Lukaku for some reason was stupidly loaned out so they were left with Ba, Torres and Etoo. The Chelsea three have big names and Etoo and Torres were once the best strikers in Europe, but not anymore. The Arsenal bunch is quite poor, but Giroud is comfortably better than any of the three. Giroud is a very good player, but not world class.GunnerGer said:supercrystal7 said:Yeh then imagine if you lost Dzeko and Negredo too. Both of those are top class strikers, maybe just below world class but much better than anything Chelsea had. Apart from Stoke they had the worst strikers in the top 10. Mourinho deserves a big part of the blame for that, because he let Lukakua go though.Danamy said:Falcao will change his way of thinking and would improve any squad.
Just imagine if we lost Aguero to injury for a big chunk of the season, we'd struggle to win anything, oh hang on a minute.......
The problem with Chelsea was not just the striker. It was the defence. Don't be surprised to see Terry dropped next season. They were too exposed at the back every time they gave teams space to attack them. Losing to Villa, Palace and Sunderland is proof enough of this, but it was much worse at the start of the season. If there defence could cope with being exposed then they should have drawn those games.
I agree with a lot of what you say mate, but are you seriously trying to say that a strike force that they had at the start of the season of Torres, Eto'o, Ba and Lukaku is worse than Giroud, Bendtner & Sanogo?
For me, Arsenal had the weakest striker options all the way down to Stoke.
Good news I think. Chelsea with a great centre forward would be much stronger. Not convinced by him.Andouble said:He will be a flop.
Hope he wins the double with Atleti, but he will flop.
Chelsea thread?MSP said:Oh my...
[bigimg]https://scontent-b-fra.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1.0-9/10313588_313585885461615_7796699777820725848_n.jpg[/bigimg]