Viewing Thread:
"Can Chelsea Do It?"

So? Can they?

Hundred millions pounds later, 'Chelski' are the first real challenge to Manchester United's unprecedented Treble. Only difference is, they're going for the Quad.

A breif look at any Chelsea teamsheet will show their class. A solid defence, Cech is one of the best in the world at the moment, second only to Buffon in my books, Terry and Gallas are rocks at the back, with Bridge and Ferriera offering support on the wings. However, both of these players are weak - they have been unlocked on more than one occasion, generally leading to those rare goals. Admittedly, this isn't often, but you build from the back. The midfield is stunning. Robben, Duff - arguably the best wingers in the country. Their pace is outstanding, and they both have the skill and finishing to create goals from anywhere. Lampard runs the game, his determination and goal-scoring ability give him the keys to any teams defence, and Makelele is invaluable with the ammount of attacks he breaks up. Up front is where you'll find the weakness, although neither Drogba or Gudjonssen can be called weak - but they still don't rival the likes of Thierry Henry and Ronaldo. They have the squad, but there are holes that could well be picked at over the end of the season, as players begin to tire.

The European Champions League, will be their hardest challenge, their Everest. Mouriniho, who won it last year with a Porto side who, at the start of the season, wouldn't have challenged a fly, is the man for the job. They have the experience as well - Makalele, Drogba and Smertin, to name a few - to go all the way. But with oppositon such as Real Madrid and AC Milan, do they really have what it takes?

As for the 'Barclaycards' Premiership, they've already got one foot through the door. 7 precious points from holders Arsenal, they look odd's on. But Arsenal's squad is fit, and, while it may not have the depth of that million-pound squad, it does have the experience of winning it, and it takes a lot to do that. Only 4 points behind Arsenal are Manchester United, who have won the league more times than any other, who are known for their late finishes. Don't count them out, they already proved they have the strength and resilience to come back and fight for it. Chelsea are certainly the favorites for this one.

The FA Cup and the Carlings Cup are certainly possible, with few challenges in the way, and Chelsea's huge squad have the size to cope with the ammount of strain these put on the team's performances in the major competitions.

Personally, I don't think so. The Premiership, and maybe the Carlings or FA, but though they have the ability, but I don't believe they are there - yet.

Colourless wrote:
> So it depends on the sums of money paid for each player, not how
> many?
>
> Well United paid 30mil each for Rio and Rooney. I'd prefer to have
> homegrown JT and £12 mil Arjen myself.... :)


Why are you having a pop at how much we spent on those two? Not even discussing that, i was just saying that to those people who say Chelsea are buying their way to the title you could say everyone does no matter who they are as to my knowledge every transfer that goes through money is changing hands somewhere even on the 'free' transfers.

Kawada wrote:
> You can say every team buys the title whoever wins it unless in the
> very rare event they only sign free agents and don't pay them any
> signing on fees. That's why i hate that argument people put forward.

So it depends on the sums of money paid for each player, not how many?

Well United paid 30mil each for Rio and Rooney. I'd prefer to have homegrown JT and £12 mil Arjen myself.... :)

We didn't buy big name players, we just got ripped off on small players. However it seems to be money well spent at the moment.....

Coin wrote:
> So? Can they?
no. they cant

You can say every team buys the title whoever wins it unless in the very rare event they only sign free agents and don't pay them any signing on fees. That's why i hate that argument people put forward.

Not your point but while it was there thought i'd chuck in my two cents :-D

Apologies Clazon, I do think I misunderstood your point.

However, the real Chelsea are hiding in there somewhere, I know it, waiting to throw it away.

Sorry. You seem to be missing my point.

I don't accuse teams of buying the title, because it's their good luck or good business management if they have the money.

I was merely saying that you can't be negative over your Chelsea team and refer to past failures, when the team you have now is nothing like the ones that stumbled before it.

********


Much laughage ensued after the Spurs comment.
:D

Colourless wrote:
> Clazon wrote:
> EDIT: "Chelski" is an accurate sign of your change.
>
> "-ski" isn't Russian, it's Polish.
>
> If you want to make a lame joke like that, "Chelskov" would
> be the appropriate name....

The point was that no-one calls you Chelsea any more...

Arsenal bought Almunia, Flamini, Fabregas, Ebuoue, Reyes, Van Persie over the past 2 years.

If they win the title, will they be buying it?


Man Utd bought Rooney, Ronaldo, Heinze, Saha, Alan Smith, Bellion etc over the past few years (possible £30 mil Rio as well...)

If they win the title, will they be buying it?


Spurs have bought 14 new players THIS season.

If they... wait... no.

So if we had bought ALL of these players in different seasons, we would not be "buying the title."

Face it. We've built a good team. Based on John Terry (homegrown) and Frank Lampard (bought in 2001). We won't necessarily win anything this season, but whatever we do get we will deserve.

Clazon wrote:
> EDIT: "Chelski" is an accurate sign of your change.

"-ski" isn't Russian, it's Polish.

If you want to make a lame joke like that, "Chelskov" would be the appropriate name....