
That is just a more detailed way of saying that, in your view, you think his net benefits (over 90 min) < Mount's (at the AM position). We just disagree on that, which is fine.
There's some interesting stuff on this point in the Amazon Prime documentary series on Tottenham, which I have been binge-watching.
It’s fine but I’ll tell you this. I guarantee I’ve watched much much more of them then you have as a Chelsea fan. Mount leaves a lot to desired offensively from the wing in 1v1 situations but he still contributes. Cho when played can be electric or completely non existent and down right detrimental. If your ass was on the line I’d wager you’d pick the player that’s not going to potential lose you games and your job. There’s also a lot of talk about Cho having off field issue or need for growth more accurately. All of that also plays a massive role.
When in doubt, appeal to one's own (assumed) authority. What else can you tell me about me? Can't we just respectfully disagree?
I watched it and it was great. But they should change the name from All or Nothing to Lunch with Levy.
Yeah, he is prominent. But I found the Mourinho-Players relationships to be the most compelling parts. I'm only through Part 4 so far, though. The Danny Rose meeting was especially interesting. I am assuming some of these guys eventually forgot the cameras were there.
lol I’m not appealing to any authority. I have more data points to work off of than you. Which is all I’m highlighting. We can absolutely respectfully disagree. Not sure where I’ve been disrespectful. Just point out that you’re you’re looking at it purely from a hypothetical point of view and not taking into account a lot of variables that actually go into. Some which we can see and some which we have to speculate on.
I think it's more likely some of those players knew damn well the cameras were there. It gets better with each episode, though it does end rather abruptly (Covid may have limited access somewhat). The Danny Rose incident is nothing compared to some of the stuff between players in the latter episodes. They really did have a rough year, with manager changes, injuries, Covid, etc. And as Mourinho likes to say, they played too much of the season as nice guys when they needed to become bastards. With what they are doing in the market now, Spurs will make it even harder for Chelsea to finish top 4. The premier league will be crazy competitive for the top 4 this year I think.
I haven’t missed a game in years (If I don’t watch live I go back and watch) and I also watched Mount (and Tomori) at Derby and Cho while in the youth side. Im not a gambling man but I’d wager I’ve watched more Chelsea than you have. I’m a Chelsea fan. I suspect you haven’t watched that closely based on your comments. If I’m wrong tho please feel free to correct me. We can disagree that’s completely fine. I’m simply imploring you to look past the hypothetical argument you’re making (Lawrence Taylor and Manny as examples) and look at the context of this specific situation.