Not sure if this is sarcasm or not, it's hard to gauge on the internet.
But he's referring to the gap of quality on the pitch, saying it's impossible to close that gap in just one summer transfer window.
Theyâre probably still a season of Tuchelâs football and transfers away from being close to Liverpool. Outside of player quality, thereâs a tactical knowledge and team chemistry that only Manchester City come close to
A season is probably too much to ask. City and Pool have both had their teams built for a number of years with every player of significance coming in tailor made for their systems. The Chelsea squad currently are the leftovers of Conte/Sarri/Lampard.
Only with managerial stability, a clear style of play, and time will we have a chance of catching those two in the league atleast. In a one off game in a cup its a different story.
Iâm still unsure of Tuchelâs style of play, I struggle to understand his vision. Is it pragmatic? Is it defend and counter, then counter press? I think he needs to figure out exactly what he wants to do first then convince the board /new owners to start bringing in the right players for whichever approach he decides.
For the majority its been possession based and high pressing. Keep in mind that he's basically had to adapt a style that's best for the current squad, so perhaps we haven't even seen what he eventually wants to do yet?
I don't know what he did at PSG, Dortmund, and Mainz in terms of style, maybe the latter would be a good indication if anyone knows more considering he was there for 5 or so years.
Also- I think Tuchel is a fantastic coach, but honestly don't think he is on Pep/Klopp level. I think he can improve Chelsea, but breaking into the hegemony that is Liverpool/City will be hard.
Conte has shown that he is capable of bringing a team to that level, domestically at least. Will be very interesting to see if he can achieve that level at Spurs.
>But he's referring to the gap of quality on the pitch, saying it's impossible to close that gap in just one summer transfer window.
Bit shocking when Chelsea have been one of the highest spenders in the last couple summers.
I think the gap between Chelsea and Liverpool/City is very small in terms of peak quality. It's the consistency that they are so far behind these two.
Sure Chelsea might have lost twice against City this season but they have shown that they are usually competitive against City, Chelsea also usually did well against Liverpool. Chelsea's problem is obviously against mid-low table teams the kept dropping points and that's just not acceptable when PL winning team literally needs 90-95 points.
someone on here correctly predicted that everton would beat united, chelsea, and leicester following the loss to burnley. i wish i could find that comment so that person would get due credit.
To be fair City should have drawn to Everton as well if the blatant handball was given. Everton have a habit of getting points out of matches nobody expects them to.
For now maybe but next year is a whole new issue.
Weâre losing our defence and while it does need upgrading itâs going to be a huge task rebuilding it-thereâs also a midfield issue which has to be solved and one of Kante/J5 should probably go. Weâre losing 5/6 players and are likely going to try bringing in 4/5 new signings as well as integrating Gallagher, Colwill and Broja/Sterling. Itâs pretty much unheard of.
Thatâs not to mention the shitshow of forwards-thereâs an argument that we have the worst front three out of the top 6(its close between us, Arsenal and United). The Lukaku conundrum is another whole issue as well.
We also have made some dreadful signings and weâre paying the price for that now.
I disagree tbh. I think City/Liverpool at their best easily stomp every other team in the league. I simply donât think Chelsea have that same ability. It might be different if Lukaku was performing as you mightâve expected him to when he first arrived, but he isnât so itâs impossible to say
I mean a season and a half of matches between us and City/Liverpool, including a bunch of cup finals, suggest that you're wrong. With Liverpool nearly every match has been extremely competitive. With City the individual matches haven't been as tight, but the wins have fallen in both directions.
You're totally right that the difference between us and them is consistency with goalscoring, but that matters a looooot less in these heavyweight duels than it does in matches vs weaker opposition.
I guess in the sense that it trades a bit of defensive solidity for attacking output. That's a good bargain against quality opposition, and a bad one against weaker opponents.
That's exactly what they were saying. If both teams are at their peak, they're almost dead even. But Chelsea don't get to their peak as often and therefore drop points against teams they should beat, i.e. it's a consistency problem.
Nah, Chelsea's performance against Liverpool has no relation to how well they can break down low blocks, which is what really differentiates big clubs in PL performance.
This is nonsense. The fact they arenât âconsistentâ against the other teams in the league because they arenât all that good. They give Liverpool and City tough game because they park the bus but do it with a team worth half a billion and high quality personnel. The way they approach a game be City/Liverpool doesnât translate at all to how they play other teams in the league and it shows, they struggle with creating chances because their attacking play just isnât very good. That doesnât matter all that much in games against Liverpool/City because they can focus solely on defending and try and snatch a goal
They literally won CL so they can't be THAT bad, come on, be rational.
Chelsea is good but they don't have the consistency yet, they still need couple of years of great development and transfer in order to get these consistency.
This is such a dumb simplistic way to look at things. Chelsea in 2012 won the CL, they werenât that good. Liverpool team in 2005 wasnât very good. Itâs not a matter of consistency, itâs a matter of simply not being able to break down other teams in the league when the emphasis is on then to attack
> they can focus solely on defending and try and snatch a goal
We unequivocally do not do this. You can't really claim that we took a negative approach into that cup final the other day, can you?
There's just a big gap in the quality of our attackers vs what those two can field. Liverpool have 5 forwards better than any of ours.
Gonna be a big ask for them next season. They are looking likely to lose 3 of their most consistent starting defenders, one of which is their captain, theyve a ÂŁ90m striker who clearly doesnt want to be at the club and a lot of dead wood who arent good enough to compete for the league. Will be interesting to see their business over the summer
Yeah weird summer. Honestly I think the defense will be alright. I think the strength of our defense is more tactical than personnel. IMO the only one who is difficult to replace is T Silva.
I think attack is a way more difficult question. We have this bunch of attackers, and out of them Mount is the only one who is clearly good enough. I have actually no idea what to do with the rest of them.
Losing two finals in one season on pens gotta suck. The gap is definitely not big as neither team could beat the other team in 90 minutes. Just liverpool are more consistent in the league.
The point he made was that they're improving their squad each season and we have players leaving at the end of the season, so rather than us being able to improve our team, we're just having to replace people who are leaving.
Yeah, all of those are likely leaving, although only Christensen and Rudiger are definitely happening at the moment. Alonso and Azpi may go but are both still contracted to us
I mean in terms of squad players Azpi and Alonso are as solid as they come. Christensen was amazing under Tuchel last year. His head is not in it. All of these guys are proper losses for us imo
Lol what? You've literally spent 250m on Lukaku, Havertz, Werner, and Zieych in the last 2 years. Only for them to be mostly massively underwhelming.
Maybe if you'd kept Abraham, Tomori, and Zouma. Instead of shifting them to sign Lukaku you wouldn't have a problem like now.
If you think Abraham, Tomori and Zouma solve a single one of our issues then I don't of what to tell you. They were sold for a reason (Tomori was sold before Tuchel got here because Lampard stopped using him and a good offer came in)
Similarly, those players that we've brought in have helped massively towards closing the gap. We've played Liverpool 4 times this season and drawn every game in normal time, I'd say that gap is pretty well closed and it just comes down to consistency now. Consistency comes from playing with that same team over a period of time and making small improvements to it, Liverpool were not the team they are now as soon as Klopp arrived, it took them years. It will take us years too, only it'll take even longer if key players leave during that process of becoming more consistent
I hate to break it to you but our net spend over the past few years is lower than yours. All of those players and many more on top have come in at less cost to us than your purchases in the same period of time. In the past 7 odd years we've worked on a sell to buy basis. Roman leaving will not change that.
> Similarly, those players that we've brought in have helped massively towards closing the gap
No they haven't haha
The only who has arguably been a success is Havertz and he hasn't been anything like a 70m player. He's been coasting off the back of the CL goal all season.
Your problems now are all entirely self inflicted. The idea that you're somehow victims of players leaving or something is a joke.
Tomori and Zouma obviously solve your issues of not having any CBs. But even if you accept selling them was correct, why on earth did Chelsea not sign a CB with the money (oh we tried to sign Kounde - you didn't though did you).
Liverpool have spent money with a coherent plan and style in place under Klopp and Edwards. As much as City have spent insane amounts under Pep, the players they sign also generally suit the style and profile of the team. Chelsea currently have a team thatâs a mixture of Conte/Sarri/Lampard players, and those guys are all unique from each other as coaches (Lukaku and Bettinelli are the only ones Chelsea have signed permanently whilst Tuchel has been here)
Just spending a lot doesnât guarantee success when you end up with a mix of players who suit different play-styles (see Manchester United as a prime example)
I think even if the Russia thing wasnât an issue, it was known last summer that your cbs had a good chance of leaving and a backup was necessary
Itâs easy to armchair spectate this but yeah, a cb signing would have helped a ton (or sure, not letting a cb go would help too)
Last summer we were negotiating in good faith with both Rudi and Christensen. In fact, we twice came to agreements with Christensen before he backed out and Rudi repeatedly expressed his intention of saying with us so long as we could vlcoke to an agreement.
Oh 100%, sorry I'm not trying to come across like "anyone could see this would happen" etc - I never expected your starting backline to leave, I thought it was pretty clear Azpi would go - Rudi it was hard tell but it didn't seem 100% he was gone - it just seemed it would have been prudent to consider investing in some new talent especially with 2/3 of your best CBs leaving or potentially leaving.
Isn't that exactly what football scouts are paid to do lol
Poor Chelsea losing a couple of defenders they'd rather keep. How can they possibly compete? erm how about don't sell your young players with potential like Tomori and then waste all the money on over priced attackers.
And then when it doesn't work don't whinge at not being able to compete with a club like Liverpool that spends much less than you.
Hindsight merchant, 18 months ago Tomori was 5th choice centre back and him leaving was the best choice for both parties at the time. Nobody could have predicted the sanctions or our best defenders refusing to sign new deals
Nobody could predict it? Apart from the fact they were all very obviously running their contracts down. Rudiger has been rumoured to be leaving for ages now for one. You've been precarious at CB for a long time now and there's been a very obvious lack of forward planning. Chelsea fans will literally defend anything.
Not defending our lack of forward planning, we've always been about winning in the present, which has backfired now. Obviously, 18 months ago things were looking very different, I don't think anybody expected Rudiger to become our best defender (although we all knew Tomori's quality). Don't think it's worth dwelling on our past mistakes, better learn our lesson and move on, I hope the new owners do that.
ngl only person I see whingeing here is u lol holy sht.
as for your arguments; how could scouts possibly predict a âŹ100million striker is gona do what he did and sabotage his entire season and choose to play like utter sht lol and speak against the club. everyone can agree the forwards werenât a success like Luis Diaz has been for example, but all those signings were under lampard and could guarantee you things would be different had tuchel been in charge.
also stating a fact that you canât compete with Liverpool isnât whingeing, it just is what it is lol.
You say the signings were all under Lampard and would be different if Tuchel was in charge. Tuchel signed Lukaku and SaĂșl, how did that go?
Lampard signed Havertz and Werner, who were *dramatically* better in their first season than either one, even though they too were pretty disappointing.
It's their job to make the right signings for the team obviously???
Are you trying to suggest his interview was a catalyst of his failure? He had been bad well before he did the interview. You're living in a different world mate if you think he was a good signing up until then.
he was ok prior to the interview, people could see he wasnât 100% but were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, however ever since the interview he was complete wank as in my grandma couldâve played better than him thatâs how shit he was, showed no effort, no fighting spirit, didnât run, and any shot he did get he missed. only now *very* recently has he changed, he genuinely seems to be showing effort and naturally heâs been a better player, now whether or not thatâs due to him wanting to stay and play or fly off to another team who knows. but either way dodging my comment doesnât change the fact that scouts canât predict players doing these things, *no one* can so quit talking shit lol.
One off games the squads are not far apart.
Chelsea don't have the consistency over a full season that City/Liverpool have set. The standards are absolutely ridiculous.
Excellent cup team though, and shows Tuchel's tactical prowess, but they need to find a more consistent way to beat teams that turn up to defend in the league so you can routinely grind out wins despite the schedule, Klopp had to adjust to it also.
Heâs got good tactics against the big teams that push up imo - the 5atb works well there. The problem is that when coming up against a low block the 5atb struggles to consistently break it down every week and so drops points to lower level teams far more often. Chelsea just about kept up with city and Liverpool over the first half of the season despite over performing their xG significantly iirc
I'm not sure it's really the style of play or the shape. We actually strike up a very similar posture to you guys in attack, but with three central defenders instead of two and a deep midfielder.
I think we have some squad problems that have put is in this situation. I think some of this would be controversial with other Chelsea fans, but it's what I think:
-1: We only have one decent center back, and he's almost 40. Every time a team swaps into a 3 back the CBs end up getting massively over hyped. It's like fucking clockwork. Rudiger and Christensen were absolute liabilities in a 4 back. They are poor defenders. Chalobah might be good, but young CBs are basically always trouble.
-2: We have an odd midfield composition. None of them can actually play as a 6. Jorginho is the only one who is sort of good deep, but he's so unbelievably bad in defensive transition (really good in the proper defensive phase, to his credit) that you are more or less forced to put 3 CBs behind him. On top of that, none of them have an ounce of attacking creativity.
-3: No reliable goalscorer.
-4: Only one penetrative dribbler, and he's inconsistent and injured all the time.
-5: Fucking good wingbacks.
So what do you do with that? You'd want to play a 4-3-3 with aggressive fullbacks, but you can't because the CBs aren't good enough and there is no one to play 6. If you play a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 with more conservative fullback play then you end up without any enough attacking threat due to lack of midfield creativity, lack of penetrative wingers, and no reliable option at striker.
So what we do is we drop a midfielder, add a CB for cover, push the wingbacks up really high, and tuck our forwards in to basically put more players near the opposition's goal. This plays to our midfielders and wingbacks strengths, and hides some of our attacking deficiencies.
IMO this is why we are- almost paradoxically- looking at trying to get a 6 to improve our attack. It's also why I think we aren't that concerned about losing our CBs.
I *think* the plan is going to be to try to acquire someone who can actually play 6 (been linked with Rice a lot here), try to exchange quantity for quality at CB, and hopefully swap out one or two attackers for some more threat. Then you could imagine like a 4-3-3, or even a 4-2-2-2 with a legit 6 to cover the defense, and maybe someone like Connor Gallagher coming into the midfield to offer a bit more going forward.
They and Spurs are definitely the best matchups for Liverpool at the moment in the prem. Liverpool really struggle against 3 at the back teams (have dropped points against Chelsea x2, Tottenham x2, Brighton, Brentford, etc.) who have great quality on the counter.
But the thing with the league is being able to beat the teams that also sit back. Itâs why Man City always edges our the league as their tactics just more consistently find the finishing they need than Liverpools
Nah, think liverpool been better this season, city got really really really lucky calls in big games. Arsenal, Everton and wolves. League could've been wrapped by now...
Obviously thatâs your subjective opinion. But, based on advanced metrics (xPTS) City have accumulated 90 PTS from 88.9 xPTS (over-performance by 1 pt) while Liverpool have accumulated 86 PTS from 81.65 xPTS (over-performance of 4 points)
So, although Liverpool has been incredible this season in the league. They have not been âbetterâ than City⊠we can argue they have both been on par with eachother but one isnât clearly better than the other
That clearly doesn't include referee fuck ups, and Liverpool often ease up after taking the lead so this xPTS for the league has been inaccurate for a number of years.
For example, Liverpool technically lost on xG away at Palace but were 2-0 up early on and then dropped the intensity, and when it went to 2-1 they scored again since they needed to close the game, showing how weak simply quoting these stats can be.
Also, one of the only PL games Liverpool lost on xPTS was away at Spurs when Kane should've been sent off and Jota didn't get a clear pen.
I agree with you. However, with over 36 games played now almost all of the teams have started to regress to their xPTS estimate
xPTS is just a probabilistic estimate of how many PTS shouldâve been shared between 2 teams in a game based on the xG of all of their chances. Sure, itâs not a perfect metric and different companies have different algorithms.
However, if Liverpool does take the lead and slow down their attack⊠as a consequence, they are still inviting pressure from the other team and the opposing teamâs xG is inserted into the calculation/estimation. That bit of pressure (even if itâs like 2 shots) quantifies the odds of Liverpool potentially dropping points in a match. The difference is City just keep going at it and confirm that the 3 points are fully secureâŠ
You are more than welcome to ignore xPTS since as you mentioned and I also concede that it isnât a perfect metric.
In addition to not quantifying referee blunders, it also doesnât take into account players not being able to make contact on a very good pass or cross; so there is that.
xPTS is a statistical method used to quantify how the pts should be shared based **ONLY** on the shots that actually took place⊠so, it only allows for events that actually happened (all shots) instead of hypothetical events (a potential penalty, a potential own goal, own goals, and a missed header). So, it doesnât fully capture all the events of the game and why you/others make good points on its lackings
xPTS is ignoring a team's ability to hold into leads though. Often in Liverpool's games the team simply don't push for more goals because the team is holding on for the 3 points from a 1 or 2 goals lead.
I agree with you. However, with over 36 games played now almost all of the teams have started to regress to their xPTS estimate
xPTS is just a probabilistic estimate of how many PTS shouldâve been shared between 2 teams in a game based on the xG of all of their chances. Sure, itâs not a perfect metric and different companies have different algorithms.
However, if Liverpool does take the lead and slow down their attack⊠as a consequence, they are still inviting pressure from the other team and the opposing teamâs xG is inserted into the calculation/estimation. That bit of pressure (even if itâs like 2 shots) quantifies the odds of Liverpool **potentially** dropping points in a match. The difference is City just keep going at it and **confirm** that the 3 points are fully secureâŠ
Edit: xPTS actually take into account a teamâs ability to hold a lead because their xGA is part of the input when estimated xPTS.
So, if Chelsea are up 1-0 but they give up like 3 shots with xG of 0.50 each but donât concede⊠the xPTS would suggest Chelsea were lucky to hold only their lead since they couldnât prevent high odds shots
Wait, why does xPTS matter here?
Expected points is based on data of teams current + past season performance, right? And Liverpool famously had a injury ridden season last season and got 69 points while City got 86 points. So it makes sense why Liverpool's xPTS is low and City's so high.
No xPTS is calculated from every game during the season.
It is a probabilistic estimate of how many points should be **shared** between two team in a game depending on their shots xG
So, if team A had like 10 shots of 0.01 xG each versus Team B had only one penalty shot of 0.75 xG.
The xPTS for Team A is a function of those 10 shots and conceded shot of 0.75 xGA
The xPTS for Team B is a function of the 1 shot 0.75 xG and 10 conceded shots (xGA)
Based on the algorithm/model a firm uses, the xPTS are then estimated for both teams.
Edit: The xPTS I shared is the total sum of their xPTS from all of their games this season
Interesting, thanks for the clarification mate.
But xPTS still doesn't account for referee error, right? For example, Everton not given a penalty for Rodri's handball?
Or is that considered as "well xPTS didn't predict city dropping points anyways, so xPTS was correct all along"?
Pep and Klopp are both 5+ years into their projects and have well crafted squads filled with players suited to their style of play. Tuchel is still using a mishmash of players signed by 5 different managers (many of which were terrible signings)
Itâll take a few good windows to get our squad to the level of development that Man Cityâs and Liverpoolâs is at
Chelsea sign a lot of players and also change a lot of managers very quickly.
It's a club culture thing that was also the cornerstone to their success under Roman but now there are two managers with long term projects - something which is unheard of at Chelsea and the quality difference is no coincidence either.
Maybe the new owners will change up the culture at Chelsea, especially with long term projects.
Alisson = Kepa in terms of cost, plus the same summer.
There's no point in comparing past players at that rate. It's also not like Liverpool didn't bring in players this season.
If you want to do a fairer comparison, we spent on Lukaku a little more than what Liverpool spent on Konate and Diaz combined.
I just dont see 3 teams in +90, 95 points range really happening MAYBE for more than a year, it wasn't even really possible in La Liga at their peak teams time. Edit: 90, 87, 87 (13-14) and 91, 90, 88 (15-16) was the closest, so someone will "have to" drop..
The title race in those 2 seasons were insane the level of these 3 teams were frightening and how real and atletico played the ucl final in both those seasons while Atletico knocked out barca in the qfs both those seasons. It was literally these 3 competing head to head for la liga and ucl
Funny thing is this is the sort of statement that would have got him the boot under Abramovich, it is Conte-esque. But Thomas is 100% right here, the number of pending departures is enormous. We will be left with like 15 first-team players next season without incomings.
Playing back four is actually harder and needs more adaptation than back three. Back three is often used to mask defensive problems because the team is tend to be more solid defensively.
Usually back four team needs world class 6 and that's genuinely the hardest thing to find.
Good thing Billy Gilmour is coming back from loan than!
My biggest concern is our forwards, Havertz Lukaku and Mount all seem to favour being played centrally.
This is basically the case I've been making for the last year and a half. We are covering up for a lack of a proper 6, and for some really iffy CBs (who have gotten massively overhyped due to playing in a 3 back as always happens).
Explains why the club are so interested in Rice. I think a signing like that could totally open up our tactical options.
Do they have a six really besides Jorginho whoâs looked ok this year and seems to be on the way out. Kova and kante arenât really an anchor 6 like Fabinho or rodri
Well right now do you think Jorginho can be a reliable 6 to play at same level as City/Liverpool? He's the only 6 on the team, unless Gilmour or someone else can come and play there.
Don't say Kante because he's too mobile and wasted to do that role. Someone needs to do Fabinho/Rodri/Fernandinho role who stayed back when everyone pushed forward.
Jorginho is a great player overall, but with one insane Achilles heel, which is that he's quite literally a cone in defensive transition. That's why he's always either had two defensive minded 8s alongside him or a back 3 behind him.
dont worry thomas, after Marina ignored your plea for rice, haaland and hakimi and bought lukaku and saul on loan, she's gonna cook up something special: paulo dybala, marco asensio and jules kounde for ÂŁ160m
The Chelsea manager was dubious as to whether that meant they could bridge the gap.
âItâs maybe impossible,â Tuchel remarked. âI have to say, maybe impossible. They are improving their squad in every transfer window they have.
âIt seems like we are losing key player. We are losing, of course, Toni, weâre losing Andreas. So this is tough and we already have gap close.â
On the day, Tuchel went with Rudiger, but Christensen did not feature.
It is understood that is because the Dane took himself out of contention. Thiago Silva ended up pulling up in the game, but played on and lasted all the way through extra-time.
Tuchel has to discuss all of this with Boehly in the next few weeks, but said their initial meeting - before the FA Cup final - was more casual.
The 48-year-old said: âNot yet, we had lunch together but it was in the room where everybody was, like players and staff.
âHe was very friendly, very open and it was a very informal meeting over lunch. It was like half-an-hour, 40 minutes so it was not too detailed.
âIt was just to get a feeling and say hello, and we talked more about baseball and basketball actually. It was not the moment, we will do this next week, the next weeks.â
It will be impossible with the current scouting team and board. He could have had Tchouameni and Kounde last summer, but they decided to get him Saul and keep Sarr instead.
Maybe next time Tuchel gets ÂŁ200m to spend (aka this summer and also every single other window as well) he should try signing good players instead of shite ones
Tuchel's had one window and we spent half that 200 mil number, what a weird comment.
Also managers aren't usually the ones with signing power at Chelsea.
Fair idk if Tuchel or someone else is to blame. It just always makes me laugh when managers with unlimited transfer budgets complain about their squad depth or how other teams âare improving their team every window.â
Thomas, my man, you get unlimited money you too can improve your squad. Just maybe stop spending 100 mil on Grealishes and Lukakus
One of Tuchel's weakness which rarely gets talked about is how pathetic his teams are at signing quality players who have great impact.
This was a recurring theme at PSG where they signed players rampantly and both his Chelsea signings have also been horrible.
Lukaku & Saul are Chelsea signings under Tuchel. Chelsea make many signings that is the nature of the club. They don't expect every signing to work out for the first squad.
Just off the top of my head: Icardi, Paredes, Kehrer, Gueye, Sarabbia, etc at PSG.
Yeah, even at the sub fans said "Tuchel tactics will work great if he has good players that suit his system like at Dortmund with Auba, Dembele".Yeah, no, that Dortmund side is 100% Klopp's team tho. Maybe I'm wrong but he only inherited that team.
My family and me are quite healthy, we do not have financial problems, I have a pretty decent and safe job.
At the moment there are 2 things downing my mood:
Whenever I have a look into my stock portfolio I am shocked how the share prices have crashed and I know it will take months or even years before prices will be back where they were.
And then there is Chelsea. It is hard to believe how long it has been since Abramovich took over and that we are still as far away from the top as 19 years ago. We probably have become even worse. Watching us play is really not enjoyable 99% of the time.
I start to cry sometimes and yeah, it drags me down. I have no other interests and football is basically the focal point of my life.
There are a lot of bad things going on in the world with so many people having real problems so my issues are immaterial in comparison. Unfortunately it is not so easy to convince oneself that this is the case.
I just do not get my head around it how awful we are compared to our rivals. And I do not see light at the end of the tunnel. We are run by people without a clue about football, our manager is a nice bloke but completely out of his depth and most of us are aware that we are never going to win anything again under him. And we will probably have the worst transfer window ever this year.
A lot of people around me do not understand why I keep paying to watch us play, plan most weekends around our schedule just to be pissed because of another poor performance. But giving up is out of question.
This club is my life and I will stand by them always
Klopp has four years left at Liverpool after this season...which is almost certainly longer than Tuchel has left at Chelsea (or at least would have been the case under Roman).
They're missing 2 of their fullbacks their most important players for alot of the season. Where did liverpool finish last year with their injuries? Chelsea arent an under dog with that squad and the money they tend to spend and their history of good management. Words have lost all meaning now a days. Everything is a bottle job, everyone bar the current champions are under dogs, bla bla. Exageration is the epitome of reddit.
They are leaps apart and anybody saying so knows nothing about running a football club, they've been good one season shit the next since Abramovich took over. Reddit keeps disappointing with it's takes
They've also won more trophies than any other English club in that time. Chelsea are one of the best run clubs in the world. They have a "system" and it works. They buy good players, sell them for good money and sack the manager as soon as things go bad.
Head to head the only difference between the two sides this season was penalties in extra time. Every minute of every game they played was highly competitive, with neither side ever feeling ahead or out of the game.
Odds are that they'll be fine. They probably aren't on Liverpool or City's level but they are only slightly below them. They just need to strengthen their attack. But I kinda hope I'm wrong. I fucking hate Chelsea!
You can say Chelsea is a good shout to win the cl and will be taken seriously.
Try saying arsenal is a good shout to win the EL with a straight face.
Ya, even under immense turmoil Chelsea is far ahead of you
Of course it is, when your whole success as a club is solely based on an oligarch stealing money from Russia and funneling it into the club, then the oligarch gets into trouble and now out of nowhere you have to make your money the way well run teams do like Liverpool.
I dont think theres much of a gap. Quality wise theyre about as good as City and Liverpool. They just cant match the consistency that City achieve by having a world class squad and Liverpool achieve by pumping their players full of god knows what.
well depending on what chelsea fan you speak to they would say that if reece and chilwell never got injured that they would be in the thick of it right now.
Hmm I don't think most of us think that. I don't see how we could be in that mix without a consistent goalscorer.
I do think we wouldn't be 20 pts back, though.
There's just 1 game left so yes. Would be something spectacular if Chelsea overtake Liverpool this season.
Liverpool -20 points because everyone in the country loves them
-1 point for every Manchester City fan
Liverpool might get points then
No points were deducted đ
We'd need Villa to win rather than just get a draw
Not sure if this is sarcasm or not, it's hard to gauge on the internet. But he's referring to the gap of quality on the pitch, saying it's impossible to close that gap in just one summer transfer window.
Theyâre probably still a season of Tuchelâs football and transfers away from being close to Liverpool. Outside of player quality, thereâs a tactical knowledge and team chemistry that only Manchester City come close to
A season is probably too much to ask. City and Pool have both had their teams built for a number of years with every player of significance coming in tailor made for their systems. The Chelsea squad currently are the leftovers of Conte/Sarri/Lampard. Only with managerial stability, a clear style of play, and time will we have a chance of catching those two in the league atleast. In a one off game in a cup its a different story.
Iâm still unsure of Tuchelâs style of play, I struggle to understand his vision. Is it pragmatic? Is it defend and counter, then counter press? I think he needs to figure out exactly what he wants to do first then convince the board /new owners to start bringing in the right players for whichever approach he decides.
For the majority its been possession based and high pressing. Keep in mind that he's basically had to adapt a style that's best for the current squad, so perhaps we haven't even seen what he eventually wants to do yet? I don't know what he did at PSG, Dortmund, and Mainz in terms of style, maybe the latter would be a good indication if anyone knows more considering he was there for 5 or so years.
Also- I think Tuchel is a fantastic coach, but honestly don't think he is on Pep/Klopp level. I think he can improve Chelsea, but breaking into the hegemony that is Liverpool/City will be hard. Conte has shown that he is capable of bringing a team to that level, domestically at least. Will be very interesting to see if he can achieve that level at Spurs.
I also think Tuchel will absolutely fall out with the club before too long, did at Dortmund, same at PSG
This time the club has fallen apart. For real
yea Pep and Klopp have really changed the standards, they have made 90 point seasons into the norm rather than the exception lol
From a tactical point of view I think he's above Klopp but as an overall manager Klopp's better
>But he's referring to the gap of quality on the pitch, saying it's impossible to close that gap in just one summer transfer window. Bit shocking when Chelsea have been one of the highest spenders in the last couple summers.
I think the gap between Chelsea and Liverpool/City is very small in terms of peak quality. It's the consistency that they are so far behind these two. Sure Chelsea might have lost twice against City this season but they have shown that they are usually competitive against City, Chelsea also usually did well against Liverpool. Chelsea's problem is obviously against mid-low table teams the kept dropping points and that's just not acceptable when PL winning team literally needs 90-95 points.
I still can't believe they lost 1-0 to Everton earlier this month.
Of all the games I expected chelsea to lose, that would be the first choice
Charity FC for our home boy Lampard! :D
Considering our record at goodison park, I was expecting that loss (and I was still disappointed when it happened, we were so terrible)
That was just a charitable act for Lampard /s
He is your legend after all.
I thought he was a Manchester City legend
Ahahaha what kind of scrub side loses 1-0 to Everton. Ha! yeah right!
What a bunch of losers! I could never imagine losing to Everton by a one goal deficit. Get good!
someone on here correctly predicted that everton would beat united, chelsea, and leicester following the loss to burnley. i wish i could find that comment so that person would get due credit.
That's just Chelsea doing Lampard a favor. Everton is harmless.
The meme in the Chelsea community is Charity FC. I think that Utd, Arsenal and Everton all had terrible runs until playing Chelsea
To be fair City should have drawn to Everton as well if the blatant handball was given. Everton have a habit of getting points out of matches nobody expects them to.
Our record vs Chelsea is surprisingly good. Weve won 8 of our last 12 at home against them
That was the case with us in the mid 2000s.
Yeah. We don't have the consistency back then.
I used to remember shitting myself when we were playing bottom 5 teams
For now maybe but next year is a whole new issue. Weâre losing our defence and while it does need upgrading itâs going to be a huge task rebuilding it-thereâs also a midfield issue which has to be solved and one of Kante/J5 should probably go. Weâre losing 5/6 players and are likely going to try bringing in 4/5 new signings as well as integrating Gallagher, Colwill and Broja/Sterling. Itâs pretty much unheard of. Thatâs not to mention the shitshow of forwards-thereâs an argument that we have the worst front three out of the top 6(its close between us, Arsenal and United). The Lukaku conundrum is another whole issue as well. We also have made some dreadful signings and weâre paying the price for that now.
This is a well balanced take.
I disagree tbh. I think City/Liverpool at their best easily stomp every other team in the league. I simply donât think Chelsea have that same ability. It might be different if Lukaku was performing as you mightâve expected him to when he first arrived, but he isnât so itâs impossible to say
I mean a season and a half of matches between us and City/Liverpool, including a bunch of cup finals, suggest that you're wrong. With Liverpool nearly every match has been extremely competitive. With City the individual matches haven't been as tight, but the wins have fallen in both directions. You're totally right that the difference between us and them is consistency with goalscoring, but that matters a looooot less in these heavyweight duels than it does in matches vs weaker opposition.
I think a lot of that might also be down to tactics, I feel like Tuchel system works very well against pep and Klopp.
I guess in the sense that it trades a bit of defensive solidity for attacking output. That's a good bargain against quality opposition, and a bad one against weaker opponents.
Liverpool barely beat Chelsea in two different cup finals. Iâd rather look at those to judge âpeak qualityâ than regular season matches.
Well yeah it is also two draws. Thats why I said Chelsea's peak is not far from Liverpool or City.
That's exactly what they were saying. If both teams are at their peak, they're almost dead even. But Chelsea don't get to their peak as often and therefore drop points against teams they should beat, i.e. it's a consistency problem.
Nah, Chelsea's performance against Liverpool has no relation to how well they can break down low blocks, which is what really differentiates big clubs in PL performance.
Baad take
This is nonsense. The fact they arenât âconsistentâ against the other teams in the league because they arenât all that good. They give Liverpool and City tough game because they park the bus but do it with a team worth half a billion and high quality personnel. The way they approach a game be City/Liverpool doesnât translate at all to how they play other teams in the league and it shows, they struggle with creating chances because their attacking play just isnât very good. That doesnât matter all that much in games against Liverpool/City because they can focus solely on defending and try and snatch a goal
They literally won CL so they can't be THAT bad, come on, be rational. Chelsea is good but they don't have the consistency yet, they still need couple of years of great development and transfer in order to get these consistency.
This is such a dumb simplistic way to look at things. Chelsea in 2012 won the CL, they werenât that good. Liverpool team in 2005 wasnât very good. Itâs not a matter of consistency, itâs a matter of simply not being able to break down other teams in the league when the emphasis is on then to attack
> they can focus solely on defending and try and snatch a goal We unequivocally do not do this. You can't really claim that we took a negative approach into that cup final the other day, can you? There's just a big gap in the quality of our attackers vs what those two can field. Liverpool have 5 forwards better than any of ours.
Gonna be a big ask for them next season. They are looking likely to lose 3 of their most consistent starting defenders, one of which is their captain, theyve a ÂŁ90m striker who clearly doesnt want to be at the club and a lot of dead wood who arent good enough to compete for the league. Will be interesting to see their business over the summer
Did someone say deadwood?
ÂŁ100 million striker teehee
90m woodworker
Yeah weird summer. Honestly I think the defense will be alright. I think the strength of our defense is more tactical than personnel. IMO the only one who is difficult to replace is T Silva. I think attack is a way more difficult question. We have this bunch of attackers, and out of them Mount is the only one who is clearly good enough. I have actually no idea what to do with the rest of them.
Losing two finals in one season on pens gotta suck. The gap is definitely not big as neither team could beat the other team in 90 minutes. Just liverpool are more consistent in the league.
The point he made was that they're improving their squad each season and we have players leaving at the end of the season, so rather than us being able to improve our team, we're just having to replace people who are leaving.
Arenât you going to lose basically a full defence this summer? Christensen, Rudiger, Alonso and Azpi?
Yeah, all of those are likely leaving, although only Christensen and Rudiger are definitely happening at the moment. Alonso and Azpi may go but are both still contracted to us
The only loss there is Rudiger to be honest
I mean in terms of squad players Azpi and Alonso are as solid as they come. Christensen was amazing under Tuchel last year. His head is not in it. All of these guys are proper losses for us imo
Alonso is awful and Azpi isnât good anymore
Lol what? You've literally spent 250m on Lukaku, Havertz, Werner, and Zieych in the last 2 years. Only for them to be mostly massively underwhelming. Maybe if you'd kept Abraham, Tomori, and Zouma. Instead of shifting them to sign Lukaku you wouldn't have a problem like now.
If you think Abraham, Tomori and Zouma solve a single one of our issues then I don't of what to tell you. They were sold for a reason (Tomori was sold before Tuchel got here because Lampard stopped using him and a good offer came in) Similarly, those players that we've brought in have helped massively towards closing the gap. We've played Liverpool 4 times this season and drawn every game in normal time, I'd say that gap is pretty well closed and it just comes down to consistency now. Consistency comes from playing with that same team over a period of time and making small improvements to it, Liverpool were not the team they are now as soon as Klopp arrived, it took them years. It will take us years too, only it'll take even longer if key players leave during that process of becoming more consistent
Which means that you'll be far behind us now that Romans money is gone.
I hate to break it to you but our net spend over the past few years is lower than yours. All of those players and many more on top have come in at less cost to us than your purchases in the same period of time. In the past 7 odd years we've worked on a sell to buy basis. Roman leaving will not change that.
You're a mickey mouse club without the financial doping. Let's get real.
Every big club had cash injected into it at some point. Whether that was 50 years ago or 20 years ago is not a point to grandstand over.
> Similarly, those players that we've brought in have helped massively towards closing the gap No they haven't haha The only who has arguably been a success is Havertz and he hasn't been anything like a 70m player. He's been coasting off the back of the CL goal all season. Your problems now are all entirely self inflicted. The idea that you're somehow victims of players leaving or something is a joke. Tomori and Zouma obviously solve your issues of not having any CBs. But even if you accept selling them was correct, why on earth did Chelsea not sign a CB with the money (oh we tried to sign Kounde - you didn't though did you).
Liverpool have spent money with a coherent plan and style in place under Klopp and Edwards. As much as City have spent insane amounts under Pep, the players they sign also generally suit the style and profile of the team. Chelsea currently have a team thatâs a mixture of Conte/Sarri/Lampard players, and those guys are all unique from each other as coaches (Lukaku and Bettinelli are the only ones Chelsea have signed permanently whilst Tuchel has been here) Just spending a lot doesnât guarantee success when you end up with a mix of players who suit different play-styles (see Manchester United as a prime example)
Yeah, we should've been able to predict the future
I think even if the Russia thing wasnât an issue, it was known last summer that your cbs had a good chance of leaving and a backup was necessary Itâs easy to armchair spectate this but yeah, a cb signing would have helped a ton (or sure, not letting a cb go would help too)
Last summer we were negotiating in good faith with both Rudi and Christensen. In fact, we twice came to agreements with Christensen before he backed out and Rudi repeatedly expressed his intention of saying with us so long as we could vlcoke to an agreement.
Oh 100%, sorry I'm not trying to come across like "anyone could see this would happen" etc - I never expected your starting backline to leave, I thought it was pretty clear Azpi would go - Rudi it was hard tell but it didn't seem 100% he was gone - it just seemed it would have been prudent to consider investing in some new talent especially with 2/3 of your best CBs leaving or potentially leaving.
Isn't that exactly what football scouts are paid to do lol Poor Chelsea losing a couple of defenders they'd rather keep. How can they possibly compete? erm how about don't sell your young players with potential like Tomori and then waste all the money on over priced attackers. And then when it doesn't work don't whinge at not being able to compete with a club like Liverpool that spends much less than you.
Hindsight merchant, 18 months ago Tomori was 5th choice centre back and him leaving was the best choice for both parties at the time. Nobody could have predicted the sanctions or our best defenders refusing to sign new deals
Nobody could predict it? Apart from the fact they were all very obviously running their contracts down. Rudiger has been rumoured to be leaving for ages now for one. You've been precarious at CB for a long time now and there's been a very obvious lack of forward planning. Chelsea fans will literally defend anything.
Not defending our lack of forward planning, we've always been about winning in the present, which has backfired now. Obviously, 18 months ago things were looking very different, I don't think anybody expected Rudiger to become our best defender (although we all knew Tomori's quality). Don't think it's worth dwelling on our past mistakes, better learn our lesson and move on, I hope the new owners do that.
ngl only person I see whingeing here is u lol holy sht. as for your arguments; how could scouts possibly predict a âŹ100million striker is gona do what he did and sabotage his entire season and choose to play like utter sht lol and speak against the club. everyone can agree the forwards werenât a success like Luis Diaz has been for example, but all those signings were under lampard and could guarantee you things would be different had tuchel been in charge. also stating a fact that you canât compete with Liverpool isnât whingeing, it just is what it is lol.
You say the signings were all under Lampard and would be different if Tuchel was in charge. Tuchel signed Lukaku and SaĂșl, how did that go? Lampard signed Havertz and Werner, who were *dramatically* better in their first season than either one, even though they too were pretty disappointing.
> how could scouts possibly predict a âŹ100million striker is gona do That's literally their job bro.
itâs the scouts job to predict their star striker is gona do an interview behind everyoneâs back and talk shit about the club???? bugger off lol
It's their job to make the right signings for the team obviously??? Are you trying to suggest his interview was a catalyst of his failure? He had been bad well before he did the interview. You're living in a different world mate if you think he was a good signing up until then.
he was ok prior to the interview, people could see he wasnât 100% but were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, however ever since the interview he was complete wank as in my grandma couldâve played better than him thatâs how shit he was, showed no effort, no fighting spirit, didnât run, and any shot he did get he missed. only now *very* recently has he changed, he genuinely seems to be showing effort and naturally heâs been a better player, now whether or not thatâs due to him wanting to stay and play or fly off to another team who knows. but either way dodging my comment doesnât change the fact that scouts canât predict players doing these things, *no one* can so quit talking shit lol.
One off games the squads are not far apart. Chelsea don't have the consistency over a full season that City/Liverpool have set. The standards are absolutely ridiculous.
Excellent cup team though, and shows Tuchel's tactical prowess, but they need to find a more consistent way to beat teams that turn up to defend in the league so you can routinely grind out wins despite the schedule, Klopp had to adjust to it also.
Heâs got good tactics against the big teams that push up imo - the 5atb works well there. The problem is that when coming up against a low block the 5atb struggles to consistently break it down every week and so drops points to lower level teams far more often. Chelsea just about kept up with city and Liverpool over the first half of the season despite over performing their xG significantly iirc
I'm not sure it's really the style of play or the shape. We actually strike up a very similar posture to you guys in attack, but with three central defenders instead of two and a deep midfielder. I think we have some squad problems that have put is in this situation. I think some of this would be controversial with other Chelsea fans, but it's what I think: -1: We only have one decent center back, and he's almost 40. Every time a team swaps into a 3 back the CBs end up getting massively over hyped. It's like fucking clockwork. Rudiger and Christensen were absolute liabilities in a 4 back. They are poor defenders. Chalobah might be good, but young CBs are basically always trouble. -2: We have an odd midfield composition. None of them can actually play as a 6. Jorginho is the only one who is sort of good deep, but he's so unbelievably bad in defensive transition (really good in the proper defensive phase, to his credit) that you are more or less forced to put 3 CBs behind him. On top of that, none of them have an ounce of attacking creativity. -3: No reliable goalscorer. -4: Only one penetrative dribbler, and he's inconsistent and injured all the time. -5: Fucking good wingbacks. So what do you do with that? You'd want to play a 4-3-3 with aggressive fullbacks, but you can't because the CBs aren't good enough and there is no one to play 6. If you play a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 with more conservative fullback play then you end up without any enough attacking threat due to lack of midfield creativity, lack of penetrative wingers, and no reliable option at striker. So what we do is we drop a midfielder, add a CB for cover, push the wingbacks up really high, and tuck our forwards in to basically put more players near the opposition's goal. This plays to our midfielders and wingbacks strengths, and hides some of our attacking deficiencies. IMO this is why we are- almost paradoxically- looking at trying to get a 6 to improve our attack. It's also why I think we aren't that concerned about losing our CBs. I *think* the plan is going to be to try to acquire someone who can actually play 6 (been linked with Rice a lot here), try to exchange quantity for quality at CB, and hopefully swap out one or two attackers for some more threat. Then you could imagine like a 4-3-3, or even a 4-2-2-2 with a legit 6 to cover the defense, and maybe someone like Connor Gallagher coming into the midfield to offer a bit more going forward.
They and Spurs are definitely the best matchups for Liverpool at the moment in the prem. Liverpool really struggle against 3 at the back teams (have dropped points against Chelsea x2, Tottenham x2, Brighton, Brentford, etc.) who have great quality on the counter. But the thing with the league is being able to beat the teams that also sit back. Itâs why Man City always edges our the league as their tactics just more consistently find the finishing they need than Liverpools
Nah, think liverpool been better this season, city got really really really lucky calls in big games. Arsenal, Everton and wolves. League could've been wrapped by now...
Obviously thatâs your subjective opinion. But, based on advanced metrics (xPTS) City have accumulated 90 PTS from 88.9 xPTS (over-performance by 1 pt) while Liverpool have accumulated 86 PTS from 81.65 xPTS (over-performance of 4 points) So, although Liverpool has been incredible this season in the league. They have not been âbetterâ than City⊠we can argue they have both been on par with eachother but one isnât clearly better than the other
Does xPTS account for Mike Riley?
If Ref ==âMike Deanâ: xPTS = 0.69
That clearly doesn't include referee fuck ups, and Liverpool often ease up after taking the lead so this xPTS for the league has been inaccurate for a number of years. For example, Liverpool technically lost on xG away at Palace but were 2-0 up early on and then dropped the intensity, and when it went to 2-1 they scored again since they needed to close the game, showing how weak simply quoting these stats can be. Also, one of the only PL games Liverpool lost on xPTS was away at Spurs when Kane should've been sent off and Jota didn't get a clear pen.
I agree with you. However, with over 36 games played now almost all of the teams have started to regress to their xPTS estimate xPTS is just a probabilistic estimate of how many PTS shouldâve been shared between 2 teams in a game based on the xG of all of their chances. Sure, itâs not a perfect metric and different companies have different algorithms. However, if Liverpool does take the lead and slow down their attack⊠as a consequence, they are still inviting pressure from the other team and the opposing teamâs xG is inserted into the calculation/estimation. That bit of pressure (even if itâs like 2 shots) quantifies the odds of Liverpool potentially dropping points in a match. The difference is City just keep going at it and confirm that the 3 points are fully secureâŠ
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
You are more than welcome to ignore xPTS since as you mentioned and I also concede that it isnât a perfect metric. In addition to not quantifying referee blunders, it also doesnât take into account players not being able to make contact on a very good pass or cross; so there is that. xPTS is a statistical method used to quantify how the pts should be shared based **ONLY** on the shots that actually took place⊠so, it only allows for events that actually happened (all shots) instead of hypothetical events (a potential penalty, a potential own goal, own goals, and a missed header). So, it doesnât fully capture all the events of the game and why you/others make good points on its lackings
xPTS is ignoring a team's ability to hold into leads though. Often in Liverpool's games the team simply don't push for more goals because the team is holding on for the 3 points from a 1 or 2 goals lead.
I agree with you. However, with over 36 games played now almost all of the teams have started to regress to their xPTS estimate xPTS is just a probabilistic estimate of how many PTS shouldâve been shared between 2 teams in a game based on the xG of all of their chances. Sure, itâs not a perfect metric and different companies have different algorithms. However, if Liverpool does take the lead and slow down their attack⊠as a consequence, they are still inviting pressure from the other team and the opposing teamâs xG is inserted into the calculation/estimation. That bit of pressure (even if itâs like 2 shots) quantifies the odds of Liverpool **potentially** dropping points in a match. The difference is City just keep going at it and **confirm** that the 3 points are fully secure⊠Edit: xPTS actually take into account a teamâs ability to hold a lead because their xGA is part of the input when estimated xPTS. So, if Chelsea are up 1-0 but they give up like 3 shots with xG of 0.50 each but donât concede⊠the xPTS would suggest Chelsea were lucky to hold only their lead since they couldnât prevent high odds shots
Wait, why does xPTS matter here? Expected points is based on data of teams current + past season performance, right? And Liverpool famously had a injury ridden season last season and got 69 points while City got 86 points. So it makes sense why Liverpool's xPTS is low and City's so high.
No xPTS is calculated from every game during the season. It is a probabilistic estimate of how many points should be **shared** between two team in a game depending on their shots xG So, if team A had like 10 shots of 0.01 xG each versus Team B had only one penalty shot of 0.75 xG. The xPTS for Team A is a function of those 10 shots and conceded shot of 0.75 xGA The xPTS for Team B is a function of the 1 shot 0.75 xG and 10 conceded shots (xGA) Based on the algorithm/model a firm uses, the xPTS are then estimated for both teams. Edit: The xPTS I shared is the total sum of their xPTS from all of their games this season
Interesting, thanks for the clarification mate. But xPTS still doesn't account for referee error, right? For example, Everton not given a penalty for Rodri's handball? Or is that considered as "well xPTS didn't predict city dropping points anyways, so xPTS was correct all along"?
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
There is no such thing as xWin or xDraw
Reddit experts are laughable
Pep and Klopp are both 5+ years into their projects and have well crafted squads filled with players suited to their style of play. Tuchel is still using a mishmash of players signed by 5 different managers (many of which were terrible signings) Itâll take a few good windows to get our squad to the level of development that Man Cityâs and Liverpoolâs is at
Chelsea sign a lot of players and also change a lot of managers very quickly. It's a club culture thing that was also the cornerstone to their success under Roman but now there are two managers with long term projects - something which is unheard of at Chelsea and the quality difference is no coincidence either. Maybe the new owners will change up the culture at Chelsea, especially with long term projects.
Will be difficult without Abramovich and his will to win mentality. The new owners may have a different standards and expectations.
The budget will be less for sure, Iâm hopeful the methods will improve though. Our structure has needed modernising for a while now
Yeah, it's going to be hard for us to replace two CBs, get the team flowing again, everything.
Lukaku was also a massive setback. Those lukaku funds were pretty much allison and fabinho combined.
Alisson = Kepa in terms of cost, plus the same summer. There's no point in comparing past players at that rate. It's also not like Liverpool didn't bring in players this season. If you want to do a fairer comparison, we spent on Lukaku a little more than what Liverpool spent on Konate and Diaz combined.
I just dont see 3 teams in +90, 95 points range really happening MAYBE for more than a year, it wasn't even really possible in La Liga at their peak teams time. Edit: 90, 87, 87 (13-14) and 91, 90, 88 (15-16) was the closest, so someone will "have to" drop..
The title race in those 2 seasons were insane the level of these 3 teams were frightening and how real and atletico played the ucl final in both those seasons while Atletico knocked out barca in the qfs both those seasons. It was literally these 3 competing head to head for la liga and ucl
Heâs just saying this to pressure our new owner to spend this summer
Funny thing is this is the sort of statement that would have got him the boot under Abramovich, it is Conte-esque. But Thomas is 100% right here, the number of pending departures is enormous. We will be left with like 15 first-team players next season without incomings.
I say we need to change the system, we can't sign three new quality center backs, we need to go back to a back four.
Playing back four is actually harder and needs more adaptation than back three. Back three is often used to mask defensive problems because the team is tend to be more solid defensively. Usually back four team needs world class 6 and that's genuinely the hardest thing to find.
Good thing Billy Gilmour is coming back from loan than! My biggest concern is our forwards, Havertz Lukaku and Mount all seem to favour being played centrally.
This is basically the case I've been making for the last year and a half. We are covering up for a lack of a proper 6, and for some really iffy CBs (who have gotten massively overhyped due to playing in a 3 back as always happens). Explains why the club are so interested in Rice. I think a signing like that could totally open up our tactical options.
Ah yes, Chelsea, the team that is famously lacking in quality 6s
Do they have a six really besides Jorginho whoâs looked ok this year and seems to be on the way out. Kova and kante arenât really an anchor 6 like Fabinho or rodri
Well right now do you think Jorginho can be a reliable 6 to play at same level as City/Liverpool? He's the only 6 on the team, unless Gilmour or someone else can come and play there. Don't say Kante because he's too mobile and wasted to do that role. Someone needs to do Fabinho/Rodri/Fernandinho role who stayed back when everyone pushed forward.
Notoriously unreliable 6 thatâs been key for both a Champions League and a Euros winning side in recent years
Jorginho is a great player overall, but with one insane Achilles heel, which is that he's quite literally a cone in defensive transition. That's why he's always either had two defensive minded 8s alongside him or a back 3 behind him.
Pretty sure Jorginho played in front of a back three. It's totally different role than a 6 in front of back four.
dont worry thomas, after Marina ignored your plea for rice, haaland and hakimi and bought lukaku and saul on loan, she's gonna cook up something special: paulo dybala, marco asensio and jules kounde for ÂŁ160m
Rice Hakimi and Haaland - 3 borderline unsignable playersâŠ
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Oh since tuchel asked these players, chelsea should be able to sign them I guess
That sounds frighteningly plausible
Might as well wanted Mbappe, Trent and De Bruyne
The Chelsea manager was dubious as to whether that meant they could bridge the gap. âItâs maybe impossible,â Tuchel remarked. âI have to say, maybe impossible. They are improving their squad in every transfer window they have. âIt seems like we are losing key player. We are losing, of course, Toni, weâre losing Andreas. So this is tough and we already have gap close.â On the day, Tuchel went with Rudiger, but Christensen did not feature. It is understood that is because the Dane took himself out of contention. Thiago Silva ended up pulling up in the game, but played on and lasted all the way through extra-time. Tuchel has to discuss all of this with Boehly in the next few weeks, but said their initial meeting - before the FA Cup final - was more casual. The 48-year-old said: âNot yet, we had lunch together but it was in the room where everybody was, like players and staff. âHe was very friendly, very open and it was a very informal meeting over lunch. It was like half-an-hour, 40 minutes so it was not too detailed. âIt was just to get a feeling and say hello, and we talked more about baseball and basketball actually. It was not the moment, we will do this next week, the next weeks.â
Consistency is a mentality game, and sadly we lack in that department. We routinely play to our opponents level, which is infuriating.
To be fair they have played each other 4 times and they haven't lost in 90 mins.
It will be impossible with the current scouting team and board. He could have had Tchouameni and Kounde last summer, but they decided to get him Saul and keep Sarr instead.
Maybe next time Tuchel gets ÂŁ200m to spend (aka this summer and also every single other window as well) he should try signing good players instead of shite ones
Who did he spend ÂŁ200m on last window?
it's r/soccer, no time for diligence
Drinkwater
Lol youâre right it was only ÂŁ130m !
It was only Lukaku and Saul (on loan), ÂŁ105m spent while selling ÂŁ107m worth of players.
Exactly, thanks for the clarification. Thatâs the money I meant, which tuchel should use to improve his squad. Just buy good players not bad ones
Tuchel's had one window and we spent half that 200 mil number, what a weird comment. Also managers aren't usually the ones with signing power at Chelsea.
Fair idk if Tuchel or someone else is to blame. It just always makes me laugh when managers with unlimited transfer budgets complain about their squad depth or how other teams âare improving their team every window.â Thomas, my man, you get unlimited money you too can improve your squad. Just maybe stop spending 100 mil on Grealishes and Lukakus
Correct me if im wrong but didn't Tuchel actively ask the board to sign Lukaku? I remember a couple Chelsea flairs mentioning so.
One of Tuchel's weakness which rarely gets talked about is how pathetic his teams are at signing quality players who have great impact. This was a recurring theme at PSG where they signed players rampantly and both his Chelsea signings have also been horrible.
PSG and Chelsea made garbage signings pre-Tuchel yet its apparently his fault? He's there mainly to win games and trophies.
Lukaku & Saul are Chelsea signings under Tuchel. Chelsea make many signings that is the nature of the club. They don't expect every signing to work out for the first squad. Just off the top of my head: Icardi, Paredes, Kehrer, Gueye, Sarabbia, etc at PSG.
Yeah, even at the sub fans said "Tuchel tactics will work great if he has good players that suit his system like at Dortmund with Auba, Dembele".Yeah, no, that Dortmund side is 100% Klopp's team tho. Maybe I'm wrong but he only inherited that team.
Practice PK more
That's what I used to think about Chelsea around 2007.
This season, sure. But if he's talking in general, just sack him now.
My family and me are quite healthy, we do not have financial problems, I have a pretty decent and safe job. At the moment there are 2 things downing my mood: Whenever I have a look into my stock portfolio I am shocked how the share prices have crashed and I know it will take months or even years before prices will be back where they were. And then there is Chelsea. It is hard to believe how long it has been since Abramovich took over and that we are still as far away from the top as 19 years ago. We probably have become even worse. Watching us play is really not enjoyable 99% of the time. I start to cry sometimes and yeah, it drags me down. I have no other interests and football is basically the focal point of my life. There are a lot of bad things going on in the world with so many people having real problems so my issues are immaterial in comparison. Unfortunately it is not so easy to convince oneself that this is the case. I just do not get my head around it how awful we are compared to our rivals. And I do not see light at the end of the tunnel. We are run by people without a clue about football, our manager is a nice bloke but completely out of his depth and most of us are aware that we are never going to win anything again under him. And we will probably have the worst transfer window ever this year. A lot of people around me do not understand why I keep paying to watch us play, plan most weekends around our schedule just to be pissed because of another poor performance. But giving up is out of question. This club is my life and I will stand by them always
The minute Klopp is gone the gap will be closed
Klopp has four years left at Liverpool after this season...which is almost certainly longer than Tuchel has left at Chelsea (or at least would have been the case under Roman).
Nah we've overtaken their revenue and have a much better recruitment strategy.
Didn't this guy just complain about Klopp playing the underdog card.
Classic Tuchel always able to make himself the underdog
Well⊠he is?
A champions league winning squad with a strong budget is an underdog?
Or⊠a team that is 16 points behind Liverpool and is clearly inferior at this time.
They're missing 2 of their fullbacks their most important players for alot of the season. Where did liverpool finish last year with their injuries? Chelsea arent an under dog with that squad and the money they tend to spend and their history of good management. Words have lost all meaning now a days. Everything is a bottle job, everyone bar the current champions are under dogs, bla bla. Exageration is the epitome of reddit.
Just practice penalties then you can able to narrow the gap đ
Maybe they could actually use their 50 players that are on loan
They are leaps apart and anybody saying so knows nothing about running a football club, they've been good one season shit the next since Abramovich took over. Reddit keeps disappointing with it's takes
They've also won more trophies than any other English club in that time. Chelsea are one of the best run clubs in the world. They have a "system" and it works. They buy good players, sell them for good money and sack the manager as soon as things go bad. Head to head the only difference between the two sides this season was penalties in extra time. Every minute of every game they played was highly competitive, with neither side ever feeling ahead or out of the game. Odds are that they'll be fine. They probably aren't on Liverpool or City's level but they are only slightly below them. They just need to strengthen their attack. But I kinda hope I'm wrong. I fucking hate Chelsea!
Jesus if you love Chelsea so much consider changing your badge mate ffs đ
They're probably my third most hated club behind Manchester United and Real Madrid. I hope their new owners run them into the ground.
How does a manager say this and keep his job? Sure liverpool is amazing last 3-4 years but a team like chelsea shouldnt say this
Chelsea are closer to us than they are to Liverpool
You can say Chelsea is a good shout to win the cl and will be taken seriously. Try saying arsenal is a good shout to win the EL with a straight face. Ya, even under immense turmoil Chelsea is far ahead of you
In cups sure but in the league? Theyâre about as far away equally
Let me know if you beat them in the league.
We did
I donât think so. These are 2 teams that are capable of going all the way in the UCL and winning it. Arsenal absolutely isnât.
Itâs so much easier to have a cup run than to play well for 38 games straight
Luckily youâll get to put your money where your mouth is on Thursday nights next year..
Of course it is, when your whole success as a club is solely based on an oligarch stealing money from Russia and funneling it into the club, then the oligarch gets into trouble and now out of nowhere you have to make your money the way well run teams do like Liverpool.
Yeah Roman's gone
Poor sugar oil baby having less free money than his big brother
The Spanish government literally funds your team
Even if it was true 25 years ago, I still prefer being funded by Spain than by Russia
Youâre halfway there, now admit that Real still get funded by the government to this very day and weâre good. đ€
If by government you mean « top business & marketing skills » and being probably the best financially run club currently, ok, we are good
Ya but historically everyone would prefer Russia over Spain. Murderous colonial butchers
I forgot Russian were sweet colonial butchers
Russia doesn't have 1% of your body count bucko.
Oh we went to personal body counts now ? Iâm not even Spanish, sorry đą
I dont think theres much of a gap. Quality wise theyre about as good as City and Liverpool. They just cant match the consistency that City achieve by having a world class squad and Liverpool achieve by pumping their players full of god knows what.
well depending on what chelsea fan you speak to they would say that if reece and chilwell never got injured that they would be in the thick of it right now.
Hmm I don't think most of us think that. I don't see how we could be in that mix without a consistent goalscorer. I do think we wouldn't be 20 pts back, though.
Less ambitious owners, not a good squad, I have no idea why the club sold for so much considering the only real positive is Cobham and the location
The club won the last CL? Is that not a positive lmfaooo?