Will Andre Villas-Boas be a success at Chelsea?
WHEN you begin to break it down, as Arsene Wenger once said, the very essence of football management is enforcing your will on the aspects you can control and hoping it’s enough to have sufficient effect. There are no sure things. Far too many variables.
For a brief period, though, Chelsea employed the surest thing in modern management. Such was the meticulousness of Jose Mourinho’s preparation allied to his razor-sharp football mind, that his Stamford Bridge team left as little to chance as possible. They may have been a very methodical side. But it’s no surprise that their point hauls in the victorious 2004-05 and 2005-06 seasons remain the highest in English history.
It’s also no surprise that Chelsea’s new manager, Andre Villas-Boas, is drawing so many superficial comparisons with his predecessor. In reality, of course, there are deeper differences. And one potentially crucial one: Villas-Boas might be an even surer thing than Mourinho.
Take the evidence from his first season and a half as a full-time manager. On taking over winless Academica in October 2009, Villas-Boas guided them from near-certain relegation to the safety of 11th place.
Second, there was a display of outright domination. It’s hard to think of a club’s season that has been as emphatic as Porto’s in 2010-11. Not only did they win every single trophy available, they did so without losing a domestic game and claimed the league by a record margin.
Granted, 20 months in full-time management still isn’t enough to make any definite proclamations. Unlike Mourinho, Villas-Boas won’t get the opportunity to prove his prowess by repeating his feats against the higher-quality competition of the Champions League (although it shouldn’t be forgotten his Porto put 10 goals past Spartak Moscow and seven past Villarreal).
But it’s not just about the numbers. It’s the performances. Like Mourinho, Villas-Boas leaves as little to chance as possible. He probably takes things further.
For a start, Villas-Boas was placed in charge of the scouting system that formed the crux of Mourinho’s approach at Chelsea. Remember that dossier about Newcastle that did the rounds in the 2004-05 season? That was Villas-Boas’s work. All of his teams are going to be equipped with an unprecedented attention to detail.
On top of that is extreme man-management ability. As goalkeeper Beto said of the team talk before the Europa League final: “It was so moving it brought tears to my eyes. Every player left that room sure we would win.”
But the clearest example of how he leaves a minimum to chance comes on the pitch. Villas-Boas’s teams play every game on their terms. The manager insisted as much in Dublin when he lionised the Barcelona approach. By attempting to play high up the pitch, Villas-Boas’s teams control both the ball and the space, leaving little to chance... not to mention 145 goals last season. It’s the kind of adventure Roman Abramovich has craved. It’s also the kind of refreshment that Chelsea’s old guard might need. Indeed, the team’s fixed approach partly explained why Fernando Torres struggled so badly. At Porto, Villas-Boas turned Hulk from a solid striker into a superstar by subtly altering his approach and position. One wonders what he can do for Torres. But there’s no question what he can do for Chelsea.
DESTINY evidently has André Villas-Boas marked down as a winner.
At 33, the alchemist’s apprentice has already acquired the formula and all he touches seems to turn to silver, if not gold. His CV is already among the best in the business.
The doubts about his appointment as Chelsea manager do not concern his credentials or his potential. They are whether his success last season came too easily to be wholly convincing and whether the job he has now taken on requires someone with more experience of management, rather than coaching.
Portugal’s Liga is not a pushover but it is not that demanding a challenge, especially if you are managing Porto.
They have won it 14 times in the last 20 years, including five of the last six. Porto are also one of Europe’s best-run clubs whereas both their main rivals, Benfica and Sporting, have been beset with boardroom rivalries and financial problems.
Porto’s success in Europe as well as at home may have been what excited Roman Abramovich, particularly the defeat of the two Moscow clubs, CSKA and Spartak. But how significant is that Europa League win? Some quite modest teams have reached the final in recent years.
To win the trophy Porto played 17 matches, drawing against Besiktas in the group stage and losing twice to Spanish clubs in the knockout rounds. The goals rattled in — 47 in all — but it’s fair to say the opposition was weak, with the exception of Villarreal in the semi-final.
In the final Porto played out a cautious 1-0 against Braga — who finished 38 points behind them in the league.
So although that record-breaking treble is impressive it may not mean too much in the context of a Premier League challenge that involves 38 games, rather than 30 in the Liga, and very few guaranteed three-pointers.
Villas-Boas is of course well aware of that himself, having spent three years as opposition analyst for José Mourinho. But balancing the different demands of English and European football will be an entirely new challenge.
The challenge on the pitch is big enough, but Villas-Boas will be taking on a major challenge off the pitch as well: reshaping the squad and renewing the spine of the side. John Terry, Frank Lampard and Didier Drogba have played such a huge part in Chelsea’s success that it seems almost impossible to visualise the team without them, but that time is approaching — if not immediately then at some stage over the next two years.
Changing the spine of a team is an art that is learned from experience. Arsene Wenger did it at Arsenal, Bob Paisley did it at Liverpool. Alex Ferguson has done it several times at Manchester United.
This will be a step into the unknown for a young man already facing a huge step up in his career, especially as it seems Chelsea have decided against providing him with a mentor. Villas-Boas has been appointed as manager, unlike Carlo Ancelotti who was head coach, which implies the club have decided against employing a director of football, although that could change.
Much will depend on whether Villas-Boas is allowed to shape his own management team, but it is a high-risk strategy. Should he match up to the challenge both on and off the pitch it will be more than just special.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
