Football: “WHAT THE F*CK WAS THAT”?

[baxus]

13 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Because the options were Matic and absolutely nobody?

Would you rather have Bakayoko? Because swapping Matic with Bakayoko hardly seems to have improved Chelsea's squad.

I don't remember that many defensive midfielders of Matic's level being on the market last summer but, by all means, correct me if I missed someone. Would you rather United signed Barry, Lucas Leiva or Flamini?  

[Consigliere]

It's being reported that Coquelin has agreed to join Valencia on a four-and-a-half year contract. The two clubs are expected to finalize the transfer fee within the next 24 hours.

[Jordan La Cabra]

Arsenal Invincibles and City-so-far Invincibles combined XI on Sky Sports. They're jumping the gun, as usual, but it's quite a tough team to pick. But here's mine:

4-2-3-1: Ederson; Kyle Walker, Sol Campbell, Kolo Toure, Ashley Cole; Patrick Viera, Kevin De Bruyne; David Silva, Robert Pires, Dennis Bergkamp; Thierry Henry.

[Mexal]

2 hours ago, Consigliere said:

It's being reported that Coquelin has agreed to join Valencia on a four-and-a-half year contract. The two clubs are expected to finalize the transfer fee within the next 24 hours.

I wish him the best of luck. I hope we sell Walcott and Sanchez as well.

[Iskaral Pust]

I'm waiting for the Coutinho deal to create a domino effect over the next seven months.  Liverpool will buy some players, which creates a ripple effect as selling clubs seek their own replacements.  Barca probably needs to sell some fringe players to balance their books, especially the wage bill.  Real Madrid will probably get worried about lagging Barca and look this summer to strengthen their team and placate the fan base, which will kick off a secondary wave of ripples.  And if all of that leads to Madrid trying to push Bale to Utd, then it could become a full-blown circus.

PSG signing Neymar was the initial catalyst, but the knock-on effect from that was mostly delayed but is picking up steam now.

[polishgenius]

7 hours ago, baxus said:

I don't remember that many defensive midfielders of Matic's level being on the market last summer but, by all means, correct me if I missed someone. Would you rather United signed Barry, Lucas Leiva or Flamini?  

I'd rather have kept Herrera there and signed a player we needed more, but I'm not sure why you're making out like only players who moved could possibly have moved. If I recall, we dropped our interest in Eric Dier when Matic became available, and there are other young DMs in the world (heck, a bit more box-to-box but Liverpool snagged Keita at the same time). Dier would of course have cost more, but that's what happens when you're looking for a longer term fix. As it is, we're gonna be beginning to look around for a Matic replacement in a couple of years.
And remember, Matic is playing well now but the reason we were allowed to get him was he suffered a big drop in form following Kante's arrival and there were worries he might be on the slide anyway, so it wasn't at all clear that we wouldn't be doing so immediately.

[Jordan La Cabra]

4 hours ago, polishgenius said:

And remember, Matic is playing well now but the reason we were allowed to get him was he suffered a big drop in form following Kante's arrival and there were worries he might be on the slide anyway, so it wasn't at all clear that we wouldn't be doing so immediately.

Matic was brilliant alongside Kante last season, I thought. From a Chelsea perspective, I was disappointed to see him go, especially as he was going to a rival and I didn’t think we were replacing him with superior players in Bakayoko or Drinkwater.

At the same time, during the 2015/16 season, if Man United had offered £10m for him I’d have been urging Chelsea to take it. I know practically our whole team dropped from that season but I always felt that Matic’s was the most extreme. He was that bad in that season that I wondered whether that was the real Matic and the good Matic from the season before was just fluke form.

Obviously it’s since proven that he’s a better player than he was in 2015/16, but Man United bought him knowing that he has the ability to dramatically drop his form off for an entire season. In fact, Jose knows that better than anyone, having managed him through those periods.

 

A boring old affair at Stamford Bridge tonight. Chelsea will be going home feeling slightly frustrated they didn’t score considering how strong an XI they fielded, but there wasn’t much in the game either way. A draw is fair enough. I’m imagine we will see a much better game in the second leg.

[baxus]

11 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

Matic was brilliant alongside Kante last season, I thought. From a Chelsea perspective, I was disappointed to see him go, especially as he was going to a rival and I didn’t think we were replacing him with superior players in Bakayoko or Drinkwater.

Nah, he had a "big dip in form" that saw him play 35 out of 38 league matches for a team that won the title quite comfortably, if not dominantly.

[Consigliere]

11 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

Matic was brilliant alongside Kante last season, I thought. From a Chelsea perspective, I was disappointed to see him go, especially as he was going to a rival and I didn’t think we were replacing him with superior players in Bakayoko or Drinkwater.

I thought so too. It seems that once Matic was sold, the narrative amongst certain sections of the Chelsea fanbase became that he was shit anyway and lots of other fans came around to believing that rubbish. IIRC, Chelsea started to leak goals towards the tail end of the campaign right around the time Matic was no longer a regular starter. I don't think Conte dropped him because of form either; it was due to tactics. Conte wanted to have a double pivot in midfield rather than a pure midfield destroyer like Matic, which is why signing Bakayoko made sense.

 

Quote

At the same time, during the 2015/16 season, if Man United had offered £10m for him I’d have been urging Chelsea to take it. I know practically our whole team dropped from that season but I always felt that Matic’s was the most extreme. He was that bad in that season that I wondered whether that was the real Matic and the good Matic from the season before was just fluke form.

I take that season from Chelsea as an anomaly. If we were to judge Chelsea players based on that season then the conclusion would be that most of them are shit/prone to massive drops in form, which is clearly incorrect.

[Mark Antony]

Lots of journos reporting that Liverpool will try to bring Keita in now and that Leipzig want an additional 20m for Liverpool to do it.

Also young winger Malcolm from Bordeaux to Arsenal as possible Sánchez replacement has a lot of buzz. 

[The Winged Shadow]

18 minutes ago, Mark Antony said:

Lots of journos reporting that Liverpool will try to bring Keita in now and that Leipzig want an additional 20m for Liverpool to do it.

Wouldn't be the worst move considering the money involved and the quality of player.

Much better than the 120m Lemar rumours!

There were a few rumours about Strootman and Ceballos as well which i thought was interesting

[Consigliere]

3 minutes ago, The Winged Shadow said:

There were a few rumours about Strootman and Ceballos as well which i thought was interesting

Strootman might be more realistic. The only concern would be those serious knee injuries but he's been playing well since recovering. Hard to see Real Madrid being willing to part with Ceballos. He is highly rated over there even though he's not had much playing time and he has a mammoth (€500m) buyout clause.

[BigFatCoward]

On 10/01/2018 at 0:52 PM, JordanJH1993 said:

Arsenal Invincibles and City-so-far Invincibles combined XI on Sky Sports. They're jumping the gun, as usual, but it's quite a tough team to pick. But here's mine:

4-2-3-1: Ederson; Kyle Walker, Sol Campbell, Kolo Toure, Ashley Cole; Patrick Viera, Kevin De Bruyne; David Silva, Robert Pires, Dennis Bergkamp; Thierry Henry.

That Arsenal team wasn't 'that' good, they just didn't lose any games, their points total was nothing special, in line with most other PL winners of the last 10-15 years.  I'd probably only go with 3 that are bankers to make that team, Cole, Viera, Henry.

[Jordan La Cabra]

1 hour ago, BigFatCoward said:

That Arsenal team wasn't 'that' good, they just didn't lose any games, their points total was nothing special, in line with most other PL winners of the last 10-15 years.  I'd probably only go with 3 that are bankers to make that team, Cole, Viera, Henry.

Oh, I agree. I think Man United have had a fair few sides that were better than the Invincibles - Chelsea, too. But it was a man for man combined XI; it just so happens that I'd pick more men from the Arsenal 2003/04 season XI than I would from the current Man City XI. Though, Kolo Toure is up for debate, but neither Otamendi or Stones are outstanding options, either, which made me go for the partnership of Toure and Campbell; one that played together 34 or 35 times that season.

And Dennis Bergkamp is always a banker, for me.

 

Man United linked with Alexis Sanchez. Still think he is Man City bound, whether it be this window or in the summer.

[polishgenius]

Berkamp and Pires have to be bankers, surely? Their points total might not have been phenomenal, but it was a brilliant team.

[Jordan La Cabra]

The Invincibles’ may not have had the greatest points total, but they have a classic starting XI. Everyone can rhyme off that line up from that season: Lehmann; Lauren, Toure, Campbell, Cole; Pires, Gilberto, Viera, Ljungberg; Bergkamp, Henry. Other players came in and played here and there, of course, but that XI was the main one.

The only other classic XI in the Premier League era I can think of is the Man United team of the late 90s, early 00s: Schmeichel; Neville, Stam, Johnsen (his was interchangeable, I think), Irwin; Beckham, Keane, Scholes, Giggs; Cole, Yorke. That XI is even more impressive as their success was over a sustained period of time.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

26 minutes ago, JordanJH1993 said:

The Invincibles’ may not have had the greatest points total, but they have a classic starting XI. Everyone can rhyme off that line up from that season: Lehmann; Lauren, Toure, Campbell, Cole; Pires, Gilberto, Viera, Ljungberg; Bergkamp, Henry. Other players came in and played here and there, of course, but that XI was the main one.

The only other classic XI in the Premier League era I can think of is the Man United team of the late 90s, early 00s: Schmeichel; Neville, Stam, Johnsen (his was interchangeable, I think), Irwin; Beckham, Keane, Scholes, Giggs; Cole, Yorke. That XI is even more impressive as their success was over a sustained period of time.

Well, that was really down to that United team basically winning everything in '99. With CL, League and FA Cup.

Although, Schmeichel was past his prime already and on his way out (didn't he leave United at the end of that Season and was replaced with Barthez (mixed success) and later on with van der Sar). Stam left soon after his falling out with Ferguson (and was replaced with Blanc for a year I think). You could also add their fringe players with Sherringham, Solskjaer, Butt, Brown and the other Neville. Our local United supporters can point out if I had forgotten anyone who should have been metioned.

As for the invincibles Bergkamp was a bit past it imo. So my mixed team looked more like.

Ederson - Walker, Stones, Campbell, Cole - Vieira, Fernandinho - Pires, de Bruyne, Sterling (or Sane whoever you prefer) - Henry.

4-2-3-1 formation.

[Jordan La Cabra]

30 minutes ago, Notone said:

Well, that was really down to that United team basically winning everything in '99. With CL, League and FA Cup.

Although, Schmeichel was past his prime already and on his way out (didn't he leave United at the end of that Season and was replaced with Barthez (mixed success) and later on with van der Sar). Stam left soon after his falling out with Ferguson (and was replaced with Blanc for a year I think). You could also add their fringe players with Sherringham, Solskjaer, Butt, Brown and the other Neville. Our local United supporters can point out if I had forgotten anyone who should have been metioned.

 

That period where they won three titles in a row - 98/99, 99/00, 00/01 - the core of the side was made up of the majority of that XI I named.

Schmeichel left after the Treble, but in came Barthez. Gary Neville was the main stay at RB - as was Stam at CB (who won three titles in his three full season at at Man U; sadly his last season was blighted by injury). Silvestre came in for Johnsen to partner him. Blanc was even there briefly. Irwin stayed until 2012, but ended up sharing duties with Phil Neville. The midfield stayed as that Beckham, Scholes, Keane, Giggs (with Butt coming in) midfield; easiliest the most well remembered midfield in Premier League history. And up front they had Cole and Yorke with that alternatives of Solskjaer and Sheringham, who ended up PFA player of the year in 2001 despite being well into his thirties by then.

What I mean is not that they only had XI players, but that everyone could name that squad and still can. You and I have just proved my point about how memorable their side was. I’m no Man United fan and I am not sure if you are (?) but we both easily recall their squad from that time because it was the same core of players and together they had three incredible years of unprecedented success in the Premier League era. 

The Invincles are the same. They probably weren’t even Arsenal’s best side of the PL era, but the feat they pulled off makes their XI so easy to remember.

Chelsea hold the record for most points, fewest goals conceded, most clean sheets all from the 04/05 season, but I doubt that squad is that easily remembered by non Chelsea fans. Same for our side in 09/10 that have the record for most goals in a season. I’d say even last year’s Chelsea team will be soon forgotten despite breaking the record for wins in a PL season.

This Man City team could well go on to be the greatest PL team in a single season and be remembered like the Man United team from 99-01 and the 03/04 Arsenal side, but it is easier for me to recall the players in the squad for Man United 99-01 and Arsenal 03/04 season than it is for me to tell you the players in Man City’s squad when they won the league in 11/12 and 13/14, despite them only being a few years ago.

Honourable mention for Leicester. Their core of players that won the 15/16 title will be easily remember for years to come, too.

[Daemon the Leaner]

13 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

This Man City team could well go on to be the greatest PL team in a single season and be remembered like the Man United team from 99-01 and the 03/04 Arsenal side, but it is easier for me to recall the players in the squad for Man United 99-01 and Arsenal 03/04 season than it is for me to tell you the players in Man City’s squad when they won the league in 11/12 and 13/14, despite them only being a few years ago.

Honourable mention for Leicester. Their core of players that won the 15/16 title will be easily remember for years to come, too.

Indeed. But it's worth noticeable that if it wasn't for QPR refusing the ball and Gerrard slipping, Man City would probably not have a single PL title for 40 years.

Thus, the weaker are the opponents, the easier it is to recall a winning XI. If Pep's team win the league (they may actually do at least a double) without being defeated, as you said it, they have a strong claim to be reminded as one of the greatests teams of PL history. But if they do so, it will partly be because of Chelsea and Man Utd failing to be title contenders, as their squads are weaker and their managers made worst choices in the transfer window. (so far)

But yeah, that City XI will probably (and unfortunately) stay in history anyway, especially that midfield of KDB, Silva, Fernandinho. Unlike the City sides from 11/12 and 13/14, who had to cope with tougher opponents (Sir Alex's United then Rodgers's Liverpool and José's Chelsea)

And I agree about Leicester. That Drinkwater-Kanté midfield, added to that Mahrez-Vardy connection, will stay in memories.

[Iskaral Pust]

Liverpool are only one point lower and in the same table position at the same point (22 games) as last year.  My recollection was of us sweeping aside a lot of teams last season up through December, and being second in the table, before we collapsed in January and February from fatigue, injuries and absences (Matip and Mane unavailable during the ACN).  

I think perhaps the gap in recollection is because last season we reached 22 games late in January, so it already included some of our collapse.  

It’s funny how particularly strong or weak segments stand out in memory but there is still very strong mean reversion in general, with total spending still having by far the highest R-squared explanatory power for points totals over long periods.