Champions League

[serghei]

Well, Chelsea and Dortmund are the teams we'd have near 50-50 chances with. Just avoid Bayern, Liverpool and City please. And PSG too if possible.

 

[Vilarrubi]

We're not even good enough to win the Europa league lmao.

We'd get blitzed by Spurs or AC Milan.

Would be entertaining to watch a 39 year old Zlatan fold Lenglet into a French croissant tho.

 

[Messi983]

Time to revenge that 8-2, hope we get Bayern.

 

[Alik]

Time to revenge that 8-2, hope we get Bayern.

 

[Fati_Future_BallonDor]

Time to revenge that 8-2, hope we get Bayern.

Bayern is a lot weaker this season than last season but i have the feeling we are also weaker.

 

[JamDav1982]

Yes they are improved, no question, being consistent vs 10-20 teams is great and the defensive record is a big upgrade.
But they are not anywhere a top 5 side is my point, and they are a different team facing Sheffield & co. than facing a big team.
And the CL knockouts are 90% big teams. Including Barca regardless of form and momentum.

Also regarding Sevilla:
Beating someones B-team with your B-team is just proving your B-team is better, in a game seemingly everyone involved treated it like a pre season friendly.

Chelsea would not be far off one of top 5 teams so far and young/new team getting better.

It was Chelsea reserves vs half a Sevilla team they beat 4-0. It was not treated like a pre season friendly and finishing top of group was available.

 

[Yannik]

It was Chelsea reserves vs half a Sevilla team they beat 4-0. It was not treated like a pre season friendly and finishing top of group was available.

Chelsea started with Havertz, Mendy with Jorginho, Kovacic, Giroud and Pulisic being A/B players
Sevilla started with Rakitic, Navas, Diego Carlos with En-Nesry and Rekik being A/B players.

And again, even if this was a full youth squad vs "half a Sevilla team" then the only point you draw from this is that your youth-squad is very good. But when both met in their A-gear it was 0-0.
Chelsea is going to face Madrid, Juve, Bayern, PSG and Barca with their A-team, not with their B-team, so whatever result they achieved with the latter is not important.

And the fact both literally didn't play most of A-players means they thought this game was an amazing opportunity to rest their important players instead of going for the group win.

 

[JamDav1982]

Chelsea started with Havertz, Kovacic, Mendy with Jorginho and Pulisic being A/B players
Sevilla started with Rakitic, Navas, Diego Carlos with En-Nesry and Rekik being A/B players.

And again, even if this was a full youth squad vs "half a Sevilla team" then the only point you draw from this is that your youth-squad is very good.
But when both met in their A-gear it was 0-0. And the fact both literally didn't most of their play A-players means they thought this game was an amazing opportunity to rest their important players instead of going for the group win.

They rested players as still fancied their chances to win and worst case scenario is second place in group. As opposed to resting players in EPL with more at stake by that point.

Chelsea are a better side than Sevilla and would be close if not in top 5 teams in Europe just now. They are nowhere near '80%' of team from last season as you made out.

 

[Yannik]

They rested players as still fancied their chances to win and worst case scenario is second place in group. As opposed to resting players in EPL with more at stake by that point.

YES.
That's what I am saying: Neither took this game seriously, and it shouldn't be a factor in anything.

They are nowhere near '80%' of team from last season as you made out.

I have said they are 80% the same team, as in the same squad. I have acknowledged in my response that Chelsea are nonetheless an improved version of themselves, but not a top 5 team because they have nothing yet to show for themselves.

What is a thing Chelsea did that 5 of Bayern, City, Madrid, PSG, Juventus, Liverpool, Atletico, Milan, Dortmund and Tottenham didn't do?

 

[Alik]

Doesn't really matter but Dortmund haven't got much to show for themselves either.

 

[JamDav1982]

YES.
That's what I am saying: Neither took this game seriously, and it shouldn't be a factor in anything.



I have said they are 80% the same team, as in the same squad. I have acknowledged in my response that Chelsea are nonetheless an improved version of themselves, but not a top 5 team because they have nothing yet to show for themselves.

What is a thing Chelsea did that 5 of Bayern, City, Madrid, PSG, Juventus, Liverpool, Atletico, Milan, Dortmund and Tottenham didn't do?

They did take it seriously as still a lot at stake just prioritised league for first team players.

They are not even remotely 80% the same team. The team that lost 3-0 at home to Bayern had a GK and defence of.. Caballero, James, Aczi, Christensen, Rudiger and Alonso. That is fairly awful and all but James are out the team and a few lucky if they ever play again.

That does not even begin to take into account the mids/attackers who have now compared to then in Kante, Havertz, Werner, Ziyech and Abraham/Pulisic fit.

What relevance does what those teams 'have done' to what those teams are now? What do Spurs have to show? Or Dortmund? PSG winning French league is what they have? What to Atletico have to show?

I would put Liverpool, City and Bayern as top three and from there is a group of others.. Chelsea, PSG, Dortmund, Spurs, Juve maybe and not much splits those if at all.

 

[Yannik]

What relevance does what those teams 'have done' to what those teams are now?

Because in order to determine wether Chelsea is

top 5 right now in football world

the most logical approach is to ask "How many clubs can I name that are better than Chelsea right now and does that number equal or exceed 5".

 

[JamDav1982]

Because in order to determine wether Chelsea is the most logical approach is to ask "How many clubs can I name that are better than Chelsea right now and does that number equal or exceed 5".

What have Spurs, Dortmund, Atletico etc 'done' to be better than this Chelsea? What is your criteria?

A Chelsea that is nothing like '80% the team' that lost to Bayern as claimed.

Gor for it and name the 5 that are better and what they have done to justify it but reverting back to last season is poor logic on comparing this season.

 

[Yannik]

The criteria is "being a team capable of winning the CL" and the bar isn't just "Dortmund and Spurs" but breaking into a top 5 currently held by 5 of Juventus, Bayern, Madrid, PSG, Liverpool and City in no particular order.
If Chelsea is better than 2 of these 6 very uncontroversial picks, then they make for an objective top 5.

"Spurs and Dortmund" are simply picks for like a top 10, a level Chelsea realistically competes it.
They haven't shown any more promise than Chelsea, but at the same time Chelsea hasn't shown any more promise than them either.

 

[JamDav1982]

The criteria is "being a team capable of winning the CL" and the bar isn't just "Dortmund and Spurs" but breaking into a top 5 currently held by 5 of Juventus, Bayern, Madrid, PSG, Liverpool and City in no particular order.
If Chelsea is better than 2 of these 6 very uncontroversial picks, then they make for an objective top 5.

What have Spurs, Atletico and Dortmund done? Or those teams just being dropped now?

What have Juve done to be in 'top 5'? Wouldnt put them as better than Chelsea anyway nor PSG. The other three are the top three for me and rest with Chelsea would be in or around top 5.