"A question that should be easier to answer than it is: Are Chelsea succeeding? For most teams, it's close to black and white. Wolves, whom Chelsea just beat 3-0? Massive failure: no wins yet, already fired their coach, probably getting relegated. Sunderland, who just tied Arsenal and came into the season with relegation as their most likely probability? Massive success: They're in fourth place and barring a total meltdown, they've all but clinched another year in the top flight."
"With Chelsea, it's not so simple. They're currently in third place, behind only Arsenal and Manchester City -- but that's complicated, in both directions, by the players they've used, the players they've had available, the difficulty of their opponents, their UEFA Champions League performance, and the color of the card the referee decides to slip out of his pocket."
"All of the above makes it really hard to know whether Chelsea's performance should be considered a success, and that's before we even get into the larger, complicating question. We know what almost every other team is trying to do: win as many games as possible. But with Chelsea, it's hard to know whether they're succeeding because it's still hard to know what they're even aiming to do."
Chelsea sit third in the Premier League, behind Arsenal and Manchester City, but that position offers an incomplete picture. Squad rotation, injuries, strength of schedule, UEFA Champions League commitments, and variable refereeing decisions complicate a simple success/failure label. For 19 other clubs, comparisons to last season, sustainability of performance, and spending relative to squad budgets can determine progress. Chelsea's aims remain unclear, making it difficult to judge whether points, results, or development should define success. Nine different numerical measures can help evaluate Chelsea's performance and intentions more precisely.
Read at ESPN.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]