Super Frank Thread

[Jase 43,479]

26 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

We have never lost with Ziyech and he and Billy/Bate are our only creative players currently.

Firstly, I find it funny how you're suddenly just plucking names like Gilmour and Bate and throwing them into the mix when talking about creative players. 

Secondly, yes, we have never lost with Ziyech but you made it sound as if we've played 100 games with him and won every single one of them when in fact, the sample size is very small and deceiving. Ziyech has made just 12 appearances this season - only 7 starts - played 612 minutes:

ZIYECH'S STARTS:

W 4-0 Krasnodar

W 3-0 Rennes

W 3-0 Burnley

W 4-1 Sheffield United

W 2-0 Newcastle

D 0-0 Spurs

W 3-1 Leeds (played only 30 minutes and the score was 1-1 then)

ZIYECH'S SUB APPEARANCES:

D 0-0 Sevilla

W 2-1 Rennes

W 4-0 Sevilla (were 2-0 up already when he came on)

D 3-3 Southampton (were winning 3-2 when he came on)

D 0-0 Man United

Looking at the games Ziyech started this season, are you gonna tell me that we should not beating most of those teams - with or without Ziyech? Krasnodar and Rennes were hopeless in the group. Burnley, Sheffield United, Newcastle and Leeds are in the bottom half of the league. The one game where we played a top half team, we didn't win (surprise surprise!) and Ziyech had an absolute stinker in that game. We didn't beat all the top half teams last season but we managed to beat a few, without Ziyech and the other new signings. So really, is this "we can't win without Ziyech" really a legitimate excuse for our recent struggles? We won games against top half teams last season, so why can't we do it this season, especially with the new signings?

[killer1257 3,282]

Firstly, I find it funny how you're suddenly just plucking names like Gilmour and Bate and throwing them into the mix when talking about creative players. 
Secondly, yes, we have never lost with Ziyech but you made it sound as if we've played 100 games with him and won every single one of them when in fact, the sample size is very small and deceiving. Ziyech has made just 12 appearances this season - only 7 starts - played 612 minutes:
ZIYECH'S STARTS:
W 4-0 Krasnodar
W 3-0 Rennes
W 3-0 Burnley
W 4-1 Sheffield United
W 2-0 Newcastle
D 0-0 Spurs
W 3-1 Leeds (played only 30 minutes and the score was 1-1 then)
ZIYECH'S SUB APPEARANCES:
D 0-0 Sevilla
W 2-1 Rennes
W 4-0 Sevilla (were 2-0 up already when he came on)
D 3-3 Southampton (were winning 3-2 when he came on)
D 0-0 Man United
Looking at the games Ziyech started this season, are you gonna tell me that we should not beating most of those teams - with or without Ziyech? Krasnodar and Rennes were hopeless in the group. Burnley, Sheffield United, Newcastle and Leeds are in the bottom half of the league. The one game where we played a top half team, we didn't win (surprise surprise!) and Ziyech had an absolute stinker in that game. We didn't beat all the top half teams last season but we managed to beat a few, without Ziyech and the other new signings. So really, is this "we can't win without Ziyech" really a legitimate excuse for our recent struggles? We won games against top half teams last season, so why can't we do it this season, especially with the new signings?

I throw them into the mix because I have seen their creativity during matches. Werner for instance makes good runs because he has good movement, but he can make as many good runs he wants, if nobody is going to play the perfect pass to him, his runs are pointless.

There is a reason why our youth score 2 to six goals almost every match whenever I watch them play. Our youth does clearly not lack creativity and Bate, Anjorin and Livramento (close to breaking an asssist record) currently are the guys that makes things happen with for the strikers.
Also, it is not like our youth is garbage or something like that. RJ was before his knee injury maybe the best RB in the league. Lamptey is a very good player. Musiala left us and those Bayern fans are making me angry telling me how good he is. Our youth is the real deal. We have a new golden generation coming, like it or not.

Whenever I see Ziyech play for our team, I see much more offensive football because he sees things other guys don't see and he is not afraid of taking risks like Cesc. Like I said, I think Thiago Silva is our second most creative players when Ziyech does not play and he is a CB. Why did we struggle under Sarri so much? Because we lacked creativity. Why did we play so bad under Conte? We lacked creativity.

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

[Jase 43,479]

8 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Why did we struggle under Sarri so much? Because we lacked creativity.

It's also because Sarriball is just bad and doesn't seem to work at the biggest clubs. He had better and more creative players at Juventus and still played bad football and got sacked. He just happened to have all the tools at Napoli. 

8 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Why did we play so bad under Conte? We lacked creativity.

Conteball was largely fine till Conte himself decided to check out in his second season. What he did and got us play in the first season was arguably our most exciting season in the last decade. 

[Jase 43,479]

7 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

I throw them into the mix because I have seen their creativity during matches. Werner for instance makes good runs because he has good movement, but he can make as many good runs he wants, if nobody is going to play the perfect pass to him, his runs are pointless.

There is a reason why our youth score 2 to six goals almost every match whenever I watch them play. Our youth does clearly not lack creativity and Bate, Anjorin and Livramento (close to breaking an asssist record) currently are the guys that makes things happen with for the strikers.
Also, it is not like our youth is garbage or something like that. RJ was before his knee injury maybe the best RB in the league. Lamptey is a very good player. Musiala left us and those Bayern fans are making me angry telling me how good he is. Our youth is the real deal. We have a new golden generation coming, like it or not.

Not saying our youth is bad but christ, you really sound like some of those ******** Chelsea youth accounts on Twitter. 

[killer1257 3,282]

Not saying our youth is bad but christ, you really sound like some of those ******** Chelsea youth accounts on Twitter. 

Just saying that our youth has some great youth products. I watch them quite often and I see more creativity and technical abilities watching them play than our boys.

I have been watching our youth play since 2010 (obviously not every match) when I became Chelsea fan . And it is not like I hype every youth player up. Also, those youth accounts hype Mason Mount up. I clearly don't rate him [emoji23].

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

[killer1257 3,282]

Conteball was largely fine till Conte himself decided to check out in his second season. What he did and got us play in the first season was arguably our most exciting season in the last decade. 

Steve Holland said that one reason why Chelsea was so effective under Conte was because England did not know how to cope with a back three. Pl was not used to that and Conte is a master of a back 3. So it took them one year to discover ways to beat us and in the second season, teams were ready to counter our back three tactics and look what happened. Conte more or less revolutionized PL football lol


Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

[Fulham Broadway 16,855]

3 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Steve Holland said that one reason why Chelsea was so effective under Conte was because England did not know how to cope with a back three. Pl was not used to that and Conte is a master of a back 3. So it took them one year to discover ways to beat us and in the second season, teams were ready to counter our back three tactics and look what happened. Conte more or less revolutionized PL football lol


Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk
 

Yup within a month over half the PL teams were copying the idea 

[Jase 43,479]

3 minutes ago, killer1257 said:

Steve Holland said that one reason why Chelsea was so effective under Conte was because England did not know how to cope with a back three. Pl was not used to that and Conte is a master of a back 3. So it took them one year to discover ways to beat us and in the second season, teams were ready to counter our back three tactics and look what happened. Conte more or less revolutionized PL football lol

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

That's on Conte for not being able to counter other back 3s...

[Atomiswave 6,072]

1 hour ago, killer1257 said:

Steve Holland said that one reason why Chelsea was so effective under Conte was because England did not know how to cope with a back three. Pl was not used to that and Conte is a master of a back 3. So it took them one year to discover ways to beat us and in the second season, teams were ready to counter our back three tactics and look what happened. Conte more or less revolutionized PL football lol


Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk
 

He really did wonders in EPL Conte, every bloody team copied us, everyone.

[OneMoSalah 8,778]

2 hours ago, Jason said:

It's also because Sarriball is just bad and doesn't seem to work at the biggest clubs. He had better and more creative players at Juventus and still played bad football and got sacked. He just happened to have all the tools at Napoli. 

Conteball was largely fine till Conte himself decided to check out in his second season. What he did and got us play in the first season was arguably our most exciting season in the last decade. 

Tbf I still think Sarri with these attacking players such as Havertz, Werner, Ziyech, even guys like Mount would have us doing a lot lot better than Frank does just now. It never felt like we were a million miles away we just lacked something extra in attack and midfield in terms of being creative. 

I think the likes of Havertz and Ziyech would of been so much better suited than Hazard and Willian tbf. Even then, at least you seen the teams identity with Sarri and there was a clear style of play. Just lacked some players to make it work. Hazard was a world class player but never in the same mould as Insigne or Callejon. Willian the same. Pedro was more similar to Callejon which is why he scored all those goals. Probably similar to why Juventus struggled in attack also because Ronaldo and Dybala are more individualistic players than team players.

I know Juventus sacked him but Juventus are still far from a much improved or better side. They had/still have ageing players and changing that squad to play in Sarri’s system and his sort of high energy high pressing football was always going to be difficult. Hence why even with Pirlo now your still seeing Juventus do well one game then struggle the next because he is trying to also change them in a way to suit his philosophy. They’ve dropped points at teams you would expect them to win at. Atalanta, Fiorentina, Lazio, Roma, Verona, Benevento....

[Jase 43,479]

Numbers on the right are Points per Game.

[ZaynChelsea 423]

5 hours ago, Superblue_1986 said:

On the flip side, it could be Lampard's saving grace having a couple of weeks to properly work on the tactical aspect of this team. I think it is easy to just throw up that £200m was spent this summer and all the players should be able to perform and gel immediately. The lack of pre season this summer gone has probably hurt us more than most due to the high turnover of players. Not having that pre season, and then having little time to work tactically on the team due to playing pretty much solidly 3 times a week since the start of the season makes things far more difficult. 

Assuming the City and Morecambe games are off now, Lampard has the opportunity to not just turn this season around but start stamping a more long term blueprint on this side. If the results and performances don't pick up following that, then his position could be reaching untenable levels.

All teams had the issue with pre-season. No excuses. And btw, the longer Lampard is here, the worse the football is getting.

[MoroccanBlue 5,303]

52 minutes ago, Jason said:

Numbers on the right are Points per Game.

And Lampard has spent more than them

[robsblubot 3,504]

5 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

And Lampard has spent more than them

not inflation-adjusted though.

He did not spend that much in today's market esp considering we did not spend in the previous summer window.

We also went for younger players with lots of potential. That's what most on here wanted.

[MoroccanBlue 5,303]

7 minutes ago, robsblubot said:

not inflation-adjusted though.

Take that with a grain of salt.

Apparently, today we would've spent 60-70 million on SWP vs 21 million back in 2005. 

[Vesper 28,832]

9 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

And Lampard has spent more than them

we only spent (net) huge (before this past summer) twice

Romans first two years

Franks net spend this year, even adjusted for inflation, is the biggest net in the history of the club

[Vesper 28,832]

9 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Take that with a grain of salt.

Apparently, today we would've spent 60-70 million on SWP vs 21 million back in 2005. 

the poster is wrong

and T-Markt adjusts for inflation

Franks net spend this summer alone was the best net spend in club history,

Roman's first two years where the only ones close

[Jase 43,479]

14 minutes ago, Vesper said:

the poster is wrong

and T-Markt adjusts for inflation

Franks net spend this summer alone was the best net spend in club history,

Roman's first two years where the only ones close

But if we just count the spending and not the sales, then I believe only Mourinho has spent more than Lampard here?