comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 1 minute ago

2004/2005 PL 1st CL SF
2005/2006 PL 1st Last 16
2009/2010 PL 1st CL Last 16
2014/2015 PL 1st CL 16
2016/2017 PL 1st no european football


----------------------------------------------------------------------
The mug ignored the evidence that in many many season Chelsea challenged in both

Go on, post your version for Spurs, lets have a feckin good laugh..

Spurs 2016/2017 2nd failed group stage and ist attempt at the EL

Well what is happening here

comment by HRH King Ledley (U20095)
posted 2 minutes ago
One season out of five where you won the league and got past the last 16 - bare minimum for top seeds really.

Hardly pushing your case here


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should be looking at what we achieved when we finished 2nd as that is the only relevant matter you as you have never won the PL and only finished 2nd once....

And to do that you had to embarrass yourself in Europe

comment by Conte'nt (U20893)
posted 2 minutes ago
Well what is happening here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just the usual Spurs fans making utter mugz of themselves again

Love how they think they are top 4 experts after two good seasons.

comment by SWTN - Judas is number 1 (U7916)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 16 minutes ago
Absolutely no logic whatsoever to his argument
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is this for logic...

You are not good enough to challenge for the CL and the PL at the same time....

The only reason you were able to challenge a bit this season was because to were not good enough to get out of your CL group or proceed in the EL.

Logical enough for you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's terrible logic. What you're saying is this

Spurs getting knocked out early (therefore less European football) gives them an advantage

At the same time, no European football for Chelsea is no advantage whatsoever...

It's irrelevant if you think Europe will affect the Chelsea squad less negatively than Spurs

The fact is for any team, regardless of how good they are, playing less games and consistently fielding an XI is an advantage, undeniable

Why do Chelsea have the squad to?

Chelsea have a pretty small squad, which is why a lack of injury problems helped them.

Willian, Fabregas and Ake are the only useful substitutes.

comment by SWTN - Judas is number 1 (U7916)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Conte'nt (U20893)
posted 2 minutes ago
Well what is happening here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just the usual Spurs fans making utter mugz of themselves again
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No real surprise here.

HRH Ledley is still in disbelief as to why Spurs haven't won the title this season. Next season it would be different though, as this young Spurs side will have gained more experience and will more than up for the title.

comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SWTN - Judas is number 1 (U7916)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 16 minutes ago
Absolutely no logic whatsoever to his argument
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is this for logic...

You are not good enough to challenge for the CL and the PL at the same time....

The only reason you were able to challenge a bit this season was because to were not good enough to get out of your CL group or proceed in the EL.

Logical enough for you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's terrible logic. What you're saying is this

Spurs getting knocked out early (therefore less European football) gives them an advantage

At the same time, no European football for Chelsea is no advantage whatsoever...

It's irrelevant if you think Europe will affect the Chelsea squad less negatively than Spurs

The fact is for any team, regardless of how good they are, playing less games and consistently fielding an XI is an advantage, undeniable
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The logic is quite simple..

Spurs have not yet been able to simultaneosuly challenge for the PL and a European trophy in the same season, quite the opposite in fact.

Chelsea have an outstanding record of maintaining dual trophy challenge. Why? Because they have been better and in my view will be miles better equipped next season than Spurs for a dual challenge.

It really is quite simple.

This is a new things from Spurs fans. No one used this excuse until last season.

Normal service is now resumed...

and who is in this year's CL final, errrm oh guess what the respective champions of Italy and Spain.

This is a pathetic excuse only matched by the "oh we had a bad season because we changed stadiums" bollux.

comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 8 minutes ago
Why do Chelsea have the squad to?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have no concerns that we will have Edin and we already have the experience and culture in our club to do so and that is much harder and much more time consuming to acquire.

I don't see us winning it, but we should be in the QFs at a minimum next season.

You struggle with basic concepts

Nobody is saying that you cannot win the PL and challenge in Europe. As you say, Juve and Real won their leagues

My point is, despite the disadvantage of playing those extra games, they are still too strong for the other teams in that league. Regardless, nobody who could challenge for La Liga or Serie A was without Europe this season. If Roma or Atleti had no European games it may have been a different story

But Chelsea, an undoubtedly strong team, going a whole PL season without European games, is not an advantage? Do you seriously think playing a consistent XI is not an advantage, and if not then tell me why

I do think you will probably do well in the CL, but wonder how your team will cope as it is very overpowering vs worse teams but struggle against the better passing sides (bar Palace) as can be seen by your losses this season.

Anyway, it is undeniable that the lack of European football benefited you massively. Your starting XI had almost no injury problems, Moses missing three games in a row being the most? That is the benefit of playing less games.

Let's put it really simply

1) playing a fresh consistent XI every week is an advantage

2) playing European football prevents you from playing a fresh consistent XI every week

Therefore, it follows that European football prevents the advantage

The teams that really succeed in both have incredibly squad depth traditionally as well.

Juve can field two XI's that could challenge for the title

And Real Madrid's bench players have won them the title

comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 4 minutes ago
You struggle with basic concepts

Nobody is saying that you cannot win the PL and challenge in Europe. As you say, Juve and Real won their leagues

My point is, despite the disadvantage of playing those extra games, they are still too strong for the other teams in that league. Regardless, nobody who could challenge for La Liga or Serie A was without Europe this season. If Roma or Atleti had no European games it may have been a different story

But Chelsea, an undoubtedly strong team, going a whole PL season without European games, is not an advantage? Do you seriously think playing a consistent XI is not an advantage, and if not then tell me why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The concept is simple. Spurs are not strong enough to challenge on both fronts.

They proved that this season as they did not challenge in Europe at all.

You are disadvantaged because you are not strong enough...is it really that hard a concept?

Same goes for Leicester.

In the last two seasons we have had the rare situation of having two teams ( Spurs and Leicester) challenging for the title that have none or very little CL experience. Neither team are up to it.

comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 3 minutes ago
The teams that really succeed in both have incredibly squad depth traditionally as well.

Juve can field two XI's that could challenge for the title
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes of course, but squad depth is a much easier fix.

The norm is challenging for both trophies, the last two season have not been the norm.

Chelsea have injuries but not in the same scale other Pl sides have. Also, having no Europe is an advantage. That said , there are no excuses for the big 6 going into the season with inadequate squad depth, which Spurs failed to address the summer. Now that Chelsea will be competing on all fronts next season, there is no doubt Conte will buy few quality players for next season to cope with the additional European fixtures.

comment by Conte'nt (U20893)
posted 42 seconds ago
Chelsea have injuries but not in the same scale other Pl sides have. Also, having no Europe is an advantage. That said , there are no excuses for the big 6 going into the season with inadequate squad depth, which Spurs failed to address the summer. Now that Chelsea will be competing on all fronts next season, there is no doubt Conte will buy few quality players for next season to cope with the additional European fixtures.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally a reasonable post from Chelsea fan

A winning club's mentality is we came second, we must improve next season and win it.

A club lacking that winning mentality will say..."Oh we came second, but we would have won the league if Chelsea had been in Europe or if we hadn't"

What was your excuse last season for not being able to beat Leicester to the title?

Be careful you don't become a club that has more excuses than trophies

comment by SWTN - Judas is number 1 (U7916)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 4 minutes ago
You struggle with basic concepts

Nobody is saying that you cannot win the PL and challenge in Europe. As you say, Juve and Real won their leagues

My point is, despite the disadvantage of playing those extra games, they are still too strong for the other teams in that league. Regardless, nobody who could challenge for La Liga or Serie A was without Europe this season. If Roma or Atleti had no European games it may have been a different story

But Chelsea, an undoubtedly strong team, going a whole PL season without European games, is not an advantage? Do you seriously think playing a consistent XI is not an advantage, and if not then tell me why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The concept is simple. Spurs are not strong enough to challenge on both fronts.

They proved that this season as they did not challenge in Europe at all.

You are disadvantaged because you are not strong enough...is it really that hard a concept?

Same goes for Leicester.

In the last two seasons we have had the rare situation of having two teams ( Spurs and Leicester) challenging for the title that have none or very little CL experience. Neither team are up to it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Find the fault in this

1) playing a fresh consistent XI every week is an advantage

2) playing European football prevents you from playing a fresh consistent XI every week

Therefore, it follows that European football prevents the advantage

The norm? You have challenged on both fronts twice this decade

comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by SWTN - Judas is number 1 (U7916)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 4 minutes ago
You struggle with basic concepts

Nobody is saying that you cannot win the PL and challenge in Europe. As you say, Juve and Real won their leagues

My point is, despite the disadvantage of playing those extra games, they are still too strong for the other teams in that league. Regardless, nobody who could challenge for La Liga or Serie A was without Europe this season. If Roma or Atleti had no European games it may have been a different story

But Chelsea, an undoubtedly strong team, going a whole PL season without European games, is not an advantage? Do you seriously think playing a consistent XI is not an advantage, and if not then tell me why
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The concept is simple. Spurs are not strong enough to challenge on both fronts.

They proved that this season as they did not challenge in Europe at all.

You are disadvantaged because you are not strong enough...is it really that hard a concept?

Same goes for Leicester.

In the last two seasons we have had the rare situation of having two teams ( Spurs and Leicester) challenging for the title that have none or very little CL experience. Neither team are up to it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Find the fault in this

1) playing a fresh consistent XI every week is an advantage

2) playing European football prevents you from playing a fresh consistent XI every week

Therefore, it follows that European football prevents the advantage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have the squad to do both it is not a problem, chelsea have proven this.

Its up to your club's to resource up to compete as a top 4 club.