Hi Guys!
Am as a new member wanna say that Am so glad yto join your forum site!!

If that fits your criteria of what a 'better' player should be then fair enough. But my argument is that there's more to it than just simply making things happen, which undoubtedly Schurrle has over Willian. And while Schurrle may produce more right now, he will never be a better footballer (all technical aspects considered).

Mata is more productive and has magic moments far more frequently than someone like Iniesta, but it is abundantly clear who most would consider to be the better footballer.

Lol. Willian is better than Schurrle at 3 things at most dribbling, ball control, and pace? But by no means Schurrle is any slow.

But the thing is Willian hardly offers us anything in final third nor he can finish so he's basically a workhorse required to press tough oppositions and a very expensive one 32 f**king millions. You know what I'd rather have Alexis Sanchez for that money who is I think is at another level to Willian and costs almost the same.

 

If we had paid 32 f**king millions for a player he should be able to produce magic and win games on his own but Willian let alone doing it.

 

And comparison of Mata and Iniesta is bollocks they play different positions.

The German Kalou

He's better than that

I think both Willian and Shurrle are missing something compared to the best players in their positions, but they complement eachother depending on us facing compact or more open defences. For me though I rather have a more complete attacking midfielder/winger like Reus, who can adapt to the oposition without having to make a substitution. 

Lol. Willian is better than Schurrle at 3 things at most dribbling, ball control, and pace? But by no means Schurrle is any slow.

But the thing is Willian hardly offers us anything in final third nor he can finish so he's basically a workhorse required to press tough oppositions and a very expensive one 32 f**king millions. You know what I'd rather have Alexis Sanchez for that money who is I think is at another level to Willian and costs almost the same.

If we had paid 32 f**king millions for a player he should be able to produce magic and win games on his own but Willian let alone doing it.

And comparison of Mata and Iniesta is bollocks they play different positions.

Your last sentence has made me realise that a debate with you is pretty much pointless. So we'll just end it here.

I prefer Schurrle starting and Willian coming off the bench. Schurrle's movement is great, he is more likely to pop up with a goal against stubborn defenses. If we are 0-0 in a game he is someone who can get that opening goal and get us going.

 

I like having Willian coming off the bench and running at tired defenders, same goes for Ramires. Their energy levels make it hard for players to keep up when the game is almost over.

Your last sentence has made me realise that a debate with you is pretty much pointless. So we'll just end it here.

Actually I also didn't want to but your productivity term made me to. One plays CM while other plays AM so it's the pretty obvious reason Mata will be more productive than Iniesta.

 

While both Schurrle and Willian plays same Spot. It's a lot different in case of Iniesta and Mata than Schurrle and Willian.

Actually I also didn't want to but your productivity term made me to. One plays CM while other plays AM so it's the pretty obvious reason Mata will be more productive than Iniesta.

You think that because Iniesta has played a couple of games at CM this season (never mind almost all of his career as an AM), that makes him incomparable to Mata?

Without trying to be disrespectful, but that argument is so ludicrous that a serious football-related discussion with you seems pointless - as I've said.

Edited October 12, 201411 yr by venom2011

Iniesta is a Central deep lying Midfielder and not a #10 like Mata. :facepalm:

 

 

I seriously dun't want to argue anymore lol.

I prefer Schurrle starting and Willian coming off the bench. Schurrle's movement is great, he is more likely to pop up with a goal against stubborn defenses. If we are 0-0 in a game he is someone who can get that opening goal and get us going.

I like having Willian coming off the bench and running at tired defenders, same goes for Ramires. Their energy levels make it hard for players to keep up when the game is almost over.

I'd have it the other way round tbh.

Schurrle seems far more effective as a sub for both Chelsea and Germany.

Willian offers more to the team cause IMO, he's a more rounded player too.

Andre is still relatively young though so should improve with time

If that fits your criteria of what a 'better' player should be then fair enough. But my argument is that there's more to it than just simply making things happen, which undoubtedly Schurrle has over Willian. And while Schurrle may produce more right now, he will never be a better footballer (all technical aspects considered).

Attacking midfielders will generally always be judged on by their contributions in the final third of the pitch and more specifically the number of goals and assists they provide for the team, playing as an attacking player that should be the bread and butter of your game, contributing to goals.

Willian, even in lesser leagues, has never put up the kind of numbers to suggest he is a world class attacking midfielder and the more time that passes the more bemused I am that we paid £30m for him.

Schurrle might not be the most attractive player to watch but he is direct and effective and gets results in the final third which is his main responsibility to the team. Given a consistent run in the side I'm confident he would end the season with double figures in goals and would have chipped in with a few assists too.... I've seen nothing from Willian to suggest he is capable of the same.

Attacking midfielders will generally always be judged on by their contributions in the final third of the pitch and more specifically the number of goals and assists they provide for the team, playing as an attacking player that should be the bread and butter of your game, contributing to goals.

*Contributing to goals* - 100% but that does not mean absolutely scoring or playing the pass before the goal. The value of the type of attacking midfielder is linked to the team style. Iniesta - one of the greatest attacking midfielders of his generation contributes by using his astounding technical ability, awareness and vision to enable Barca to dominate possession and create not only for the eventual goalscorer, but everyone else around him.

Now for a team with a greater emphasis on counter-attack, as we play in big games, someone like Schurrle becomes more valuable (and this is the reason why he gets the nod in some games over Willian). With less team possession, what a player does on the ball becomes less relevant and Schurrle's positive attributes of making great attacking runs comes to the fore.

But we are so good right now that our general play is moving beyond that. In Hazard, Oscar, Matic, Fabregas and Willian you have a group of technically gifted players who can not only win games, but dominate the opposition.

Schurrle has had a rough last few games but I think we need to give this more time before we start calling him a Kalou or something.

 

I certainly don't think that was the case he had a good season last season and I'm confident he will have a much better season this one, he looks up for it despite having a few shockers already.

 

The main reason why I commented though is because I do think some people are massively underplaying Willians attributes. He may not have the greatest goals/assists tally but if you watch him he does start a lot of attacks. Look at Hazards goals last season and look who was the one who started the attack/counter. He isn't just a work horse he does contribute in attack but I will admit his final third isn't great. His end product has been pretty lazy if anything it's almost as if he hesitates or just completely goes the wrong way, he's certainly no Juan Mata in that regard but I disagree with anyone who says he isn't a good attacking player because I think he is.

 

The debate on him and Schurrle though I'm not to bothered about it. They will both start in different games, I don't think one will outweigh the other to much, we like to rotate a lot in attack, the only ones really nailed on starter is Costa and Hazard, Oscar probably will be nailed starter later in the season. As for the right side though we will rotate with Willian and Schurrle, they both bring different variety and that's good to have, I don't think it's so much of a case of who is better than the other.

What are people getting in a hissyfit about...both players are useful for different reasons and I'm glad they're at chelsea...Schurrle will score more goals, Willian is a better team player...great we have such options and they will probably have same amount of starts...thing is both could learn from each other...Willian needs to score more like Schurrle and Schurrle needs to learn to track back better like willian

*Contributing to goals* - 100% but that does not mean absolutely scoring or playing the pass before the goal. The value of the type of attacking midfielder is linked to the team style. Iniesta - one of the greatest attacking midfielders of his generation contributes by using his astounding technical ability, awareness and vision to enable Barca to dominate possession and create not only for the eventual goalscorer, but everyone else around him.

You keep mentioning Iniesta but Willian is no Iniesta, never has been and never will be. He lacks the ability to influence a game like he can and in fairness not many can.

We've got enough hard working players in the side who start attacks and retain possession well but ultimately, for me, what it comes down to is that Willian time and again fails to make a telling contribution in attack despite being one of the most advanced players on the pitch.

You don't always have to make the final pass or score the goal itself but you still have to do it with a respectable amount of consistency and Willian doesn't, his career stats show that which is why I think Schurrle is the much better attacking player out of the two.

What are people getting in a hissyfit about...

Is this forum really getting to the point where people can't debate/discuss something with opposing opinions with it always being construed as hissyfits or childish arguments?

I'm seeing this more and more on the forum of late and it's diminishing my enjoyment of the site.

This isn't aimed at you specifically Brit but is becoming a recurring trend.

Debate is fine...but some of the comments seem ott to me that's all...perhaps the int. Break is getting under everyone's skin...I know I can't wait for proper football to return

I'd have it the other way round tbh.

Schurrle seems far more effective as a sub for both Chelsea and Germany.

Willian offers more to the team cause IMO, he's a more rounded player too.

Andre is still relatively young though so should improve with time

 

I agree about him being more effective as a sub for Germany, but pretty much all of his goals for us have come from the games he has started in.

You keep mentioning Iniesta but Willian is no Iniesta, never has been and never will be. He lacks the ability to influence a game like he can and in fairness not many can.

We've got enough hard working players in the side who start attacks and retain possession well but ultimately, for me, what it comes down to is that Willian time and again fails to make a telling contribution in attack despite being one of the most advanced players on the pitch.

You don't always have to make the final pass or score the goal itself but you still have to do it with a respectable amount of consistency and Willian doesn't, his career stats show that which is why I think Schurrle is the much better attacking player out of the two.

I mention Iniesta in a counter-argument as THE prime example of an AM who does not have the statistical backing to be considered a great player by many fans' consideration. I don't compare him to Willian.

I've acknowledged previously that Willian indeed fails to impact a game adequately at times. It's plain to see. But that can change at any time during his development cycle. As it has for many players e.g. Ramsey, Bale, Ronaldo etc. It takes some players longer than others. And you have to make allowances for the standard of football he has experienced. He has come from Shaktar & Anzhi, and has never been required to produce at this level.

I believe he is just too good not improve given time in a top league. Whereas I think Schurrle will ultimately find a good consistent level, but is not capable of hitting the same heights due to technical constraints. I can agree that it is a toss-up right now as to who should play.

You know what technical ability is not everything to judge a player. Thomas Mueller whose technical ability I think is average still he makes up with his clever movement and finishing so it's really not just about technical ability. I really do have hope that Schurrle can be our very own Thomas Mueller and I think he will be.

 

Well Willian is not young he's 26 in same age group as of di Maria, Fabregas, Mata and not of Ramsey or Schurrle whom both are 3 years younger yet still they can influence them game more than Willian and there is much higher room of development for those players. And I believe there is more chance of Schurrle improving than of Willian he works hard and have a right attitude.

 

I don't have anything against Willian but I think he has under performed for what we have expected he's not a 15-18m player he's a 30millions pound player he should be creating moments of magic to win the match not just press. He should be on his peak right now and should influence the game much much more than he do now.

 

I know I'm repeating some of my points but meh...

Your last sentence has made me realise that a debate with you is pretty much pointless. So we'll just end it here.

I believe "spoilt" would be an appropriate adjective for this situation.

Willian not good enough so we should've got Sanchez...

What puzzles me about Schurrle is that he went from one of the most successful dribblers and long-range shooters in Germany to a pale shadow in Chelsea colours. I suspect it's a tactical thing- Germany and Leverkusen seemed geared to get the best out of his attacking runs, whereas we're at Chelsea he's primarily support to Costa and Hazard.

What puzzles me about Schurrle is that he went from one of the most successful dribblers and long-range shooters in Germany to a pale shadow in Chelsea colours. I suspect it's a tactical thing- Germany and Leverkusen seemed geared to get the best out of his attacking runs, whereas we're at Chelsea he's primarily support to Costa and Hazard.

Definitely tactical. Here he has to dribble through tightly-packed defences and his technique is just not strong enough. You will notice that he has better dribbling success in less

-compact CL games where he has more time and space. Sometimes you'll find it even more so in international football which pales in comparison to the quality of top league football.

Here's a nice little piece on how underrated Willian was last year for anyone interested: http://statsbomb.com/2014/05/overratedunderrated-the-eden-hazard-and-juan-mata-edition/

It's simple really. Schurrle should start against the weaker teams when we are more attack minded. Willian should start when we need to be more defensive minded. Both should battle it out until one clearly outshines the other.

 

I have more love for Schurrle but Willian can be extremely handy in situations when we need to win/keep possession, despite his frustrating efforts in the final third.

 

Schurrle can be awesome or pretty much non existant. I hope he finds his form again soon though because he can be vital for us as he showed in the CL against PSG last season.