Mikel John Obi

[CHOULO19 24,332]

We are not a top 5 club in the world presently because of our pivot. That is a fact people.

No, that's an opinion/analysis.

[Naked Mole Rat 437]

Our MF has nothing to do with Mikel? Yea, you're right.

I was referring to what I was about to ask.

Anyway, a bold opinion is still an opinion. You won't be able to strengthen your point or convince people you're telling the truth by claiming that your opinions are facts. To be honest, I think it makes you look stupid more than anything because you should have figured out how to distinguish a fact from an opinion when you were five. I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets annoyed when he reads a YouTube comment that goes like "[insert opinion]. FACT." I don't actually think that you don't know the difference between a fact and an opinion. I just wanted to point out that you were making a mistake.

Also, one more thing. I don't appreciate it when people throw sarcastic remarks at me like you did, and that's another habit you probably don't want to develop, because it really can bring out the ugly side of some people.

[Johnny Kills 164]

I was referring to what I was about to ask.

Anyway, a bold opinion is still an opinion. You won't be able to strengthen your point or convince people you're telling the truth by claiming that your opinions are facts. To be honest, I think it makes you look stupid more than anything because you should have figured out how to distinguish a fact from an opinion when you were five. I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets annoyed when he reads a YouTube comment that goes like "[insert opinion]. FACT." I don't actually think that you don't know the difference between a fact and an opinion. I just wanted to point out that you were making a mistake.

Also, one more thing. I don't appreciate it when people throw sarcastic remarks at me like you did, and that's another habit you probably don't want to develop, because it really can bring out the ugly side of some people.

You don't appreciate people throwing sarcastic remarks at you, but you're allowed to say I look stupid, I'm doing something I'm not supposed to be doing because normal people learn the difference at 5 years old. You're insulting someone who you've never spoken to in your life, but I'm the one that's offending you? Thank you for wasting my time, arguing semantics instead of engaging in a discussion how I'm wrong football wise.

[Kojo 4,676]

To be honest I'm not bothered anymore, I've been wanting Mikel gone for a very long time, and I've started many arguements on this thread.

But all in all this ones up to Jose, if Mikel is going to play he will play, I'm going to trust Mourinho on this.

[Johnny Kills 164]

No, that's an opinion/analysis.

How? BVB, Madrid, Barcelona, Juve, Bayern. Our back 5 is in the same tier. So is the creativitiy. What is it then? Our strikers? Bayern and Juve don't have world class strikers, not at all. Matri, Quag, Matri, Gomez are nothing to rave about (I don't wanna put Mandzukic's name in here because I wasn't watching Bayern when he was playing this season). What is common with all of these teams? Their strength with their central midfielders. The pivots of Bayern, BVB and Madrid are the best in the world. Juve have Marchisio and Vidal and Barcelona has Busquets. We have Mikel, Ramires, MVG, and Essien. How is this not fact? Because you don't want it to be?

[CHOULO19 24,332]

How? BVB, Madrid, Barcelona, Juve, Bayern. Our back 5 is in the same tier. So is the creativitiy. What is it then? Our strikers? Bayern and Juve don't have world class strikers, not at all. Matri, Quag, Matri, Gomez are nothing to rave about (I don't wanna put Mandzukic's name in here because I wasn't watching Bayern when he was playing this season). What is common with all of these teams? Their strength with their central midfielders. The pivots of Bayern, BVB and Madrid are the best in the world. Juve have Marchisio and Vidal and Barcelona has Busquets. We have Mikel, Ramires, MVG, and Essien. How is this not fact? Because you don't want it to be?

Just one question, if things are that simple in football, why do teams have managers? It's not just about players, but finding the right combination and creating the system that fits them.

What stopped us from being one of the best teams last season? A LOT of things, imo. First is the complete lack of defensive system; we were defending as individuals rather than a team. Then there was the serious lack of squad depth in a a crazy season. Offensively, our biggest issues were the distances between our lines being too big making the transition from defense to offense very difficult, and the lack of width we had really hurt us against team who packed the box. As well as other factors like the constant changes in the back four, lacking a CB good enough to be starter next to Luiz, no one from the front four dropping back enough to receive the ball, not having any pivot players that fit the system we were playing..etc

Football is not that simple that you can just pinpoint one problem with the team and you can solve it and turn into one of the best teams in Europe overnight. Club pay millions for managers and even they can't locate and solve all the problems. But of course that just my opinion, it's not a fact and neither was what you stated.

[bleed_blue 136]

Just one question, if things are that simple in football, why do teams have managers? It's not just about players, but finding the right combination and creating the system that fits them.

What stopped us from being one of the best teams last season? A LOT of things, imo. First is the complete lack of defensive system; we were defending as individuals rather than a team. Then there was the serious lack of squad depth in a a crazy season. Offensively, our biggest issues were the distances between our lines being too big making the transition from defense to offense very difficult, and the lack of width we had really hurt us against team who packed the box. As well as other factors like the constant changes in the back four, lacking a CB good enough to be starter next to Luiz, no one from the front four dropping back enough to receive the ball, not having any pivot players that fit the system we were playing..etc

Football is not that simple that you can just pinpoint one problem with the team and you can solve it and turn into one of the best teams in Europe overnight. Club pay millions for managers and even they can't locate and solve all the problems. But of course that just my opinion, it's not a fact and neither was what you stated.

Conceded 1.61 goals per game when mikel started, 0.81 goals per game when he did not. Seems like the MAJOR problem has been identified.

[Clevemayer 764]

To be honest I'm not bothered anymore, I've been wanting Mikel gone for a very long time, and I've started many arguements on this thread.

But all in all this ones up to Jose, if Mikel is going to play he will play, I'm going to trust Mourinho on this.

if true you've learned a big lesson how to add to a discussion...

that was my point there is no reason in talking the same stuff again and again...

[Phil Driver 503]

Is he injured again?

It would seem that of the returning confederations cup players,Mikel is the one who has not played,realisation will be here soon for those who have not worked it out yet,all the clues are there and Mikel will be on the bench picking up his generous wage courtesy of Emenalo for another four years if he wants to.

It is obvious the Galatasary interest was a red herring planted by his agent,nobody wants him on those wages,inc. Mourinho and he was for sale ,Ramires said he was phoned by Mourinho and told of his value to Chelsea,I doubt Mikel has got the same assurance and crunch time is here and all is about to be revealed. Mourinho is not silly,nor was the waiter ,he wanted Ramires too at Napoli ,hence Mourinho contacting Ramires to remind him of his value to Chelsea.

It will be good for us as a club to see the manager in control of the team and who plays once again and Mikel's non selection will be further evidence of this .

In Jose we trust .

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Conceded 1.61 goals per game when mikel started, 0.81 goals per game when he did not. Seems like the MAJOR problem has been identified.

Chelsea had, let's say, 10-12 really difficult games last season. (The top 4 competitors and Juventus home and away, Shakhtar away, and maybe you could call games like Everton or Liverppol away there as well). We played around 7 of those matches in the first 21 games. We played about 5 more in the next 47 games. (This is why "Benitez' success" drives me crazy. The schedule he had overall was ridiculously easy.) Chelsea had a large number of really easy games last season (around 25 games against teams that were bottom of the Premier League or lower caliber). Mikel started one game in the Carling Cup and it was against ManU. He started two games in the FA Cup and they were against ManU and Man City. He started 4 games in the UCL and they were the Juventus and Shakhtar starts. He started 19 games in the league and 12 of them were against top-10 teams. Of the 8 easiest games against Championship and First division sides, and Nordjaelland, Mikel started none of them (Moses, on the other hand, started 6 of them). .We gave up more goals when Mikel started because Mikel started a huge percentage of his games against top teams and none of his games against the worst teams so yes, it's harder to hold Juventus, Arsenal and ManU down than it is to hold Brentford, Leeds, and Sparta Prague.

[bleed_blue 136]

Chelsea had, let's say, 10-12 really difficult games last season. (The top 4 competitors and Juventus home and away, Shakhtar away, and maybe you could call games like Everton or Liverppol away there as well). We played around 7 of those matches in the first 21 games. We played about 5 more in the next 47 games. (This is why "Benitez' success" drives me crazy. The schedule he had overall was ridiculously easy.) Chelsea had a large number of really easy games last season (around 25 games against teams that were bottom of the Premier League or lower caliber). Mikel started one game in the Carling Cup and it was against ManU. He started two games in the FA Cup and they were against ManU and Man City. He started 4 games in the UCL and they were the Juventus and Shakhtar starts. He started 19 games in the league and 12 of them were against top-10 teams. Of the 8 easiest games against Championship and First division sides, and Nordjaelland, Mikel started none of them (Moses, on the other hand, started 6 of them). .We gave up more goals when Mikel started because Mikel started a huge percentage of his games against top teams and none of his games against the worst teams so yes, it's harder to hold Juventus, Arsenal and ManU down than it is to hold Brentford, Leeds, and Sparta Prague.

Average league position of our opposition when Mikel started: 10.3

Average league position of our oppostion when Mikel did not start: 11.5

Not much difference there.

Considering the fact that we dropped 5 points vs QPR(final position 20), 2 points vs Reading (promoted team n final position 19), 3 points vs Newcastle (final position 16), 5 points vs Southampton(newly promoted, final position 14), 3 points vs West Ham (promoted team n final position 10), I am not sure how you can call games against bottom teams of PL as "really easy games".

[CHOULO19 24,332]

It would seem that of the returning confederations cup players,Mikel is the one who has not played

I realize you're basically not susceptible to reality, but denying that Mikel played is too much even for you!

[Phil Driver 503]

Ah I see he came on in the 66th minute and we were awful ,only watched the first half .

You are soon going to have to face reality here soon and in England we spell realise with an " s " . Have you ever seen Mikel live? he looks just as slow as on the box. The remaining points which you choose to ignore will still be proven right given time.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Average league position of our opposition when Mikel started: 10.3

Average league position of our oppostion when Mikel did not start: 11.5

Not much difference there.

Considering the fact that we dropped 5 points vs QPR(final position 20), 2 points vs Reading (promoted team n final position 19), 3 points vs Newcastle (final position 16), 5 points vs Southampton(newly promoted, final position 14), 3 points vs West Ham (promoted team n final position 10), I am not sure how you can call games against bottom teams of PL as "really easy games".

Because they are. We drew Brentford and we drew Juventus but they were not the same quality game. Was your previous stat just about Premier League totals? No, because Mikel's average goals against in Premier League starts was 1.2.Chelsea's average overall was 0.98. When you consider the higher caliber of opponent as well as the difference in style when Mikel was starting (under Benitez, we didn't play games like we did with the 4-2 Spurs win or the 3-2 ManU loss.), it's perfectly in line. There are plenty of legitimate complaints about Mikel. He doesn't offer much going forward, he moves the ball too slowly for our system, etc...but to even try to suggest that Mikel is costing the team a goal or half a goal a game is borderline insane. The worst defensive player in football doesn't do that and even Mikel's detractors (unless they are blind) know that he's a quality defensive player. His weaknesses are elsewhere.

[Phil Driver 503]

Wrong ,Makelele was a quality defensive midfielder ,Mikel is not in the same league ,Makelele sensed danger and won the ball as high up the pitch as possible and then used it wisely and quickly. Mikel is a very poor defensive midfielder he is too slow both in mind and body . Please do not waste the word "quality".

[bleed_blue 136]

Because they are. We drew Brentford and we drew Juventus but they were not the same quality game. Was your previous stat just about Premier League totals? No, because Mikel's average goals against in Premier League starts was 1.2.Chelsea's average overall was 0.98. When you consider the higher caliber of opponent as well as the difference in style when Mikel was starting (under Benitez, we didn't play games like we did with the 4-2 Spurs win or the 3-2 ManU loss.), it's perfectly in line. There are plenty of legitimate complaints about Mikel. He doesn't offer much going forward, he moves the ball too slowly for our system, etc...but to even try to suggest that Mikel is costing the team a goal or half a goal a game is borderline insane. The worst defensive player in football doesn't do that and even Mikel's detractors (unless they are blind) know that he's a quality defensive player. His weaknesses are elsewhere.

The only defensive style that suits mikel is when we defend with 10 men behind the ball. Otherwise he is useless defensively. Saying otherwise aint gonna change the reality.

If you are braindead, not sure calling others as blind is a good idea.

And that goals per game in pl was 1.21 with mikel n 0.81 without mikel. Not to mention our superior goal scoring, match winning performances when he did not play in PL. 1.68 points per game in pl with mikel, 2.26 points per game without mikel in pl.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

The only defensive style that suits mikel is when we defend with 10 men behind the balls. Otherwise he is useless defensively. Saying otherwise aint gonna change the reality.

If you are braindead, not sure calling others as blind is a good idea.

Yes, he's useless defensively which is why he's made 277 appearances for Chelsea under what, 8 different managers playing a variety of different systems? You don't like him, fine, but to call him useless defensively is patently absurd.

[Phil Driver 503]

The mistake we made as a club was to try and turn a failing (expensive) attacking midfielder into a defensive one ,it has not worked it is a specialist position and you either have those skills or you do not , Makelele was the master of that role and trying to turn a failed attacking midfielder into a defensive one was doomed to failure ,

Chalobah already looks more of a natural in that role to me .