Maybe Hazard isn't doing that, but don't be surprised if there are players in the game who are doing that. I think it's the wrong thing to do, but I think it's naive to think that it doesn't happen and hasn't happened a lot. Managers make a huge difference. Not to turn this into a BarÃ§a discussion, but the results with nearly the same players at BarÃ§a but with different managers speaks volumes. Some managers simply get the best out of players or the majority of players while some don't. I look back at Ronaldinho who was the best player in the World and who simply partied his way out of that position. Had Guardiola been in charge two years sooner, all other things being the same in terms of his managerial experience, that would have never happened. This isn't to say that Mourinho doesn't get the best out of his players the majority of the time, but even when things are going well players can stop performing. And let's face it, things aren't going well for Chelsea at the moment. I think there's something to having the right players that fit into your tactics as well. Chelsea aren't bereft of them, but I think they could improve on a few. I also think there's something to morale as Edonator mentioned and a lot of that can come from results. Chelsea aren't getting results at the moment like they're accustomed and Mourinho doesn't strike me as someone to pick up the players and get them out of a rut. Still to perhaps add to your point, I think Mourinho's record hasn't been put into context in the past. I've been saying it for years. Take his record with Inter. It was just after Calciopoli and they didn't really have much competition in the league at all. They also shouldn't have even been in the CL Final, though to be fair that was still a good run. On top of that his first stint at Chelsea saw massive spending and one of the most expensive sides in the game. At Madrid he had the most expensive side ever assembled. Even last season I would argue that while Chelsea deserved the league from what I saw, it was in part to an opponent like Man City not living up to it's potential as much as it was down to Chelsea. Of course Mourinho deserves credit for the difference if you ask me, but had Man City lived up to it's potential I think things would have been different. Before anyone jumps all over me for that last paragraph, I will say that I still think that Mourinho is a good manager in one sense of the word. He's proven in my opinion despite that context that I would put his record into and he's done jobs that I don't think many other managers could have done.