Has Cesc Fabregas fullfilled his potential ?

[duffer]

Far, far worse, Fabregas like all those other ungrateful urchins owe their entire careers to Wenger and his coaching.

I can't believe Fabregas was 24 when he left and basically ended up spending his prime years at Chelsea of all clubs. When everyone knows he had other options.

If he had stayed, Arsenal might have won the league.

It's strange, he ended up playing deeper for Chelsea at the end but I don't think he was good enough to play there earlier on in his career. Cesc had some fatal flaws in his game that Wenger covered up, were brutally exposed at Barcelona and then Chelsea tried to mitigate them as well. Given the player he actually was, he's fulfilled his potential. Arsenal didn't hold him back from anything.

They held him back from winning things. It's not a co-incidence that he started winning leagues as soon as he got away from Arsenal and joined better sides.

 

[JSArsenal]

They held him back from winning things. It's not a co-incidence that he started winning leagues as soon as he got away from Arsenal and joined better sides.

Then we're talking about two different things.
On an individual level, he was never as good as he was at Arsenal.
He won trophies elsewhere.

That notwithstanding would he have been good enough to do so without the footballing education he received at Arsenal?

 

[Cassidy]

Then we're talking about two different things.
On an individual level, he was never as good as he was at Arsenal.
He won trophies elsewhere.

That notwithstanding would he have been good enough to do so without the footballing education he received at Arsenal?

Im sure he would have been fine with a football education at Barcelona

 

[GazTheLegend]

Then we're talking about two different things.
On an individual level, he was never as good as he was at Arsenal.
He won trophies elsewhere.

That notwithstanding would he have been good enough to do so without the footballing education he received at Arsenal?

I actually agree. Feel that what killed your club was clubs like Manchester City, Chelsea and ourselves signing your players just before you gelled into a world class team. It started with Ashley Cole and Samir Nasri and it ended with van Persie - and indeed Fabregas. He would absolutely have won trophies had those players all stayed at your club - but you had a stadium to pay for and simply couldn't offer him or them the same money.

 

[duffer]

Then we're talking about two different things.
On an individual level, he was never as good as he was at Arsenal.
He won trophies elsewhere.

That notwithstanding would he have been good enough to do so without the footballing education he received at Arsenal?

Sure. He was 16 when he left Barca. If he'd stayed maybe he would've been better.

 

[tenpoless]

His trophy count did increase as time went on. But the best version of Fabregas is Arsenal's Fabregas for me. He simply stood out and had time on his side.

 

[duffer]

His trophy count did increase as time went on. But the best version of Fabregas is Arsenal's Fabregas. He simply stood out and had time at his side.

Is it possible he stood out more in that side because he was the best player in it for most of his time there?

He went from playing with Walcott and Arshavin to Messi and Iniesta. Of course he's going to look better at Arsenal.

 

[JSArsenal]

Sure. He was 16 when he left Barca. If he'd stayed maybe he would've been better.

He wouldn't have gotten a game ahead of Deco, Xavi or Iniesta in those days. There is actually no point where I can see Fabregas playing in Barcelona's midfield. At best he would have played where Pedro/Henry ended up playing but more of a Pires (midfielder on the wing) rather than the forward that those two were. Fabregas was never, as strange as this sounds, technically good enough to play as a midfielder for Barcelona. As proven by when he finally did go there, when Xavi and Iniesta were in decline and still couldn't play there.

I actually agree. Feel that what killed your club was clubs like Manchester City, Chelsea and ourselves signing your players just before you gelled into a world class team. It started with Ashley Cole and Samir Nasri and it ended with van Persie - and indeed Fabregas. He would absolutely have won trophies had those players all stayed at your club - but you had a stadium to pay for and simply couldn't offer him or them the same money.

I still maintain that we should have kept Ashley Cole and RVP. The latter probably wins us the league in 2013. We had signed a midfielder in Cazorla, a LW and a back up striker that we always needed in Giroud. RVP was ungodly that season as well. Cashley staying wins us the league in 2008 because he was far better than Clichy and it avoids the whole captain issue because he would have been captain and Gallas would not have been there. It also massively weakens Chelsea.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Individually he peaks in Arsenal in his early twenties, he was the main man at Arsenal, and widely recognised as the best young midfielder in the world too. Ever since his move to Barca and then to Chelsea he hasn't quite match or fulfill his early promises, he was just part of the successful team, but he didn't quite stand out.

Career wise I don't think he could have any complain - he basically almost won everything he could have, although he could have win a few more club trophies, but you can't really ask for more - 1 WC and 2 Euro, plus a few domestic league and cups is still a great achievement overall.

 

[kouroux]

Scored the winning penalty.

You're right. Somehow I forgot about that and focused on the big chances missed

 

[littleman]

Everyone has a different story when comparing players

- Player was only good because he was a big fish in a small pond, was exposed when he moved to big pond with other big fish (e.g. Fabregas from Arse to Barc)

- Player was not good only because he was a big fish in a small pond, and small fish don’t know how to play with him (e.g. Pogba with Utd compared to Juve)

The narrative changes all the time to suit the purpose.

I’m really not sure Cesc was never good enough to be a Barca midfielder. Maybe it was style of play as it concentrated a lot more on possession, movement and positioning. Plainly he was brilliant as a midfielder in the EPL, his through-passes in his EPL career as a whole are possibly the best ever.

 

[tinfish]

He's the best player at Arsenal so far in the Emirates era. I don't really get why he was so underrated - maybe because his performances at Barca or Chelsea wasn't as good. When he was at Arsenal he was comfortably the best midfielder in the league and everyone was popping one out over him. He was a monster that did everything - the pass, tackle, tracking back etc. etc.

Sadly as with most things over football, the trophy count, missing CL or the emotional sentiment about him and his disruptive departure to Barcelona will always tarnish his image with Arsenal fans and football fans in general. I don't know why our fans are so bitter though.... take away the emotional sentiment and as I said before he is our best player so far during the Emirates era.

On Arsenal Mania I've seen tossers rate, Ozil, Mertesacker, Ramsey etc. as all better players than Fabregas... baffles me. RVP is a good shout but he only came consistently good towards the end of his career here. Fabregas at Arsenal was special since his debut performance.

 

[footballistic orgasm]

I'll say no because he won't be considered as being as good as Xavi and Iniesta and a few others, when at a certain stage, he was seen as the one with the higher ceiling as a midfielder. To be honest though, he's more versatile than both and way deadlier in the final third than both (especially Iniesta who's final third contribution was rather poor for a player of his status).

But Cesc has nothing to be envious of any other player in terms of career achievements, he's won almost every important trophy (except the CL).

 

[SadlerMUFC]

Cesc was a victim of going to Barca at a time when they had quite possibly the best midfield in football history. He was still a great player though...

 

[Robô]

Finding a place for Fabregas has always been an intriguing question. He is not the player who controls the pace of the game (like xavi, iniesta, pirlo, modric etc.) and dont have the explosion to a classic box to box. For that reason, Fabregas became a false nine in Spain NT and Barcelona.

I think he changed his position so much throughout his career that created this feeling that didn't fulfill his potential.

 

[FootballHQ]

Far, far worse, Fabregas like all those other ungrateful urchins owe their entire careers to Wenger and his coaching.

I can't believe Fabregas was 24 when he left and basically ended up spending his prime years at Chelsea of all clubs. When everyone knows he had other options.

If he had stayed, Arsenal might have won the league.

It's strange, he ended up playing deeper for Chelsea at the end but I don't think he was good enough to play there earlier on in his career. Cesc had some fatal flaws in his game that Wenger covered up, were brutally exposed at Barcelona and then Chelsea tried to mitigate them as well. Given the player he actually was, he's fulfilled his potential. Arsenal didn't hold him back from anything.

Arsenal's best chance at that with him as main man was 07/08, played brilliant football for most of that season but it all feel away after Eduardo's injury.

Next two seasons you were a long way off 1st and 10/11 you were in contention but again poor run in which probably convinced Fabregas it was time to move on to Barca who'd just won their 2nd european cup in three seasons and likes of Messi at their total peak.

He could've easily left after winning the world cup the previous summer.

 

[Cascarino]

No. First Wenger then Barca Gerrarded him. He was a top CM but only a decent no.10.

Nope. He began slowing down in his development even at Arsenal (personally I felt that the move to the number 10 was a bad choice for his development and it was more about Wenger trying to cover glaring holes in his team) and the move to Barca didn't work at all. He has performed quite decently there – I actually liked their partnership with Messi where Cesc played as a false 9/10, but it certainly didn't make the best use of his best qualities. At Chelsea he has performed very well as a deep-lying playmaker and almost broke an assist record, but he was hardly one of the best players in the league, let alone in the world at that point – and that was his potential.

I don’t really agree about his development slowing down at Arsenal (injuries not withstanding) Or him moving further forward affecting his development (though I see the argument especially with the point you make about his effectiveness in the deeper role at Chelsea) , the 2009/10 season was a phenomenal one, and is probably the best version of Fàbregas that we got to see. I can see the argument that Wenger moves him around for squad reasons (and largely agree) but I think this benefitted Fàbregas and how attributes also. Albeit he was spoken of as a 10, his actual positioning that season was a lot more fluid, he was given almost complete freedom and he functioned almost as a box to box player, often dropping deep to initiate attacks as well as making late runs into the box. He was a more mobile energetic player back then and he could basically function as the heartbeat of the team. This probably did affect his performances at Barcelona in later

I think the false 9 told you mentioned was probably as good as it got for him at Barcelona. There were some really good games, it’s a shame that overall the move didn’t work out (individually Speaking as opposed to the trophies won).

I'll say no because he won't be considered as being as good as Xavi and Iniesta and a few others, when at a certain stage, he was seen as the one with the higher ceiling as a midfielder. To be honest though, he's more versatile than both and way deadlier in the final third than both (especially Iniesta who's final third contribution was rather poor for a player of his status).

But Cesc has nothing to be envious of any other player in terms of career achievements, he's won almost every important trophy (except the CL).

I think that’s more about how we sometimes erroneously view progression as a linear path of incremental improvement, rather than accurate assessments of the players. Fàbregas was a wunderkind, but some players peak younger (Rooney, Owen etc) whereas someone hit the heights at the tail end of their career (Adúriz).

Is it possible he stood out more in that side because he was the best player in it for most of his time there?

He went from playing with Walcott and Arshavin to Messi and Iniesta. Of course he's going to look better at Arsenal.

I think your point here is a good one, When he went to Barca he played alongside a few players who were a different level. And as good as he was, it was easy to see the gap between him and some of the others.

Arshavin was a fun player, and was pretty damn good for a short spell. You mentioning him has reminded me of Euro 2008 and his class display against Holland, and his goal against Barcelona in the CL.

 

[TwoSheds]

I don’t really agree about his development slowing down at Arsenal (injuries not withstanding) Or him moving further forward affecting his development (though I see the argument especially with the point you make about his effectiveness in the deeper role at Chelsea) , the 2009/10 season was a phenomenal one, and is probably the best version of Fàbregas that we got to see. I can see the argument that Wenger moves him around for squad reasons (and largely agree) but I think this benefitted Fàbregas and how attributes also. Albeit he was spoken of as a 10, his actual positioning that season was a lot more fluid, he was given almost complete freedom and he functioned almost as a box to box player, often dropping deep to initiate attacks as well as making late runs into the box. He was a more mobile energetic player back then and he could basically function as the heartbeat of the team. This probably did affect his performances at Barcelona in later

I think the false 9 told you mentioned was probably as good as it got for him at Barcelona. There were some really good games, it’s a shame that overall the move didn’t work out (individually Speaking as opposed to the trophies won).




I think that’s more about how we sometimes erroneously view progression as a linear path of incremental improvement, rather than accurate assessments of the players. Fàbregas was a wunderkind, but some players peak younger (Rooney, Owen etc) whereas someone hit the heights at the tail end of their career (Adúriz).



I think your point here is a good one, When he went to Barca he played alongside a few players who were a different level. And as good as he was, it was easy to see the gap between him and some of the others.

Arshavin was a fun player, and was pretty damn good for a short spell. You mentioning him has reminded me of Euro 2008 and his class display against Holland, and his goal against Barcelona in the CL.

Gerrard also had his best season further forward playing with Torres up front. Doesn't mean he should have been indulged playing there. The guy would have been an all time great box to box midfielder under the right coach and with better teammates, but instead he became a very good forward.

Same goes for Fabregas, what he could contribute in terms of goals and assists from deep as well as dictating the tempo of the game was far more valuable than the greater number of goals and assists he contributed at no.10. end of the day he was a decent forward but should have been a world class CM.

Alli had the same problem - classic English football really, oh he's scoring goals he must be a forward. No, he's a midfielder who scores goals which is very valuable. Now you see the results - he's never learned how to play midfield properly and the goals have dried up a bit up front so he doesn't offer much and can't get a look in.

 

[Zehner]

I remember at the time of his break through, he was expected to fill the void Zidane would eventually leave after retiring. He cemented this belief with his great performances at a young age and received much praise, especially from Luis Aragones. Among all Spanish prospects, he was easily the one to stand out the most. During that time I'd say most people would've agreed that Fabregas would sooner or later win a Ballon D'Or.

So no, I don't think he fulfilled his potential. Still had a great career but if you'd told people during his prime at Arsenal that Iniesta, Xavi, David Silva and David Villa would end their careers as quite clearly superior players, they would have been disappointed to say the least.

 

[Mb194dc]

Amazing to me he's only 33 still. Feel like he's been playing forever and would be pushing 40 by now.

Fantastic player in terms of vision and passing but one who had to be used in a particular way tactically as he had some big limitations which were often exposed at Arsenal & Barcelona. Doesn't really suit Pep style as too direct a passer and doesn't have the stamina to press so much.

He had his best seasons in 14/15 18 assists 3 goals, and 16/17 12 assists 5 goals in only 1300 minutes, Chelsea title winning seasons. Mourinho and Conte got the best out of him.

 

[Cascarino]

Amazing to me he's only 33 still. Feel like he's been playing forever and would be pushing 40 by now.

Fantastic player in terms of vision and passing but one who had to be used in a particular way tactically as he had some big limitations which were often exposed at Arsenal & Barcelona. Doesn't really suit Pep style as too direct a passer and doesn't have the stamina to press so much.

He had his best seasons in 14/15 18 assists 3 goals, and 16/17 12 assists 5 goals in only 1300 minutes, Chelsea title winning seasons. Mourinho and Conte got the best out of him.

Agree about the Pep comment. When he did play for Guardiola it often looked awkward on the pitch. Definitely disagree that those two seasons were his best though, in the 2009-2010 season he was phenomenal. It’s reductive to boil everything down to stats but in appearances 37 he had 19 goals and 20 assists. He was incredible all over the pitch and sadly a few injuries that season stopped it from being arguably one of the greatest midfield seasons from a premier league player. Gets forgotten about now due to a lack of trophies that season but it can’t be pinned on Cesc.

Gerrard also had his best season further forward playing with Torres up front. Doesn't mean he should have been indulged playing there. The guy would have been an all time great box to box midfielder under the right coach and with better teammates, but instead he became a very good forward.

Same goes for Fabregas, what he could contribute in terms of goals and assists from deep as well as dictating the tempo of the game was far more valuable than the greater number of goals and assists he contributed at no.10. end of the day he was a decent forward but should have been a world class CM.

Alli had the same problem - classic English football really, oh he's scoring goals he must be a forward. No, he's a midfielder who scores goals which is very valuable. Now you see the results - he's never learned how to play midfield properly and the goals have dried up a bit up front so he doesn't offer much and can't get a look in.

Calling him a forward during that time at Arsenal doesn’t really fit him, he was a midfielder with license to roam and create. Similar to how KDB functions in today’s city team. Think it definitely suited Fàbregas the most as it allowed him to be creative all over the pitch, bringing the ball out from deep but also allowing him to utilise his world class chance creation prowess.

Regarding Gerrard, I don’t think he could have been the box to box you envisage. When it came down to it, he could be a liability in CM at certain occasions. His best football came with a free role, and the more disciplined Alonso and Masch as the central midfielders. Gerrard still contributed all over the pitch, but it just meant he wasn’t shackled to a certain position defensively.

 

[TwoSheds]

Agree about the Pep comment. When he did play for Guardiola it often looked awkward on the pitch. Definitely disagree that those two seasons were his best though, in the 2009-2010 season he was phenomenal. It’s reductive to boil everything down to stats but in appearances 37 he had 19 goals and 20 assists. He was incredible all over the pitch and sadly a few injuries that season stopped it from being arguably one of the greatest midfield seasons from a premier league player. Gets forgotten about now due to a lack of trophies that season but it can’t be pinned on Cesc.




Calling him a forward during that time at Arsenal doesn’t really fit him, he was a midfielder with license to roam and create. Similar to how KDB functions in today’s city team. Think it definitely suited Fàbregas the most as it allowed him to be creative all over the pitch, bringing the ball out from deep but also allowing him to utilise his world class chance creation prowess.

Regarding Gerrard, I don’t think he could have been the box to box you envisage. When it came down to it, he could be a liability in CM at certain occasions. His best football came with a free role, and the more disciplined Alonso and Masch as the central midfielders. Gerrard still contributed all over the pitch, but it just meant he wasn’t shackled to a certain position defensively.

Exactly, "freeing them up" is what I call indulging them. They were class because they could do the dirty work AND contribute in attack. Once you allow them to just fanny around up front you lose what makes them special.

Don't agree that Fabregas at no.10 was like de Bruyne at all btw. De Bruyne had his best seasons at City deeper in midfield where he can drive through and get involved in all areas all the time. This year he's perhaps had his best games further up the pitch but IMO that's because he's either out of form or losing his engine a bit. He's still a great no.10, but these are special players who can do it from deeper, win the ball and set the tempo while they're at it.

Pogba also should have become one of these special players but doesn't like he's ever quite going to nail it now.

 

[Cascarino]

Exactly, "freeing them up" is what I call indulging them. They were class because they could do the dirty work AND contribute in attack. Once you allow them to just fanny around up front you lose what makes them special.

Don't agree that Fabregas at no.10 was like de Bruyne at all btw. De Bruyne had his best seasons at City deeper in midfield where he can drive through and get involved in all areas all the time. This year he's perhaps had his best games further up the pitch but IMO that's because he's either out of form or losing his engine a bit. He's still a great no.10, but these are special players who can do it from deeper, win the ball and set the tempo while they're at it.

Pogba also should have become one of these special players but doesn't like he's ever quite going to nail it now.

Tbh that indulging you mention is probably part of the reason Fàbregas struggled after his move to the nou camp. He went from having total freedom, both in a positional and tactical sense, to having to adapt to a rigid preexisting framework in which synergy was valued over everything.

 

[sun_tzu]

110 caps for Spain at a time when they had busquets, alonso, xavi, iniesta is pretty phenomenal

If thats not fulfilling his potential then how much potential did he have!

 

[giorno]

Is it possible he stood out more in that side because he was the best player in it for most of his time there?

He went from playing with Walcott and Arshavin to Messi and Iniesta. Of course he's going to look better at Arsenal.

Nah, he was genuinely fantastic at arsenal, and barcelona never played him to his strenghts(because yes, they had better players plus they were a near flawless machine as it was)

Just a case of a player who peaked very early, then made a relatively bad career choice during the last years of his prime. Bit like Rooney except for the bad career choice

 

[littleman]

110 caps for Spain at a time when they had busquets, alonso, xavi, iniesta is pretty phenomenal

If thats not fulfilling his potential then how much potential did he have!

while true, I think there was a possibility he would have been the best of his generation or even one of the best midfielders of all time given how good he was and how young he was while at Arsenal

his poor integration at Barca and his great but quickly diminishing stint at Chelsea sort of put a stinker on his career veneer

at 33, a generational great would still be playing at a top club ala Zidane, Iniesta, Xavi, Giggs, Scholes, Nedved, Pirlo etc.

 

[GailSpaceWynand]

Generally it seems that Fabregas isn't held in the same level of respect/joy by fans like Xavi and Iniesta are, but at his best he was possibly better.

Xavi and Iniesta are basically considered legends of spanish footballl and of the game overall, while Fabregas seems a tier below...

Umm no. He was a WC player in his prime but unfortunately Xavi and Iniesta were a class above.

 

[Stacks]

Gerrard also had his best season further forward playing with Torres up front. Doesn't mean he should have been indulged playing there. The guy would have been an all time great box to box midfielder under the right coach and with better teammates, but instead he became a very good forward.

Same goes for Fabregas, what he could contribute in terms of goals and assists from deep as well as dictating the tempo of the game was far more valuable than the greater number of goals and assists he contributed at no.10. end of the day he was a decent forward but should have been a world class CM.

Alli had the same problem - classic English football really, oh he's scoring goals he must be a forward. No, he's a midfielder who scores goals which is very valuable. Now you see the results - he's never learned how to play midfield properly and the goals have dried up a bit up front so he doesn't offer much and can't get a look in.

He actually was a world class CM before he became a decent forward

I remember at the time of his break through, he was expected to fill the void Zidane would eventually leave after retiring. He cemented this belief with his great performances at a young age and received much praise, especially from Luis Aragones. Among all Spanish prospects, he was easily the one to stand out the most. During that time I'd say most people would've agreed that Fabregas would sooner or later win a Ballon D'Or.

So no, I don't think he fulfilled his potential. Still had a great career but if you'd told people during his prime at Arsenal that Iniesta, Xavi, David Silva and David Villa would end their careers as quite clearly superior players, they would have been disappointed to say the least.

Don't remember anyone claiming this. When he first broke through at 16 he was criticised heavily for being too passive. This may have been a tiny group of people but was not the general consensus. Gourcuff was touted as the next Zidane. Literally no one thought he would win a Balon D'or when you have guys like Ronaldinho and Kaka who can do almost everything better. When was this exactly? He was never at any stage the best player even in England so who was predicted him to dominate the world?

110 caps for Spain at a time when they had busquets, alonso, xavi, iniesta is pretty phenomenal

If thats not fulfilling his potential then how much potential did he have!

People need their heads a wobble

while true, I think there was a possibility he would have been the best of his generation or even one of the best midfielders of all time given how good he was and how young he was while at Arsenal

his poor integration at Barca and his great but quickly diminishing stint at Chelsea sort of put a stinker on his career veneer

at 33, a generational great would still be playing at a top club ala Zidane, Iniesta, Xavi, Giggs, Scholes, Nedved, Pirlo etc.

He was one of the best of his generation.

Kaka and Ronaldinho ain't generational talents then. Nor was Rivaldo?

 

[Zehner]

Don't remember anyone claiming this. When he first broke through at 16 he was criticised heavily for being too passive. This may have been a tiny group of people but was not the general consensus. Gourcuff was touted as the next Zidane. Literally no one thought he would win a Balon D'or when you have guys like Ronaldinho and Kaka who can do almost everything better. When was this exactly? He was never at any stage the best player even in England so who was predicted him to dominate the world?

I was around 14/15 back then and media coverage of foreign leagues was different to today so my perception might not be in line with that among EPL fans back then. However, at least in our domestic media, he was treated like one of the greatest talents in the world, certainly the most promising Spanish youngster. Definitely heard more about him than about, say, Messi ~2006. There were quite a few Zidane comparisons when an Arsenal match was on TV or Germany played Spain etc.

And Ronaldinho and Kaka were significantly older than him. Fabregas was lauded as the next big thing, Ronaldinho and Kaka were already superstars at that time.

 

[Sandikan]

I loved, loved, loved watching him play. Two random moments stick out in the memory:

One was a goal he scored for Arsenal where he pounced on a loose ball from the kick off, dribbled past Palacios at speed, megged Ledley King and scored. I think the live broadcast missed that goal. Another was a pass over the top he played to Diego Costa for Chelsea against Arsenal.

I know Barca tapped him up in public saying he had "Barca DNA" but he always struck me as a very British midfield player and in a way I guess he is pretty English. He came over as a boy and played 11 seasons in English football.

No, his best goal was when he closed a clearance down just in his own half I think it was, and it ricocheted over the defender and goalie into the net. Incredible.

 

[POF]

I actually agree. Feel that what killed your club was clubs like Manchester City, Chelsea and ourselves signing your players just before you gelled into a world class team. It started with Ashley Cole and Samir Nasri and it ended with van Persie - and indeed Fabregas. He would absolutely have won trophies had those players all stayed at your club - but you had a stadium to pay for and simply couldn't offer him or them the same money.

I completely disagree. No matter what players they had, that Arsenal team was never winning anything significant under Wenger.

They played nice football but when the pressure was on they collapsed like a house of cards. Their best players may not have been as impressive or easy on the eye after moving away from Arsenal but they won a lot more because they moved to teams with winning mentalities.

Back on topic, the above sums up Fabregas' career. He was more pivotal to how the team played at Arsenal but more successful elsewhere. I think he'll regret staying at Arsenal so long when he reflects on his career.

 

[littleman]

He was one of the best of his generation.

Kaka and Ronaldinho ain't generational talents then. Nor was Rivaldo?

Kaka had a short peak from injuries, and Ronaldinho just had ill discipline and really didn’t seem to care after a while.

Don’t think they’re quite comparable to Cesc but I think without injuries and with more determination both Kaka and Ronaldinho would still be playing at a top club at 33 like the other names mentioned

 

[Snow]

while true, I think there was a possibility he would have been the best of his generation or even one of the best midfielders of all time given how good he was and how young he was while at Arsenal

his poor integration at Barca and his great but quickly diminishing stint at Chelsea sort of put a stinker on his career veneer

at 33, a generational great would still be playing at a top club ala Zidane, Iniesta, Xavi, Giggs, Scholes, Nedved, Pirlo etc.

Fabregas was 17 when he played 46 games of first team football. How many of them did that? At 33 Rooney finished his Everton season and went to the US. I don't think you can criticise Rooney much for his career.

 

[MadDogg]

Gerrard also had his best season further forward playing with Torres up front. Doesn't mean he should have been indulged playing there. The guy would have been an all time great box to box midfielder under the right coach and with better teammates, but instead he became a very good forward.

Same goes for Fabregas, what he could contribute in terms of goals and assists from deep as well as dictating the tempo of the game was far more valuable than the greater number of goals and assists he contributed at no.10. end of the day he was a decent forward but should have been a world class CM.

I'd agree with Fabregas, not so much Gerrard. I've always felt his talents were almost wasted by spending most of his career trying to fit him into central midfield. Maybe as the most attacking of a three man midfield, but not in a two. Either that or as an outright #10 or on the right, which is where he ended up having his best seasons.

 

[littleman]

Fabregas was 17 when he played 46 games of first team football. How many of them did that? At 33 Rooney finished his Everton season and went to the US. I don't think you can criticise Rooney much for his career.

That's true and changed my mind -- Cesc doesn't have a huge late career because he started so early (at 16 he immediately became a starter at Arsenal after his first game).

For what it's worth, I do think midfielders can get more mileage because even less mobile ones can be very successful ala Pirlo/Carrick.

 

[ThierryHenry14]

Cesc was a victim of going to Barca at a time when they had quite possibly the best midfield in football history. He was still a great player though...

Agreed. He joined a team that had no place for him at the time. Barcelona midfield nowadays is a completely different story.

 

[Stacks]

I was around 14/15 back then and media coverage of foreign leagues was different to today so my perception might not be in line with that among EPL fans back then. However, at least in our domestic media, he was treated like one of the greatest talents in the world, certainly the most promising Spanish youngster. Definitely heard more about him than about, say, Messi ~2006. There were quite a few Zidane comparisons when an Arsenal match was on TV or Germany played Spain etc.

And Ronaldinho and Kaka were significantly older than him. Fabregas was lauded as the next big thing, Ronaldinho and Kaka were already superstars at that time.

wow that's really interesting to know. Over here (England) Fernando Torres was the Spanish darling and people thought he was the best forward in the world

 

[Ferguson’s Hairdryer]

I think these questions get asked about players like Fabregas and even more strangely Rooney for one reason, well two, because Ronaldo and Messi exceeded their potential / expectations. So we look at all other players against those two.

Fabregas has had a great career. Shows how amazing the Barca team from 2006-2013 was when someone who wasn’t quite good enough for Barca was still one of the best CM’s in the world.

 

[El Jefe]

Fabregas is a very interesting case for me, mainly because of how people try and rewrite his legacy in the PL. I've noticed the same thing with Gerrard too, perhaps its something to do with not winning a league title at Arsenal.

While his style of football changed towards the end of his time at Arsenal, in his first four years, he was very much like Xavi, he controlled midfields whether he was in a 2 or 3 man midfield but also have the legs to win the ball and get scrappy in midfield. He also performed in the big games, he had notable midfield dominating performances vs us, Juventus, Real Madrid and AC Milan. Whenever he was fit he dominated passing stats in the league and that was while Scholes was still in the PL. People forget but in Ronaldo's unbelievable 2007/08 season, Fabregas was just as good as Ronaldo for two thirds of the season until Arsenal fell apart.

Barcelona was a bad career move and the main reason why I feel he doesn't get the respect he deserves, because of the comparisons to Xavi and Iniesta. Even when his legs were gone he came to Chelsea and had two great seasons and got the silverware his performances in England deserved.

In response to the OP, yes and no. His trophy haul is elite and played for big clubs but at 17/18, the thought was he would have been what Xavi/Inesta became.

I still say he's the best passer in PL history. Only player who could make the Scholes/Alonso passes but also the Ozil/Silva kind, while maintaining high pass completion percentages.

 

[Snow]

I think these questions get asked about players like Fabregas and even more strangely Rooney for one reason, well two, because Ronaldo and Messi exceeded their potential / expectations. So we look at all other players against those two.

Fabregas has had a great career. Shows how amazing the Barca team from 2006-2013 was when someone who wasn’t quite good enough for Barca was still one of the best CM’s in the world.

Yep, that's true. They really can't be a measuring stick for anything normal. Also in their time people are measured by titles and this is an era where Juventus, Bayern and PSG have completely dominated 3 of the top 5 leagues which doesn't leave many titles to win for anyone else in those countries. At club level Fabregas has won the PL x2, La Liga x1, FA Cup x1, League Cup x1 and Copa del Rey x1 but he missed the big one. A small footnote though, he's got 2 Euros and a WC medal as well.

Ultimately he might feel a bit disappointed on a personal level to not manage to achieve more with Arsenal as they failed to match his quality and to win "only" 1 La Liga title in 3 years with a Messi Barcelona and no Champions League title which including a disappointing knockout in the semis against Chelsea and and embarrassing knockout against Bayern but the disappointment would only be measured against his ambitions and abilties because his career is one most professionals at a top level could only dream of.