Why would anyone want to manage Chelsea?

The media have memories that rival fish for short-termedness. A little over six months ago, in October or whenever it was, they took great pleasure in relaying the events of Stamford Bridge. With barely unrestrained glee, they reported that Chelsea had sacked the most successful coach they ever had in Jose Mourinho and replaced him with the owner's friend, Avram Grant, a man whose claim to fame was moderate success with Isreal's national team. It was him who led Isreal to going unbeaten in the 2006 world cup qualifying group which is not bad given that the likes of France were in the group. A man who, they reported with comical incredulity, didn't even have the requisite UEFA qualifications.

Six months on and they are once again incredulous, and rubbing their collective chins sadly at the dismissal of a man who they depict as dignified etc etc. A man they criticised in the aftermath of the Carling Cup final for not having the tactical know-how to outwit his counterpart and for not having any guts to make the changes that might offend the big egos in his team. They criticised him for not being witty like Jose, for world hunger, for...well you get the picture. All of a sudden, a slick PR exercise, his father (not him, mind you) survived the holocaust dontchaknow. Grant suddenly became the sympathetic character who despite great tragedy in his life had managed to become a man on the brink of greatness whereas before he was a bumbling fool likened to Baron Silas Greenback from the DangerMouse cartoons. I do a great Baron Silas by the way..."Excellent, Stiletto". I love that character, with his little caterpillar, Nero. Sigh, they don't make cartoons like they used to.

I don't know how I feel about this dismissal, I don't think its exactly fair, but I can see the reasons. On the one hand, Grant is not the person who will bring the attractive football that Abramovich claims. On the other, it is possible he might have if he could have brought his own players in. Remember that the players for Chelsea this season were all Mourinho's players (ok maybe not Shevchenko). It was Mourinho's decision to not buy any flair players and to slowly strip the flair of players like Joe Cole or curbed their attacking instincts like Ca$hley. It was foolish for Abramovich to expect players who'd played one way for 4 years almost, to suddenly change their style.

Speaking of Mourinho, he showed what classy individual he is with his 'Philosophy of a loser' comments. My favourite part of the whole quote was his whole '2 titles a season' comment. That's right people, the Carling Cup and Community Shield are now valid titles on par with the league and champions league. I even look down on Chelsea's FA Cup win as literally the only hard sides they played in that Cup run were Blackburn and Manchester United in the semis and final respectively. And it is arguable that Chelsea were only really ahead in the league despite all their spending because no one really managed to step up and challenge them and once Manchester United woke up from their slumber; once Cristiano Ronaldo got an end product the results were present for all to see. Way to go, Jose- the luckiest manager alive.

As for Chelsea, the usual suspects are being bandied about. Hiddink because he is friends with Abramovich even though his agent reportedly has removed links. Mark Hughes is another name being mentioned. I think this would be a good choice. He's a former Chelsea favourite, and his teams while a bit thuggish, play ok football. He's also shown that he can find real gems for a good price. 6 million for McCarthy and Santa Cruz in 2 seasons, plus other players like Ryan Nelsen mean that he has a good eye of a player. Funds of course won't be a problem at Chelsea although the Abramovich camp has recently been pretty open about reminding all and sundry that the money he's spending is actually an interest free loan. It also remains to be seen what Hughes would do when faced with the biggest egos in the world. That said, he managed to keep the likes of Bellamy in line both at Blackburn and Wales so who knows. Roberto Mancini rounds up the favourites (at least according to Football365).

Alternatively, they might wait until after the Euros when some more big name coaches should be seeking employment. The big question is why anyone would want to go to Chelsea when a season that ended with them coming so close to silverware results in a sacking for the manager. A manager who was a few inches from almost delivering the trophy his Special predecessor never could with a team that wasn't really his.

Then you have the recent rumour, 50 million pounds for Fernando Torres. This for me might be the main thing that would keep managers from taking the job. What if he doesn't fit into the new managers game plan? A continental manager who is used to working under a Sporting/Football Director might be the way to go for Chelsea but even then I think the manager has some say in who he wants as far as the team goes. Frank Arnesen and the new manager would still have to meet to decide the kind of players that would fit into that manager's tactics. The Torres rumours just show that the coach is expendable and that Abramovich is going to be in charge. I don't know if the top managers are ready to work in a situation like that. Even the well known chairmen like Moratti, Berlusconi, Perez and Aulas give their managers a certain level of independence. And people like Moratti and Berlusconi have been in the game for years anyway so their opinion at least has some merit, if only a fraction- Abramovich only just came to football in 2003.

I pity true Chelsea fans, not the plastic fans who were Arsenal fans until December 2004, and manchester united fans for the previous five years but the ones who had to deal with the likes of Jokanovic, Lambourde. The fans who remember that their dodgy right back was Frank Sinclair, but that's ok he didn't cost 13.2 million. They thought they had a sensible new owner who let splashed the cash and let the club be run properly, who left the managing to the manager. They probably shook their heads at the goings on at Hearts, with their own Russian (Lithuanian) chairman, Vladimir Romanov.

Abramovich has proven himself to be just as bad as Romanov if not worse than the Lithuanian. At least Romanov talks to the press, and attempts to defend his actions or explain his rationale behind them even if it makes no sense to anybody (his Monkey rant for example).

Abramovich's one saving grace is that the amount of money (on a far greater scale than Romanov) he's ploughed into the club means that despite his best efforts Chelsea will remain successful on the pitch.