Fabregas thinks Chelsea are average without Drogba - and he could be right

As if just to antagonise Chelsea fans, Fabregas was widely quoted yesterday as saying Chelsea would be merely an average side were it not for Didier Drogba.

Having watched his side’s defence get pummelled by the Ivorian just over a week ago, you can perhaps understand Fabregas’ comments. The Spaniard said: “Overall, I saw a Chelsea team that was normal but a team that probably has the best striker in the world. An average team that has the best striker in the world can always do something and Didier Drogba makes all the difference”.

At first I thought he was being more than a little bitter after Arsenal’s resounding loss, and that he was undermining the other ten players who started the game at the Emirates. It’s certainly doubtful many of Arsenal’s current players would find their way into Chelsea’s starting eleven, for example. A further argument against Fabregas’ theory would be that, in the four games Chelsea have played this season without their talismanic forward (three in the Champions League and one in the Carling Cup) Chelsea didn’t experience anything but victory.

But now I’ve thought more about it, perhaps Fabregas isn’t too far from the truth. Yes, Chelsea would be far from average with or without Drogba. But without him – this season at least – Ancelotti’s side would be a very different and far less threatening outfit. As attacking options go, you could easily argue that a Drogba-less Chelsea wouldn’t be far from ‘average’ when compared with immediate peers in the Premier League, La Liga and Serie A.

Drogba has been without peer at Chelsea, in the Premier League and probably European football so far this season. He is easily Chelsea’s top scorer with having scored 16 goals, as many as Anelka, Lampard and Kalou combined (Chelsea’s second, third and fourth highest scorers). He has single-handedly scored nearly one third of all Chelsea’s goals (29%).

Aside from goals his contribution has been immense. Making seven assists and winning four penalties means that Drogba has either scored or created 27 goals this term – pretty much half of all those Chelsea have scored. Can there be another striker with as a good a record?

And if that wasn’t enough testament to his effectiveness, Drogba has missed four of Chelsea’s 24 fixtures this season, been substituted off the field in six and come on as second half reinforcement in one. All that means it’s taken him just 1,650 minutes to rack up those 27 goals. On average, Drogba’s contribution can be summarised as having delivered Ancelotti a goal once every hour.

And all this says nothing of Drogba’s (underestimated) leadership qualities, his invaluable defensive work from corners and set pieces and how even his presence gives Chelsea the flexibility to play in different ways.

So yes, a Drogba-less Chelsea isn’t average and yes, it could still win games. But Drogba’s best form in a blue shirt has taken Chelsea to a new level this season and, as an unfortunate side effect, to a place where losing him could be catastrophic.

What do you think? Is there a striker in the world you’d rather have line up for Chelsea than Didier Drogba? Post a comment.

Comments

[boris]

maybe he should tell this to his gaffer, Wenger, who apparently said drogba did very little and hardly touched the ball against them, although he scored 2

[JB]

Funny that Fabregas says this because a lot of people I speak to think Arsenal are fairly average! Their funny little players and their pretty, innefective football.

To finish consistently below us, year after year, and to not be able to beat us home or away in the last 5 years, who is it that makes l'arse average?

[Gooner]

I have analysed / assessed a Chelsea team without Drogba and reckon they would be a top 10 club; a bit behind Tottingham

[Mick the gooner]

He's a diving b'stard as well

[Gooner]

JB - the discussion is a Chelsea without Drogba. Top 10 club I say.

[V]

Gooner here in peace. It is nice to see a post that doesn't insult our club outright like the comment by JB. Pretty and effective football got us to win 3 titles and finish above you more often.

Anyway, petty jibes aside...

I think chelsea will do fine without drogba in January although yes he is without doubt one of the best strikers, arguably the best because what he offers is so unique and rare.

Cesc's argument is a little reductionist of course, but then again, people were saying Arsenal were a one man team when we had Henry.

[Gooner]

V - If I were honest and unbiased I would say that Chelsea with or without Drogba are very well organised, work the Channels well with Lampard and Ballack making the through balls to Drogba and Anelka. Passes and crosses are accurate. So, they remind of the organisation that George Graham brought to the Arsenal. But we will catch them soon.

[V]

That is a little unfair - I've seen them play some very elaborate football. But yes, they are well organized and Hiddink and now the Italian dude has praised them for this. But yeah, pretty football can be played once the game is safe and secure. Wow, blogger you're making non Chelsea fans say complimentary things about your team. Must stop that now.

[blood is blue]

chelsea is a top team with or without drogba...
if chelsea is average arsenal is welll below poor..
but i want gooners to finish behind us as second..
dont consider whts that lil prat say..he ll leave u this summer..but u cannot complain..every one has only one career and they may want to win somethin..

[lampard]

boris,you said they aint beat us home or away in the last 5 years? last year they beat us at home and the year before away, this chelsea side is powerful but i wouldnt call it a great team compared with some of the teamsover the last few years, not average but a couple players injured could see it become average

[tim]

Love the attitude over there at the Bridge. Seems some of your lot (JB, blood is blue being perfect example) are already forgetting that a dirty Russian schemester who couldn't give a f*ck about your club has bought you absolutely everything you've won.

You're forgetting you don't operate on the same playing field as everyone else, and that your club has lost countless millions of pounds while "winning" trophies.

Allow me to remind you of when your sh*t club couldn't beat The Arsenal for a decade when we were both operating within the same ethical boundaries.

All those hundreds of millions in losses, AND WE'VE STILL WON THE LEAGUE AS MANY TIMES THIS DECADES AS YOU HAVE! FURTHERMORE, WE'VE HAD JUST AS MUCH SUCCESS IN EUROPE AS YOU HAVE!

Would some other club have ruined football had yours not done it first? Sure. Still doesn't change the fact that you are the ones who got the ball rolling.

Players are meant to be bought with money earned from winning and teams are meant to be built with money earned from winning.

Your club did neither of those to earn the team you have. You deserve none of the trophies you have won and you all bloody f*cking well know it.

You'd be a shadow of Arsenal, just like you were before, had you not sold your souls. Considering the awful financial state you were in, you'd be lucky to still be in the Prem had Abramovich not come along.

Each and every one of your accomplishments are hollow. Your club did absolutely NOTHING to earn the money you bought all those players with. If you want to gloat to Arsenal supporters about your successes, please change your name to Abramovich FC.

I can't be arsed to do it right now but I've seen before the amount of pounds your club has lost per point you've finished above Arsenal over the past few seasons, and it is absolutely staggering.

Pound for pound we're still the best club in the world. We're the only ones who compete at a high level and don't spend 100s of millions of pounds we don't actually have on building our team.

[RW]

I'm seeing the usual laughable comments from smug arrogant Chelsea fans. Such short memories before the Russian crook pumped all that cash into your virtually bankrupt club. Just makes me laugh that despite all the money pumped in, you still think it's a ‘level playing field’ and are so much better than everyone else. 2 (bought) titles in over 50 years and you think you’re the b0ll0cks!! Why can’t you just be humble and accept you've never been a big club and never will be. Chelsea was just an average run of the mill yo-yo club like West Ham before money bought you success. So many people can't wait until it all ends thanks to your mouthy short term memory support and will enjoy laughing at you lot looking forward to playing Orient and Brentford in League 2. Will be as funny as when your fans got excited about Chelsea winning the Full members cup!

[Russell Saunders]

Thanks to everyone - Chelsea and arsenal fans alike - for your views. Some good debate! Like to see that - not always the case as people start needlesly slinging mud. Hopefully not what this blog is all about.

Tim - you've come right out of leftfield with that essay though. An arsenal fan called a Chelsea fan up for having a swipe at arsenal needlessly with no relevance to the article, and you've done the same, but worse...

Needless to say, I can't agree with much of what you've said. 'earning' success is a funny thing, as is 'earning' the right to be a big club. If it was down to you, the same clubs would win everything every year. How did man utd become the biggest and most successful club? Because they hapened to be ontop when the tv revolution hit the game. How is that earning it? Nottingham Forest, who peaked too early, should feel gutted at their misfortune.

Meanwhile - Chelsea. I font care for a second that we've spent lots of money. I've enjoyed it. We've won things I never thought possible. Whatever some arsenal fans say, football is First and foremost about winning, and no amount of deluding yourself about wenger's failings should make you forget that - but it does.

Anyway - there's a huge debate to be had in response to your oddly timed rant (we HAVE done better in the champions league, and the prem for that matter) but I'm typing on my mobile phone screen so it'll be difficult to fit everything in.

Anyway, thanks all for your comments. Hope the post was vaguely interesting!

[Russ]

Russell, sorry mate but have to disagree.

You can dress it up how you like and try to justify the success you've had but you were nothing before the Russin. You won the odd FA Cup and thats it. Man Utd are the biggest(but not always the most successful) club in the world and its been that way for 50 years - long before TV rights.

"If it was down to you, the same clubs would win everything every year" errrm isnt that what's happening now? Look how many different clubs won the league title in the 60s, 70s and 80s compared to the last 15 years. Arsenal and Utd only dominated from the late 90s to Mid 00s.

"we HAVE done better in the champions league, and the prem for that matter"
Another silly ill though comment. 3 league titles to 2 I think. Since you won your 1st title, chelsea did not finish above arsenal since 1994! We've both been in 1 champs league final but never won it. How can that be better exactly?

[Nicky]

To the last poster.. "CALM DOWN" how can you be so agressive and jealous?

You sound like your going to explode!

If Chelsea knocked you off your perch you just have to be patient, all the Arsenal kids will mature next year and your team will be brilliant. :0)

[JoshH]

I can guarantee if a billionaire started pumping money into Arsenal there would be no complaints from the Gooners.

Chelsea thumped you 3 goals to nil. Let's just let the results speak for themselves.

[chelseaD]

Stones and glass houses spring to mind! How did they do against us without Van Persie? Enough said.

[Russ]

I am calm Nicky and am enjoying the debate thanks! No explosions here mate :-D

Yep Chelsea have knocked Arsenal off their perch over the past 4-5 years but lets see what happens if UEFA do bring in a rule where clubs have to be run as a business and only spend what they generate. Might be interesting times for your boys :-)

[Russell Saunders]

Hi Russ

Thanks too for your post. The thing is, I'm not trying to 'justify' anything - precisely the opposite. In fact, what I'm saying is that there is no need to. We have been successful, we may continue to be or may not, but that's the game. How 'big' we are, or whether there's a level playing field is by-the-by.

Oh, and let's not pretend we're the first club to get by on huge injections of cash from an investor. Real, Barca, AC Milan, numerous English clubs....

And yes, we weren't as 'big' as Arsenal (as if being a 'big' side matters - its irrelevant) before Roman arrived but let's not pretend that made us irrelevant, please. Stamford Bridge used to host mammoth attendances back in the day (maybe has the post-war record? not sure), and don't forget the cups we won at the end of the 90s and early 2000s (more than the vast majority of teams, if not Arsenal/ Man Utd/ Liverpool). We have also played some beautiful football under Hoddle, Gullit and Viallia and had some great players play at the Bridge.

So we were 'something', to use your own terminology. And your argument doesn't stack up, either - you claim we were nothing or irrelevant because we won nothing, but at the same time you argue that Arsenal matter now and are the real big club, yet you've won nothing for, what, five years now? Don't think that quite tallies.

And Man Utd haven't been the biggest club in the world for 50 years, that's just not true, sorry. But football is different now from how it was in the 60s - 90s - there are a few, dominant teams and not the same variety of winners (as you say). But we didn't create that change, it was like that well before Abramovich arrived on the scene. Without Roman's money, it would still be just Arsenal v Man Utd each year. My point was that, if clubs aren't allowed to break that hegemony by getting outside investment, we'll never see change, and those established clubs in the Premier League will be untouchable.

And re. my point on the Champions League and Premier League - I was referring to someone elses previous comment about this decade. I think we've won the Premier League the same amount of times, no? and the Champions League - yes, we've been in the final once as have you. But our record over the last five years has been excellent, you can't deny that, and pretty much the best in Europe. That's why UEFA have us 2nd (or perhaps 3rd) not in their coefficient rankings.

Anyway, it's strange that this debate has emerged, I didn't intend it to with the article. I love the banter with Arsenal fans at matches and with mates who support them, but at the end of the day I respect the club for all the reasons you outline. That you play the way you do, and we play the way we do - and the contrast that brings - is what really gives us the beautiful game.

Cheers.

[Russ]

Josh you are wrong. Arsenal had success without the assistance from any billionaires. Ask any Arsenal fan what they think about Usmanov and stan kroenke taking over the club. Chelsea welcomed abramovich as you knew he could buy you the success you've never had before. Football would be shit if every club was owner by a billionaire who knows nothing about the game.

[Russell Saunders]

Russ - interesting. I'm not sure I believe you (re. not wanting an investor to lend a bit of a hand, think it's something you say you don't want until it happens and works) but I'll take your word for it.

Can I ask why? For me, Arsenal could do with a bit of help with that stadium still to pay for and the need for some more experienced reinforcements on the pitch.

Is if a club culture thing? I can't believe it's just about wanting to do things in what is perceived as the 'right' way - it's football at the end of the day.... Anyway, interesting.

Genuinely good to have people chipping in with sensible comments (not sure some of the Arsenal fans above have posted that, but I'll get over it)

[Sebastian Ramirez]

If we didn't have Drogba we would have some other high priced striker. He does a bit of diving and is certainly temperamental, but he is French, whatareya gonna do about it? The team is strong with our vast midfield choices.

In ten years I doubt our rich owner will still be around. So I for one enjoy seeing the high price players we have.

[Cskachavski]

chelski r a team made from a billionaire they wouldn't b shiz without that money once abramovic gets bored he'll leave an I'll b in a pile of debt because he cleverly has put all the money into the club in as a loan! Bet u don't c or hear any chelsea fans in the next 10 years when there battling with Ipswich in the championship!

[alex s]

Ok to start off "Gooner" i started cracking up when you said 'I have analysed/assessed' firstly your idea of analysing comprises of your tiny little brain going 'hey i dont like chelsea'. But if you have 'analysed' the situation please reveal the data to us.

secondly to the F*ckwit who said Abromavich dosen't care about our club but then started talking about the millions he has put into it. Do you really think he would have put that money in had it not been for his love of this fantastic club?

Thirdly to Tim, i want to start by saying your a w*nker. Next onto your weak arguement. Chelsea and Arsenal were not on an equal playing field before Roman took over as you mentioned, before that our club was in serious financial trouble and on the brink of bankruptcy. Something we have struggled with on numerous occasions throughout our history. And I will write the word history before because as much as narrow minded people such as yourself and dipper fans try to argue the contrary we have had a great one.

Great artice by the way bridgeviews

[Richard]

How is comparing Chelsea to their peers at the top of every other league make them average? That's like saying George Best was an "average" footballer, if bracketed in a world greats category along with Maradona, Pele and Cruyff!

But Drogba is obviously crucial to Chelsea's success, but they have an easy fixture list in January, so the loss of Drogba to the African Nations won't be so critical. Millions of European fans can't bet on Chelsea for the title or Drogba top goalscorer because of betting monopolies offering no options in these fields. The campaign at www.right2bet.net is lobbying for an open gambling market so all consumers can choose their supplier. Please support the petition if you agree!

[boris]

lot of crap being spoke here, chelsea were a yo-yo club years ago i agree, but we had qualified for the champions league beforeroman bought us, yes we were in debt at the time but when you consider how much debt compared to what some clubs owe in this day it was minimal, i've heard the argument of chelsea bought thier succes, which is bollocks we were a team with a few cups behind us and challenging for the league before roman, yes he did spend a lot of money and some of the tranfers were a total waste, but here we go arsenal fans slagging us of because of our wealthy owner, like you dont want your club to have the wealth it takes to win titles and cups, after tasting succes after such a long barren period i hope when it's all finished i can be as cool as you lot when we win feck all for a few years, so let me get this right Arsenal fans would prefer to win feck all rather than be bought by someone with money?????? is this correct Russ... Also lampard the names of the posters are underneath thier posts so i assume your comment was meant for someone else

[boris]

lot of crap being spoke here, chelsea were a yo-yo club years ago i agree, but we had qualified for the champions league beforeroman bought us, yes we were in debt at the time but when you consider how much debt compared to what some clubs owe in this day it was minimal, i've heard the argument of chelsea bought thier succes, which is bollocks we were a team with a few cups behind us and challenging for the league before roman, yes he did spend a lot of money and some of the tranfers were a total waste, but here we go arsenal fans slagging us of because of our wealthy owner, like you dont want your club to have the wealth it takes to win titles and cups, after tasting succes after such a long barren period i hope when it's all finished i can be as cool as you lot when we win feck all for a few years, so let me get this right Arsenal fans would prefer to win feck all rather than be bought by someone with money?????? is this correct Russ... Also lampard the names of the posters are underneath thier posts so i assume your comment was meant for someone else

[Tim]

Firstly, to the author, you seem like a pretty solid bloke and I'm sorry if you feel my comment was mistimed.

To be honest, I haven't paid your club much mind since the takeover. Take it as you will, but I just don't have time for anything Chelsea and haven't ranted against Chelsea since right after the takeover. I think the manner in which it changed football is despicable.

Allow me to further explain myself...

When people say things like :
"I think it's something you say you don't want until it happens and works" in regard to an Abramovich-style takeover, they really could not be further from the truth.

Arsenal are a brilliant club and our supporters are not deluded, as you claim, into thinking winning doesn't matter. Of course winning matters, and we'll get back to doing it when the time comes. To suggest that I would want us to take a "well, if you can't beat them, join them" approach is, frankly, insulting.

It'd be one thing if it was Didier Drogba you were talking about. For example... Do I hate Drogba? Of course. Would I learn to like him if he played for Arsenal? Of course. That I'll admit.
A cash injection from a foreign billionaire that will change the entire fabric of the club? No way.

Arsenal are, what, at worst, the 6th or 7th best club in the world right now?

We've achieved and maintained that status by having a net gain in the transfer market since the arrival of Arsene Wenger.

We went toe to toe with the free-spending Manchester United from Wenger's arrival until the arrival of Abramovich and did so without a cash injection that we did nothing to earn, so when you cite the dominance of United and Arsenal as a negative in terms of the way football used to be, I couldn't disagree with you more as it pertains to Arsenal.

Arsenal earned their place and fully deserved to be at the top of the totem pole. Our board hired a brilliant manager, who went on to lure some of the best players in the world using the club's prestige, among other things, as bait. Did that bait include pay raises? Sure, but the money was clean. It was always ours to spend; it didn't come out of thin air like the money that has fallen into the laps of a growing number of other clubs.

And when you say it wasn't a level playing field pre-Abramovich because Chelsea was in a bad spot, well that's not our fault. You got yourself in that position. The difference between you then and us now is that we're not in a bad spot now, we just simply don't spend beyond our means like the 5 clubs in the world who are currently better than us.

And that's why we don't need investment. People act like we're a club in crisis. We're not. We're a huge club that is still on the rise and earning its own success.

For me, there's no shame in finishing behind teams who are outspending you by hundreds of millions of pounds. Arsenal has never had to do that to win and hopefully never will.

We may not have won anything the last 5 years, but going to the Champions League Semi and Final 2 out of those seasons isn't exactly where Chelsea was pre-Abramovich now is it?

For all of your spending, you've finished a combined 13 pts. ahead of us over the last two campaigns. At the end of the 07-08 season, we were 4 points off the pace and only 2 behind you after giving away a huge mid-season lead after we were decimated by injuries. At full strength that year, we were the best team in the world, playing the best football and winning in the process. Surely you don't forget it.

One of these times we're going to win a trophy and it will be well worth it going about doing it the right way. It would be hollow to me if it we sold out to do it.

One more point and then a refutation of something you said:
Having the kind of cash injection that Chelsea has affects the game in more ways than many people realise. It's not just better and more expensive players you can buy, it's not just that you can have a deep squad that can survive injuries. Being able to afford to make mistakes in the transfer market and be able to write them off is something that cannot be underestimated.

No club, operating as a legitimate business, can afford to splash 30 million quid here, 25 million quid there, have those signings fail miserably, and just go out and replace them.

If you had to balance your books you never would have achieved anything, so again, I just can't see how winning that way can make someone proud.

You love CFC, sure. But just as surely you see something vile and wrong about that way of "business," as if that term can even be used to describe what has been going on at Chelsea the last few years.

Now for the refutation of something that was said:
If winning is the bottom line, how have Chelsea had more success this decade than Arsenal?

Going from the 00-01 campaign to the present...

Arsenal have won the Prem twice.
Chelsea have won the Prem twice.

Arsenal have finished second 3 times.
Chelsea have finished second 3 times.

Arsenal won the FA Cup 3 times.
Chelsea won the FA Cup twice.

Arsenal have been to one Champions League final.
Chelsea have been to one Champions League final.

That comes out to:

Premiership titles:
Arsenal: 2 Chelsea: 2

European finals:
Arsenal: 1 Chelsea: 1

FA Cups:
Arsenal: 3 Chelsea: 2

So this decade...
Chelsea haven't had more success in the league, haven't had more success in Europe, and have had less success than Arsenal in the FA Cup.

It was only a few years ago that we were singing "you'll never beat The Arsenal" due to our complete and total dominance over you.

Speaking of songs, as long as I'm able to sing "Have you ever seen The Arsenal buy the League? Have you f*ck" I'll be happy.

And when we go on and win a trophy, just wait for the accolades that your winning will never receive to come flowing our way.

Sorry for having a go at your club, or more precisely, what your club has become, but hey, I call a spade a spade, and there's virtually nothing I said that can be disputed. The truth may hurt but it's still the truth. I'm far, far away from being the only one who sees it this way either.

P.S. I don't think Cesc was really saying Chelsea were average. I think he was saying that the Chelsea performance itself was average and ordinary.

Arsenal had the better of the play until Drogba changed the game.

And are people in this thread really questioning whether Chelsea would be a top 10 club without Drogba? Of course you would. No Drogba might mean finishing below us and the Mancs, but no one else.

[springy]

Its a shame that these bleating goonheads can't get their heads around the fact that for all their fancy pretty football and very overated kids hav'nt got them any silverware. All we here again from them is that when Abramovich gets bored we will be playing chanpionship football or we will dissappear from the face of the earth. He has'nt got bored and is in it for the long haul. They got lucky in an own goal against a failing Liverpool side yesterday. Birmingham were unlucky not to beat them, and after the 0-3 drubbing that Chelsea gave them they still refuse to believe that they are an average side. They, like the top 2 clubs can usually beat the teams below them but come up short (no pun intended) against the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd. We are still top and no way will Arsenal finish above Chelsea. They are not good enough.

[springy]

Russ, 2 ECWC trophies which was a much tougher and prestigious trophy to win than you 1 UEFA cup. Plus the fact we always do better in the Champions league than you. More semis etc.

[springy]

tim funny that you wont do a 10 year history as we won a FA cup in 2000 which makes 3 FA cups, funny that!! the year 2000 is in this decade, no? and you forget couple of Carling cups which Chelsea have won which makes us more sucessfull this decade.very selective writing tim and pretty poor!!

[tim]

springy,

Funny that you consider the Carling Cup to be a proper trophy.

Funnier still that you consider the 99-00 campaign to be part of this decade. It isn't.

And lest you forget, you bought your titles, WE DIDN'T!

HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THE ARSENAL BUY THE LEAGUE?

HAVE YOU F*CK!

So genius, care to address any of the other comments I made about your club?

Care to argue with my statement that Arsenal are far and away the best club in the world that doesn't operate with hundreds of millions of pounds of transfer debt?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

How about this one:

What properly-run club could go through one manager after another like yours has? Just another perk of not having to balance your books.

Lastly, saying Arsenal (at worst the 6th best team in the world) are average shows just how f*cking deluded you and your ilk have become.

Again, you've finished 13 points ahead of us over the last 2 campaigns.

How many millions did your dictator throw away to get you those points?

Look at the titles achieved this decade, consider how we went about winning ours and how you went about winning yours. We are run like a proper business. Run in a way that won't literally ruin the sport. You're run like a dictatorship and the fact that you're proud that Roman "is in it for the long haul" is beyond pathetic.

You're a bunch of leeches sucking off the conquests of a thieving Ruski.

Your club did nothing to earn its current success beyond selling its soul.

End of f*cking conversation.

P.S. If we win our game in hand against Burnley, we're 3 points behind you. You'd think all of your unbridled spending coupled with our net gain in the transfer market would be able to buy you a bigger lead than that. Maybe you should fire your manager again.