🇪🇸 Cesc Fàbregas

[BlueLyon 9,359]

Sunday is his first real test imo, he got alot of flack at Barca for disappearing in the big matches. Hope he proves us all wrong

I think it wont be realy big test...city and elimination Cl games are where we will truly need him IMO

[Atlas Lion 1,223]

I think you're overrating the level of playmaking those 3 have. Ozil is the only real contender there but he's not been creating much in Arsenal's system.

For me, Messi and Fabregas are tier 1, then there's everyone else.

Iniesta is an unbelievable passer of the ball, especially in tight areas.

[Barbara 15,149]

Sunday is his first real test imo, he got alot of flack at Barca for disappearing in the big matches. Hope he proves us all wrong

passed with flying colors against City imo. Our best player or one of the best. He played too deep, but he did very well.

How he does against Arsenal isn't that important he's passed the test against City for me. I know he wasn't too creative in that game, but that mostly because of the tactics we played.

Cesc and Costa have nothing else to prove to me... they're the real deal. They will certainly have a bad match here and there and Costa could even go a few without scoring. That won't change their value in the team and as players. One for under 30m and another for 32m. I totally get supporters from other teams saying we cheated this transfer window. We bloody did! It's a steal to have paid so 'little' on those players seeing how much di María, Falcao, Neymar (even if he's too young), Bale, etc have cost.

[Daniel1980 1,425]

Iniesta is an unbelievable passer of the ball, especially in tight areas.

Have you watched him much lately? He's been unimpressive and inconsistent for over a year, only with brief flashes of brilliance, and he's been poor this season. Many Barcelona fans think he should be dropped.

[LAB 1,030]

I am so happy this player proved to me i was blind when he played for Barca. I thought he was one of the most overrated players, but little did i know after all.

Eager to see him vs Arsenal. I wonder if they'll boo him.

[Tomo 21,751]

He has improved his defensive side in recent games since his first half horror show against Swansea, he will never be particully good at that side of the game, but he needs to be adequate if he wants to be long term pivot player.

[zolayes 14,489]

He has improved his defensive side in recent games since his first half horror show against Swansea, he will never be particully good at that side of the game, but he needs to be adequate if he wants to be long term pivot player.

I dont care what his position is called ,, no one can pick a killer pass like he can.

Glass is 3 quarters full NOT one quarter empty

[Tomo 21,751]

I dont care what his position is called ,, no one can pick a killer pass like he can.

Glass is 3 quarters full NOT one quarter empty

Balance in the team is important, if we use him in a 4 3 3 with Rami and Mikel, he can still make those passes without having to defend as much.

When you are in the pivot you have responsibilitys to protect the back 4. I want us to be a ruthless team that wins 3-0 4-0 with solid displays at both ends of the pitch, not the second coming off Liverpool last season.

[zolayes 14,489]

Balance in the team is important, if we use him in a 4 3 3 with Rami and Mikel, he can still make those passes without having to defend as much.

When you are in the pivot you have responsibilitys to protect the back 4. I want us to be a ruthless team that wins 3-0 4-0 with solid displays at both ends of the pitch, not the second coming off Liverpool last season.

THE PIVOT is a new term it didnt exist three years ago, Fabregas CREATES ,, very few are better

at this ,, Accept that and you won't worry

[Barbara 15,149]

Balance in the team is important, if we use him in a 4 3 3 with Rami and Mikel, he can still make those passes without having to defend as much.

When you are in the pivot you have responsibilitys to protect the back 4. I want us to be a ruthless team that wins 3-0 4-0 with solid displays at both ends of the pitch, not the second coming off Liverpool last season.

ewww why should we employ a pivot or a midfield with Rami and Mikel?

Fàbregas isn't defensively inept to the point he needs players Rami AND Mikel to be behind him. It's either one or the other, but even then, 'no, thanks' from me.

I think Matic + Fàbregas have been working much better now than they were a month ago. I can only expect them to be even better a month from now.

Against the biggest sides, we could bring Ramires and play 4-3-3, which is what we did against City, but surprisingly enough Fàbregas wasn't the most advanced, Ramires was. That's a waste imo... Fàbregas as the most advanced midfielder isn't immediately behind the striker, as were playing with Willian and Hazard. I get it that Rami has pace - much more than Cesc - and being ahead allows him to make runs. But let's be honest... Ramires didn't have one single run during the first half as far as I remember. We were that tad defensively. I don't expect Mourinho to be that defensive playing Arsenal, Liverpool or United away from home. He knows City have two good CBs and an amazing attack. The other teams - even the top ones - are unbalanced and we don't need to be as cautious, although I'm sure we'll be a bit cautious nonetheless when playing away, but not to that extent.

on the second line of your post... haven't we been winning matches by 3, 4 goals anyway? City was the exception, as covered above (despite Costa's unlucky woodwork), but every other single match we played and didn't score more than three goals (Leicester, Bolton, Schalke and Sporting) it was because of bad finishing, not because we didn't break through the opponents defense. There's nothing to be fixed there. Adding both Ramires and Mikel to the team would affect us negatively in the attack and I'm not sure there's such an incredible improvement in the defense. This is going back to last year tactics. If we bring the two of them, as you're suggesting, it means we're wasting an AM to be replaced by a MD. If you want Ramires to improve as defensively, he needs to go forward less often. There's no reason at all for that.

I know Villa and Sporting aren't that great attacking (the latter created some stuff but their finishing was even worse than ours), but we've managed to get too consecutive clean sheets. It's expected for the team to get used to the new tactics and for players to have a better understanding of one another, especially Matic and Fàbregas - as the rest of the team, except Costa, is the same as last season's. That's what I've been saying we need: time. Time is getting the job done and I can see us improve defensively some more, but we won't ever be as good as last season and there's no similarity between us and Liverpool, being an unbalanced team that attacks a lot and but is terrible defending. We aren't even close to being that. The Everton match was a one-time-off thing, that I don't see happening again once the team is ready.

I said in a few posts in August that by the end of September we should be able to see improvements in our defensive system and if we still didn't have at least the slightest progress then it'd be concerning. I've seen more than enough progress in the last few weeks and I think we're going in the right direction, and the right direction has a midfield (pivot, diamond, triangle, whatever you want to name it) with Matic and Fàbregas and three AMs ahead of them. The exception is the tough away game here and there where I see us playing a 4-3-3 with Ramires joining them. Mikel is a sub that won't be used in the majority of the matches and Ramires will mostly be employed as a RW more than a defensive or holding midfielder. There's no need for him to be anything different from that.

Also, even if we don't win matches by 3 or 4 goals every time, what's the matter? We already progressed into a more attractive football many were demanding, now the demand is for us to win by 3 or 4 goals most of our matches. What's next? There's no need to win every single match or most of them by a big scoreline. Seriously, we're very solid in the attack, regardless of how many goals we score, and we're on our way to have stability in the defense, but we'll never be as solid defensively as last season at the same time being as solid offensively as City was last season. In the real world where football is played by human beings, that's not possible. You simply can't have everything like in the video-games... What City accomplished last season with 102 goals scored and 37 conceded is already way too much and that's basically 1 goal conceded by game on average. For an attack that could score 102 times, that's outstanding and very difficult to achieve.

[Mechromancer 262]

Modric is better in practically everything.

[Daniel1980 1,425]

Modric is better in practically everything.

Disagree. Modric is an excellent midfielder, one of the best out there, but the only thing he's better at than Cesc is defensive ability and probably positioning. Cesc is better at everything else: vision, creative passing, creating chances, through balls, final balls, shooting, versatility. Modric created 10 chances for his team this season. Cesc created 28 chances.

[Mechromancer 262]

Maybe Cesc has more productivity, but Modric is a better middlefield in general. Technically and tactically.

[Barbara 15,149]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrmvQKvCDsU&list=UUhX9gSVf1lhh1Kcfs-4Jcdw

[Daniel1980 1,425]

Maybe Cesc has more productivity, but Modric is a better middlefield in general. Technically and tactically.

Not sure what makes him a better midfielder in general. I agree that Modric is better tactically in defence, but Cesc is better tactically in attack: he reads the game better, sees other player's runs better and makes runs himself, knows when to pass, the weight of the final ball. Modric is nowhere as good in the final third. Unless you're a defensive midfielder, contributing to attack and being more productive is always more important than being just tactically solid. Because in football that's what counts and wins matches: goals.

[Barbara 15,149]

For me the answer is simple to decide who's better: Would I trade Cesc for Luka? the answer for me is no. So regardless of who's better in what, I think Cesc is better for Chelsea and that's all that matters to me. Mata is better than a lot of players, but he isn't better for Chelsea. It's not only about individual quality, but how they fit in the system. Modric would fit here just fine, it's just that Cesc fits better... We need a Cesc more than we need a Luka.

[Tomo 21,751]

@barbara

3 to 4 nil ill take over 6-3, and im not expecting Cesc to be Ramires or Mikel (defensively) if he can get to half the level Luka Modric (defensively) then I will be the happiest person on earth as that would mean we have undebatably the best CM on earth.

I have seen improvements and im feeling a lot better about Matic and Cesc partnership than i did a few weeks ago, im going to leave that particular debate alone however and give a proper opinion at the end of the season.

[The Skipper 20,609]

He has improved his defensive side in recent games since his first half horror show against Swansea, he will never be particully good at that side of the game, but he needs to be adequate if he wants to be long term pivot player.

IMO he is adequate and has been for most of the season, people tend to be over exaggerate how weak he is or has been defensively this season.

[Tomo 21,751]

IMO he is adequate and has been for most of the season, people tend to be over exaggerate how weak he is or has been defensively this season.

He has definitely stepped that side up in recent games however the Leicester, Everton and especially Swansea games I had concerns, when Neville analysed him on MNF, the way the Swansea midfield were playing passes round him was almost identical to what players do to Juan.

However I am confident he will step that side up, but the Swansea first half especially did nothing to ease my initial fears.

[RoyalBlues 4,050]

For me the answer is simple to decide who's better: Would I trade Cesc for Luka? the answer for me is no. So regardless of who's better in what, I think Cesc is better for Chelsea and that's all that matters to me. Mata is better than a lot of players, but he isn't better for Chelsea. It's not only about individual quality, but how they fit in the system. Modric would fit here just fine, it's just that Cesc fits better... We need a Cesc more than we need a Luka.

Agree with Cesc, but I disagree if you said Mata isn't better for Chelsea. He just doesn't fit with Mourinho style.