The harsh reality: Chelsea is a Frankenstein team too

LONDON, ENGLAND - JULY 01: Frank Lampard, Manager of Chelsea reacts following the Premier League match between West Ham United and Chelsea FC at London Stadium on July 01, 2020 in London, England. Football Stadiums around Europe remain empty due to the Coronavirus Pandemic as Government social distancing laws prohibit fans inside venues resulting in all fixtures being played behind closed doors. (Photo by Michael Regan/Getty Images)
LONDON, ENGLAND - JULY 01: Frank Lampard, Manager of Chelsea reacts following the Premier League match between West Ham United and Chelsea FC at London Stadium on July 01, 2020 in London, England. Football Stadiums around Europe remain empty due to the Coronavirus Pandemic as Government social distancing laws prohibit fans inside venues resulting in all fixtures being played behind closed doors. (Photo by Michael Regan/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit

For years, certain Premier League clubs have stood out as a mishmash of styles that just do not go together. The reality is that Chelsea may be one of them.

A Frankenstein team has been a term attached to various Premier League clubs, most notably Everton, West Ham (multiple times across the years), and occasionally Watford. In some ways, Manchester United can be seen as one since their last league win. But this is not about them. This is about Chelsea and the increasing recognition that the Blues can number themselves among the mishmashed teams of the league.

This is not necessarily a new notion. In 2018, it was clear. Often. But that stemmed from a very sudden and unplanned shift in style from where the Blues were to where they wanted to be. Frank Lampard came in and has made great strides towards bridging the two banks of the river, but there are still issues that go beyond him.

Say Chelsea had an ax. The head broke so the replaced it. Then the handle broke and they replaced that too. Is it the same ax? Now imagine they replaced the ax head with a hammer head because that is what the manager said was needed at the time. The next manager saw the handle and decided they needed to replace that with a ruler. No, this does not make any sense but it has basically been Chelsea’s way, on and off, for nearly two decades now.

The only manager to really move Chelsea in one solid direction has been Jose Mourinho. His fingerprint on the club lasted arguably until Maurizio Sarri took charge and then it arguably returned (in part) with Frank Lampard. The managers between his two stints and after his second all tried to put their finger prints on the club too. Mostly, they just muddled things.

Chelsea became a team of hard working players surrounded by highly technical tika-taka players. In some ways, that is totally fine. Clubs rarely want to be just one thing. The issue is when certain sections, like attack and defense, do not work together well because of the mishmash.

The issue is most evident when putting a microscope onto those sections. While it is good to have variance in players like Marcos Alonso and Emerson, how they fit into the entire unit is an issue. Chelsea’s back line consists of bruisers as well as players Pep Guardiola would love to have spraying passes. But it is a very delicate balancing act to put those two types of players together.

Then there is the attack. Again, it is good to have options, but if a player like Olivier Giroud is looking for assistance, that dictates the players that can surround him. There must be goal scorers to feed off him. Tammy Abraham, however, needs someone feeding him good service over and over. It is not easy to build around one or the other while keeping the other player in a position to help the team.

Midfield is about the only place this discrepancy can be mitigated, though it can still be an issue. Look no further than the N’Golo Kante versus Jorginho debate. Is it better to have a holding midfielder who can defend, or have one who can dictate play through the middle? And how does one or the other shape the rest of the midfield?

Chelsea predicted XI: Realigning and rotating for Watford. light. Related Story

The solution under Petr Cech and Marina Granovskaia’s team building (with Frank Lampard’s input), seems to be to play both sides. The players signed thus far, including many of those linked, can play multiple positions which allows them to slot into many different teams. But stylistically, they do lean more in one direction than the other. Lampard is attempting to build the team in his image, but to do so he will have to dismantle some of it as well.

But it is not all doom and gloom. One major way to trend the club in one direction has been the use of the academy. The academy has been playing in a particular way for years so all the players are versed in it. The influx of Tammy Abraham, Mason Mount, Reece James, Fikayo Tomori, and others has helped to create a base for the team to build around. Lampard, with Jody Morris as his assistant, has been trying to find the right senior team players to include in that direction.

This summer is not just about bringing in good players. Chelsea has had those summers before. It is about bringing in the right players so Chelsea is not pulling in two directions at once. The inconsistency in recent seasons has largely been down to having some players suited for one way and others suited for something entirely different and trying to jam them together and make it work.

Next. Chelsea talking tactics: Watford is still standing despite relegation fears. dark

Lampard needs to find the right players to bring along in his revolution. Otherwise, the Blues face the same fate as West Ham, Everton, Watford, and others: having a team that looks good on paper but struggles to put it together in practice.