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!