Pep Guardiola is a man that for sure has revolutionized the idea of good football. His renowned Tika-Taka football is craved and adored by one too many individuals all around the footballing universe. Found and developed by the La Masia, Pep Guardiola is Barcelona in and out. He understands the quality of the academy products of the club and used it to impressive effectiveness. Pep has also effectively lifted Barcelona to a height that many consider them to be a level above any other team in Europe. So it can only be understandable that Roman wanted Pep to take over reign at Chelsea.
Unfortunately for Roman Abramovich, on the 16th January, Bayern Munich confirmed the former Barcelona boss as the new Bayern Munich manager, effective after the current season ends. Pep Guardiola signed a three year contract with the German giants. So what does this mean for Chelsea, is the loss of the Spaniard tactician a curse or a blessing for the London giants?
The Negatives of Losing Pep Guardiola to Bayern Munich:
1) Pep Guardiola is a man who only bought players that were a necessity. He hardly bought players just for the sake of buying. The rest of the team was usually build from the La Masia, which provided him with excellent quality players.
2) If that would be the same approach by the Spaniard, the kinds of Nathan Ake, Patrick Bamford, PVA, Chalobah, Loftus Cheek, Lucas Piazon, Islam Feruz, Billy and Conor Clifford, Lalkovic and many other could had been the new face of Chelsea.
3) The idea of maybe one day seeing a full Chelsea Academy products lining up for Chelsea is a dream I would have really loved to see.
4) And then, of course, he would had implemented the ‘Beautiful Football’ technique in Chelsea that Roman Abramovich had always wanted to see.
The Positives of Losing Pep Guardiola to Bayern Munich:
1) Pep Guardiola’s football philosophy lied in his idea of pass, pass and pass. He never once opted to change this strategy, not against the best teams. He only wanted his team to play with more possession, with more passes and with more beauty.
2) No Plan B: Against Chelsea, he clearly understood that the pass – possession tactic wasn’t working against the rather defensively concentrating Chelsea side. Still, he never once asked his players to change their playing style, and deliver more crosses into the box. And everyone knows what the outcome of that match was.
3) A team build to run smooth: Moreover, the team of Barcelona had a spirit of unity among themselves. They were buttery smooth, and I always believed that the team could perform well, even if the manager decides to take a day off on a match day. So that doesn’t mean that Pep’s philosophy will work with every team. Chelsea are currently in a transition period, and even with the kinds of Hazard, Mata, Oscar, Moses, Marin and others impressively gelling together well, they are not the natural leaders on the pitch. And that is a matter of concern as the manager’s role is clearly important.
4) Chelsea is not Barcelona: The plusses of Guardiola at Barcelona was that the players idolized him as a legend for the club. This gave them an extra moral edge when it came to trusting the Spaniards judgments. Chelsea is not at the same wavelength, he is just another man who would had attempted to manage the club, and maybe his ideas wouldn’t be of much impact on the players.
5) Messi – Iniesta – Xavi factor: Guardiola’s team had been built around these three players. And with each of them at their peak, it cannot be easily underlined as to whether the Barcelona progress was owing to Pep’s brilliance or these trio’s magic.
6) Lastly, bringing in Pep Guardiola means he will try to raid Barca’s youth academy for new players, wouldn’t that mean it would be an insult to our own academy? Would be a whole different story if he would have managed to utilize our academy to the same efficiency.
Call me over-optimistic, but I always like to look at the positives at every event and so maybe I would had purposely ignored a few points. But you never know, maybe Pep Guardiola and Chelsea FC was never meant to be a part of each other, and that is what the benefit of both parties lied in.
Do let me know what you guys think below.