Was outshone in the middle by our former player.

Want to know why Spurs came back into it? Good tactical change and Gallaghers drive in the middle. First half our midfield popped it about in triangles, second half Gallgher bossed that/ broke it up and put Enzo in his back pocket. WTF was it with fans booing Gallagher, didnt want to be sold and been a Blue since 6... give your heads a wobble.

15 hours ago, acaeus said:

Funny thing is that people complain he's not a good tackler; and for me not only we have too many "good tacklers" in midfield already, but tackling alone is the least important trait (and cheapest one to buy) for a midfielder (excluding a dedicated DM evidently).

If he leaves, which I still think unlikely as I fully expect Alonso to hold on to him, we'd need to get a replacement and one who can score goals. Like Enzo or not, he's the one CM who's not allergic to the opposition goal.

Yep he seems to be our best goal bet for a few matches now, to be getting rid of him would be crazy. If we want a midfielder play Enzo in the No.10 role and get someone else into modfield.

Palmer is the one not delivering this season though early signs he may be getting back to his game.

40 minutes ago, bluelightening said:

Was outshone in the middle by our former player.

Want to know why Spurs came back into it? Good tactical change and Gallaghers drive in the middle. First half our midfield popped it about in triangles, second half Gallgher bossed that/ broke it up and put Enzo in his back pocket. WTF was it with fans booing Gallagher, didnt want to be sold and been a Blue since 6... give your heads a wobble.

Morons.

8 hours ago, GarnachoCheese said:

Yes Szoboslai is much better defensively.

Odegaard is crap too, wouldn't want him anywhere near our XI.

Fabregas is probably the greatest passer/creator in PL history, what similar attribute does Enzo have that would excuse his shortcomings?

Jorginho was crap.

Kova was bang average.

Disagreed on Szloboslai and I think he plays way too deep in Stlot's system; he's much better as CAM.
Strong disagree on Jorginho and Kova; winning is all that matters to me and they are winners. How they win hardly matters—whatever they did worked against Real Madrid then City.
Ironically, Jorginho to me was very similar to Fabregas in characteristics. Yes, less of a creator, mas also a master passer.

6 hours ago, dermott said:

Morons.

Yeah it was silly, but suppose there was an altercation between him and Cuccu during the match.

2 hours ago, acaeus said:

Disagreed on Szloboslai and I think he plays way too deep in Stlot's system; he's much better as CAM.
Strong disagree on Jorginho and Kova; winning is all that matters to me and they are winners. How they win hardly matters—whatever they did worked against Real Madrid then City.
Ironically, Jorginho to me was very similar to Fabregas in characteristics. Yes, less of a creator, mas also a master passer.

Blasphemy. Don’t compare Jorginho to Fabregas.

1 hour ago, GarnachoCheese said:

Blasphemy. Don’t compare Jorginho to Fabregas.

Heh — 2 Premier League titles vs 1 Champions League title. In terms of achievement, that’s very comparable in my book.

And honestly, I couldn’t care less what Fabregas did elsewhere.

Also, rooting for specific players has never really been my thing anyway — the club always comes first for me.

4 minutes ago, acaeus said:

Heh — 2 Premier League titles vs 1 Champions League title. In terms of achievement, that’s very comparable in my book.

And honestly, I couldn’t care less what Fabregas did elsewhere.

Also, rooting for specific players has never really been my thing anyway — the club always comes first for me.

Sometimes just forget what they won and actually compare the player. Cesc best season for us was light years above Jorgino. There's even an argument for Mikel being better than Jorgino.

4 hours ago, acaeus said:

Disagreed on Szloboslai and I think he plays way too deep in Stlot's system; he's much better as CAM.
Strong disagree on Jorginho and Kova; winning is all that matters to me and they are winners. How they win hardly matters—whatever they did worked against Real Madrid then City.
Ironically, Jorginho to me was very similar to Fabregas in characteristics. Yes, less of a creator, mas also a master passer.

Jorginho was an awful passer, barely an assist to his name for a 'playmaker'

45 minutes ago, KonaKai Blue said:

Sometimes just forget what they won and actually compare the player. Cesc best season for us was light years above Jorgino. There's even an argument for Mikel being better than Jorgino.

Mikel was a very different type of DM. His passing range and progression were nowhere near Jorginho’s — that part is pretty measurable, not just opinion.

But something doesn’t compute here. According to some people on here, Jorginho was “crap,” Kovacic was meh, and if I dig a little deeper I’m sure I’ll hear colorful takes about Mount and Kai too.

So apparently we beat Real Madrid and then Manchester City in the Champions League with two players: Kante and vibes.

17 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Jorginho was an awful passer, barely an assist to his name for a 'playmaker'

Numbers disagree. Yes, Fabregas was the playmaker and the creative type. We are—or at least I am—talking about two different roles here: a playmaker and a deep lying DM.

They were both very good passers; the numbers corroborate that. Both also had excellent passing range, which is measurable as well.

Not being a playmaker does not make Jorginho “crap,” which I honestly find to be a pretty ridiculous take.

Edited May 20May 20 by acaeus

7 hours ago, acaeus said:

Ironically, Jorginho to me was very similar to Fabregas in characteristics. Yes, less of a creator, mas also a master passer.

It is hard to argue with anyone who believes this

1 hour ago, Bob stark said:

It is hard to argue with anyone who believes this

Indeed. I sometimes wonder how folks around here stand in regards of club vs player.

I think folks focused on the creative part where they are indeed different even after Fabgregas moved deeper, while I was referring to overall passing and defending: they were both weak in that regard, but Fabregas far more so.

Quick chatgpt response:
"Fabregas was fundamentally a creator: risk-taking passes, through balls, long diagonals, fast vertical progression, etc. His instinct was always to unlock defenses.

Jorginho was more of a controller/metronome: tempo, circulation, positioning, buildup structure, press resistance. His game was more about controlling matches than creating moments.

So yeah, both deep midfielders and both excellent passers, but they did very different things on the pitch."

Still incredible that we've managed to win CL beating Real Madrid in the semis and then City in the final with 2 quacks in midfield.

Edited May 21May 21 by acaeus

5 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Jorginho was an awful passer, barely an assist to his name for a 'playmaker'

Jorginho was an eye opener for me. He came with huge reputation as great passer but I felt like he kept underhitting his pass with make no sense.

I can't remember who, but he told me Jorginho simply couldn't do it and it was technical problem and it really opened my eyes

9 hours ago, acaeus said:

Heh — 2 Premier League titles vs 1 Champions League title. In terms of achievement, that’s very comparable in my book.

And honestly, I couldn’t care less what Fabregas did elsewhere.

Also, rooting for specific players has never really been my thing anyway — the club always comes first for me.

Wes Brown has 5 PL titles and 2 CL winners medals.

9 hours ago, acaeus said:

Mikel was a very different type of DM. His passing range and progression were nowhere near Jorginho’s — that part is pretty measurable, not just opinion.

So if its measurable you should be able to show us the prof, right? Jorginho was not a great passer in the slightest, the vast majority of his passes were 5 yard wall balls, totally risk free possession for the sake of it with absolutely zero progression.

4 hours ago, acaeus said:

Still incredible that we've managed to win CL beating Real Madrid in the semis and then City in the final with 2 quacks in midfield.

You're right, it is incredible. Imagine how easy it would have been with a proper midfield partner for Kante.

We won in spite, not because of. Its no surprise he couldn't win any trophies anywhere else in Europe. Napoli won the cup in 13/14 when Jorginho was riding the bench all season, he became a mainstay the year after and they went on a 4 year trophy drought. 3 years at Arsenal and all of a sudden they're winning things now he's left.

Honestly, this discussion around Enzo defensive ability is irrelevant.

The only manager who play enzo as midfielder was Potter, the other manager played him as either attacker or more of box to box.

11 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Jorginho was an awful passer, barely an assist to his name for a 'playmaker'

Each pass more underhit than the last. Mikel was twice the player.

6 hours ago, acaeus said:

Indeed. I sometimes wonder how folks around here stand in regards of club vs player.

I think folks focused on the creative part where they are indeed different even after Fabgregas moved deeper, while I was referring to overall passing and defending: they were both weak in that regard, but Fabregas far more so.

Quick chatgpt response:
"Fabregas was fundamentally a creator: risk-taking passes, through balls, long diagonals, fast vertical progression, etc. His instinct was always to unlock defenses.

Jorginho was more of a controller/metronome: tempo, circulation, positioning, buildup structure, press resistance. His game was more about controlling matches than creating moments.

So yeah, both deep midfielders and both excellent passers, but they did very different things on the pitch."

Still incredible that we've managed to win CL beating Real Madrid in the semis and then City in the final with 2 quacks in midfield.

The issue with using an LLM for that sort of comparison is that when you ask it to compare A v B, it assumes that A & B are wholly different. But in reality Fabregas did every bit of what ChatGPT says Jorginho did too, whereas Jorginho did nothing of what it claims Fabregas did.

Don't get me wrong, Jorginho had his role. I don't even think he was that bad a defender. But if we want to talk numbers compare him at Napoli vs Chelsea, where even under Sarri his attacking numbers fell off cliff. That's where Jorginho and even Kovacic failed for us, because they were complete passengers in attack.

Back to Enzo - when he first signed I was super excited because even in the shambles of Potter, he displayed an energy and attacking ability in the pivot far beyond Jorginho. It's a shame that he doesn't see himself as that sort of player any more.

14 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Back to Enzo - when he first signed I was super excited because even in the shambles of Potter, he displayed an energy and attacking ability in the pivot far beyond Jorginho. It's a shame that he doesn't see himself as that sort of player any more.

Vitinha's role at PSG is genuinely what I thought we were getting when we signed Enzo.

The World Cup I think pulled the wool over a lot of our eyes. Scaloni put him in for Paredes to move the ball better against Mexico, and they reaped the rewards for it. At River and even at Benfica, he was always a box to box midfielder.

9 hours ago, GarnachoCheese said:

Wes Brown has 5 PL titles and 2 CL winners medals.

And? what else is there? 🤷‍♂️ winning is the end of it all
I certainly want the players who win around and in my team.... warts and all.

8 hours ago, dkw said:

So if its measurable you should be able to show us the prof, right? Jorginho was not a great passer in the slightest, the vast majority of his passes were 5 yard wall balls, totally risk free possession for the sake of it with absolutely zero progression.

I've watched plenty of Mikel play and he couldn't hit a long ball to save his life. Here's some data from Opta data:

Player	Passes /90	Long Balls /90	Long Ball Success	% of Passes That Were Long
John Obi Mikel	58.2	1.4	54.2%	2.4%
Michael Carrick	66.4	5.5	71.8%	8.3%
Xabi Alonso	74.1	8.1	74.5%	10.9%
Steven Gerrard	55.7	6.8	66.1%	12.2%
Frank Lampard	52.3	4.2	65.8%	8.0%

with Jorginho

Midfielder (Peak Chelsea Years)	Total Passes (Per 90)	Long Balls Attempted (Per 90)	Long Ball Success Rate	Progressive Passes (Per 90)
John Obi Mikel	58.2	1.4	54.2%	~2.1
Jorginho	79.5	4.2	71.5%	5.5

Jorginho was also a far more dynamic player on the pitch. Mikel was far more positioned and stayed deeper.

8 hours ago, GarnachoCheese said:

You're right, it is incredible. Imagine how easy it would have been with a proper midfield partner for Kante.

We won in spite, not because of. Its no surprise he couldn't win any trophies anywhere else in Europe. Napoli won the cup in 13/14 when Jorginho was riding the bench all season, he became a mainstay the year after and they went on a 4 year trophy drought. 3 years at Arsenal and all of a sudden they're winning things now he's left.

A simpler explanation is that we had a few World Class players, a few good players in excellent form, and other good players in good form. There were no quacks in this team; impossible to win especially facing Real Madrid twice (and outplaying them w/ Benzema) with too many weaknesses.

7 hours ago, Bob stark said:

Honestly, this discussion around Enzo defensive ability is irrelevant.

The only manager who play enzo as midfielder was Potter, the other manager played him as either attacker or more of box to box.

Yes, but my point has always been that we are the only? (maybe Madrid too) top club who play two dedicated defensive mids at all times. Most other teams pair a DM with players who aren't very good defensively — just like Enzo.

5 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

The issue with using an LLM for that sort of comparison is that when you ask it to compare A v B, it assumes that A & B are wholly different. But in reality Fabregas did every bit of what ChatGPT says Jorginho did too, whereas Jorginho did nothing of what it claims Fabregas did.

Don't get me wrong, Jorginho had his role. I don't even think he was that bad a defender. But if we want to talk numbers compare him at Napoli vs Chelsea, where even under Sarri his attacking numbers fell off cliff. That's where Jorginho and even Kovacic failed for us, because they were complete passengers in attack.

Back to Enzo - when he first signed I was super excited because even in the shambles of Potter, he displayed an energy and attacking ability in the pivot far beyond Jorginho. It's a shame that he doesn't see himself as that sort of player any more.

Well that was the only point I was making. Fabregas apparently was a pretty long rabbit hole 😅
Oh absolutely! He has been mostly disappointing given his status; I'm not not sure how much is him vs the setup/mess we are in. We seem to give that leverage to other players, but not him.

19 hours ago, acaeus said:

Mikel was a very different type of DM. His passing range and progression were nowhere near Jorginho’s — that part is pretty measurable, not just opinion.

But something doesn’t compute here. According to some people on here, Jorginho was “crap,” Kovacic was meh, and if I dig a little deeper I’m sure I’ll hear colorful takes about Mount and Kai too.

So apparently we beat Real Madrid and then Manchester City in the Champions League with two players: Kante and vibes.

Numbers disagree. Yes, Fabregas was the playmaker and the creative type. We are—or at least I am—talking about two different roles here: a playmaker and a deep lying DM.

They were both very good passers; the numbers corroborate that. Both also had excellent passing range, which is measurable as well.

Not being a playmaker does not make Jorginho “crap,” which I honestly find to be a pretty ridiculous take.

I disagree. I don't think they were vastly different. Mikel wasn't the registra or whatever you call it because he wasn't first choice and our style of play wasn't possession based.

He wasn't a defensive midfield general or Kante or Makalele. His attributes were good close ball retention and short range passing. Just like Jorginho.

3 hours ago, acaeus said:

Jorginho was also a far more dynamic player on the pitch. Mikel was far more positioned and stayed deeper.

Well those are two words you usually don't see in the same sentence. Jorginho had no trace of athleticism, not a single strand within his DNA.

59 minutes ago, PloKoon13 said:

Well those are two words you usually don't see in the same sentence. Jorginho had no trace of athleticism, not a single strand within his DNA.

Are you.... suggesting that Enzo is more athletic than Jorginho? 😅

I feel that I'm doing this again: will be labeled as a jorginho fan, and I'm really not; I can think of many players I'd have in midfield rather than him (it goes into team building tho). Midfield wise I think I was really only a fan of Kante and that's about it—liked everything about both his game and as an individual.

Edited May 21May 21 by acaeus

51 minutes ago, acaeus said:

I've watched plenty of Mikel play and he couldn't hit a long ball to save his life. Here's some data from Opta data:

Player	Passes /90	Long Balls /90	Long Ball Success	% of Passes That Were Long
John Obi Mikel	58.2	1.4	54.2%	2.4%
Michael Carrick	66.4	5.5	71.8%	8.3%
Xabi Alonso	74.1	8.1	74.5%	10.9%
Steven Gerrard	55.7	6.8	66.1%	12.2%
Frank Lampard	52.3	4.2	65.8%	8.0%

with Jorginho

Midfielder (Peak Chelsea Years)	Total Passes (Per 90)	Long Balls Attempted (Per 90)	Long Ball Success Rate	Progressive Passes (Per 90)
John Obi Mikel	58.2	1.4	54.2%	~2.1
Jorginho	79.5	4.2	71.5%	5.5

Jorginho was also a far more dynamic player on the pitch. Mikel was far more positioned and stayed deeper.

A simpler explanation is that we had a few World Class players, a few good players in excellent form, and other good players in good form. There were no quacks in this team; impossible to win especially facing Real Madrid twice (and outplaying them w/ Benzema) with too many weaknesses.

Yes, but my point has always been that we are the only? (maybe Madrid too) top club who play two dedicated defensive mids at all times. Most other teams pair a DM with players who aren't very good defensively — just like Enzo.

Well that was the only point I was making. Fabregas apparently was a pretty long rabbit hole 😅
Oh absolutely! He has been mostly disappointing given his status; I'm not not sure how much is him vs the setup/mess we are in. We seem to give that leverage to other players, but not him.

1 hour ago, PloKoon13 said:

Well those are two words you usually don't see in the same sentence. Jorginho had no trace of athleticism, not a single strand within his DNA.

As soon as it read that I burst out laughing, quite possibly the funniest thing I've seen on this forum. Hes as dynamic as a piece of fudge.