Factoring in both short and long term capabilites, which club is less equiped for success? They’re both well under expectations at the moment, but who is more likely to be good in a 2-5 year window?
Factoring in both short and long term capabilites, which club is less equiped for success? They’re both well under expectations at the moment, but who is more likely to be good in a 2-5 year window?
I feel like Chelsea is in a better position at this moment.
Chelsea have a lot of high potential players and actually play somewhat decent up until they actually need to finish a chance or defend a incoming goal. Very often they’d have 70% possesion and 17 shots in the final third but none of those become goals and thats their real detrement. With Nkunku coming back sooner or later they should atleast in theory start finishing their chances, and honestly i think the defenders and Sanchez just need the proper motivation and morale, as they are not really half-bad, just make very dumb mistakes which can be avoided.
I dont see the same at Man Utd. There are injury problems sure, but almost every other club suffers from injuries, they arent the only ones, and yet the other clubs seem to be doing miles better. They have a core that is falling apart with their best players being in massive muds or getting old/injured. I’m not going to get into the question of “should Ten-Hag be sacked” or “The Glazers should sell the club so we can get proper owners” but what I can say from a unbiased outsider that doesnt give a damn really about the PL - you should focus more on the pitch, less on whats happening out of it. It wasnt the Glazers losing 0-3 at home to Newcastle. As bad as the ownership may or may not be, the players and tactics should be equally to blame.