EasyG said:whos this backbone of english players chelsea have?
other then lampard and terry any other english players you have bought u've basically killed them lol.
scott parker awesome for charlton, goes to chelsea, you basically bought him so no one else coudl have him and then killed his career, till the good old boys at newcastle buy him and now look at him again bloody awesome again.
there doing it with SWP as well, brilliant for man city, chelsea buy him and it happens again, he had a sweet game the one before last so how do they reward him for it? by not playing him again.
LionOfJudah said:how about joe cole? wasted talent at west ham, same at chelsea at the start but then changed suddenly...what a failure he is NOT!!!!!!!
well ok but he has started at least half the prem games this season. and you can't deny that his all round game hasn't improved at chelsea. I am sure if he was still at west ham he'd be getting games but still wouldnt be as improved as he has become at chelsea.EasyG said:failure he is not , regular starting 11 he is not.
EasyG wasn't saying he was a bad player but was responding to someone saying Chelsea have a backbone of english players. EasyG was just pointing out that apart from Terry and Lampard the rest of regular players (chelsea's backbone) are foreign; Gallas, Del Horno, Carvalho, Makelele and Essien.LionOfJudah said:well ok but he has started at least half the prem games this season. and you can't deny that his all round game hasn't improved at chelsea. I am sure if he was still at west ham he'd be getting games but still wouldnt be as improved as he has become at chelsea.
Frosti said:I’m seriously tired of people attributing Chelsea’s success to money alone. The players work extremely hard for each other on the pitch and show real desire to win things.
Real Madrid have shown that Money alone won’t bring Trophies and I didn’t see anyone complaining when Man Utd Spent £30Mil on Rooney, Van Nistlerooy, Veron, Ferdinand ect.
If Chelsea winning the title is a forgone conclusion these days, who’s fault is that? Arsenal, Liverpool, and Man Utd only have to play Chelsea twice each year, So I suppose it’s Chelsea’s fault too if they drop points against lower opposition too?
Sorry but it just sounds like sour grapes to me.
I think Bayern Munich should be grouped with Real, Milan and Liverpool. They have won the European Cup 4 times and you have to remember that German clubs HAVE to make a profit every year. So for them to compete with other top clubs that, with the exception of Liverpool (with the exception of year before last) and Man Utd, can lose money every year and still buy top players is very impressive.BoomAM said:Juve, Inter, ManU, Arsenal, Barca, Chelsea, Munich & whatever are big teams. But what have they won European wise? Not a lot.
What have they won though?BaZ87 said:I think Bayern Munich should be grouped with Real, Milan and Liverpool. They have won the European Cup 4 times and you have to remember that German clubs HAVE to make a profit every year. So for them to compete with other top clubs that, with the exception of Liverpool (with the exception of year before last) and Man Utd, can lose money every year and still buy top players is very impressive.
Like i said they have won the European Cup 4 times!!!! As for recently Real and Liverpool (apart from last year) haven't been amazingly successful. I agree that Man Utd etc shouldn't be called a great European side.BoomAM said:What have they won though?
They never seem to get that far in Europe lately.
Bayern are an outside shot, but regardless, the other teams dont deserve to be named in the same sentance as the other 3 (4?) in regards to European heavy weights.