Has Cesc Fabregas fullfilled his potential ?

[TwoSheds]

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.

Gerrard could and should have been a goalscoring Roy Keane / fit Robbo. Instead he became a nice attacker because he didn't fancy doing the dirty work any more.

 

[Bwuk]

The Barca move was a bad move in hindsight. No-one was getting ahead of Xavi or Iniesta.

I wanted him here when Chelsea signed him. What a player he was.

 

[MadDogg]

Gerrard could and should have been a goalscoring Roy Keane / fit Robbo. Instead he became a nice attacker because he didn't fancy doing the dirty work any more.

I wouldn't say it had anything to do with the dirty work. He had a similar problem as Pogba in that they can both play the deeper role extremely well at times, but neither of them are solid and consistent enough to do it game-in game-out for a team that wants to compete at the top. So they'll have a brilliant game one week and then the next they'll struggle and cause the team as a whole to be disjointed. Gerrard's struggle was more with his game-control and playmaking though while Pogba's tends to be in the defensive side. When Liverpool finally put Mascherano and Alonso together behind Gerrard it unleashed him and we saw the best of him. Incidentally, that's the exact same kind of combo that Pogba had at Juve and what we probably should have tried to build here if we wanted to get the best from him. A proper playmaker to take control of the team and a more defensive beast, taking some of the general playmaking pressure off them and letting them focus more on just hurting the opposition.

Sure you can say both Gerrard and Pogba 'should' be able to be great players in the deeper role, but I don't think either have the right mentality for it.

 

[Gio]

Gerrard could and should have been a goalscoring Roy Keane / fit Robbo. Instead he became a nice attacker because he didn't fancy doing the dirty work any more.

Keane and Robson played in a different era where two box-to-box CMs ran midfield. The shape of midfield had changed during Gerrard's career as 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 became dominant. Replicating the all-encompassing midfield roles of Keane and Robbo was not straightforward within those systems. Indeed he was often criticised for trying to be too all-action and for doing too much dirty work. And to to be honest restricting him to a more defensive brief did not always make the best use of his exceptional attacking talents. He was capable enough, if you look at the holding role played for England around 2003/04 and at Euro 2004, where he was defensively solid. But generally playing to his strengths was about ensuring he had a holder next to him to enable him to attack and press. And he was just about as good as it gets in that roaming #8 role.

 

[Fortitude]

I'll hazard a guess that if you think Rooney did, you think Cesc did, too. If it's a no for you for Rooney, it's also most likely a no for you for Cesc.

For me, neither of them did.

Accolades were a given for both of them, it's not really the point. The concept of exponential growth from a starting point way, way up in the clouds, which both of them had, lends itself to them being compared to all-time greats in terms of trajectory from the outset. They are never seen as normal players nor is a good or great career for a normal player in keeping with what a good or great career is for them, which is where accolades fall short somewhat when they assessed by those generic markers.

The reality is, Cesc was a genuine marvel at 16, in a position where it's rare and pretty much unheard of for a child to come into the adult game and not only start, but be a key player. Throughout his earlier years, nobody would have been surprised if he went on to be an all-time great who could keep company with any midfielder of his type who had played the game. He didn't meet those standards, ultimately, and ended up falling back in with the pack. That's not to say he had a bad career, obviously. Same as Rooney - by the metric of normal players, not pre-destined for greatness, it'd be an amazing career, but for the both of them, irrespective of trophy cabinets, there will always be the: 'what could have been' question, and rightfully so, imo.

It's easy to acknowledge the duality or dichotomy in young prodigies: some were never destined to be anything but good pros once the rest caught up with them physically, but in others, the need to analyse what 'went wrong' is pretty much intrinsic. It doesn't mean you can't still appreciate what they did manage to do in the game, however.

 

[TwoSheds]

Keane and Robson played in a different era where two box-to-box CMs ran midfield. The shape of midfield had changed during Gerrard's career as 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 became dominant. Replicating the all-encompassing midfield roles of Keane and Robbo was not straightforward within those systems. Indeed he was often criticised for trying to be too all-action and for doing too much dirty work. And to to be honest restricting him to a more defensive brief did not always make the best use of his exceptional attacking talents. He was capable enough, if you look at the holding role played for England around 2003/04 and at Euro 2004, where he was defensively solid. But generally playing to his strengths was about ensuring he had a holder next to him to enable him to attack and press. And he was just about as good as it gets in that roaming #8 role.

I don't remember him ever being criticised for doing too much dirty work. I do remember him being criticised for not knowing how to control a game from midfield. He needed a better coach (and club) to bring it out of him. Fergie would have made him a great. If he'd have gone to Mourinho's Chelsea that might have been the making of him too.

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

The Barca move was a bad move in hindsight. No-one was getting ahead of Xavi or Iniesta.

I find it odd when people say this. In my opinion, he gave up on Barça too early. The year after he left, his replacement Rakitić was scoring in a CL final and Xavi was just about to leave the club having been phased out as a starter. Rakitić ended up making over 300 appearances for the club and won four Ligas and four Copas. That could easily have been Cesc with a little more patience.

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

Gerrard could and should have been a goalscoring Roy Keane / fit Robbo. Instead he became a nice attacker because he didn't fancy doing the dirty work any more.

Gerrard was never a very good central midfielder. Lacked the tactical intelligence and discipline to play the role properly and didn’t have the technique of a modern day CM. His world class period of 2005-2009 was basically the period where Benítez stopped giving in to his and the media’s insistence to play him in central midfield and used him where his talents were more effective and his indiscipline wasn’t a liability to his team.

Back in the 90s he probably would have been a great box to box midfielder (at least domestically) but England was a tactical backwater then. We all saw how crap he was for the national team in all those years he stunk up the England midfield.

 

[Lord SInister]

He did great for his potential, the only issue was his overhyping by EPL media, who somehow thought he was Xavi-Iniesta level player, which he wasn't.

 

[AkaAkuma]

Maybe he could have exceeded his performance, butid be more than happy with his career:

• good decision moving to Arsenal, got game time very early and from an outsiders perspective became a club legend.​
• returned to his boyhood club, did ok, met his wife? whilst some would call it a failure i imagine he was happy to have played for Barca.​
• Won 3 back to back international trophies.​
• Returned to London, likely his 2nd home and won the league.​
• Suning it in Monte Carlo in his twilight.​

 

[André Dominguez]

He was the best player at his position during many seasons. Pretty sure his career can be considered as very sucessful.

 

[The Corinthian]

He's been absolute class for most of his career, and has delivered in a variety of set ups, positions, systems, what have you.

Arsenal as a CM pushing on - he delivered.
Barca as a inside forward - he delivered (although this time was seen as unsuccessful for Cesc, he put up some great numbers and was seen as a failure by virtue of not being Xavi or Iniesta...but then who is?)
Chelsea as a DLP - he delivered.

For the national team, he's been great as well.

Being such a high performing player for anything close to 15 seasons is incredible. It's only GOAT levels (Messi, Ronaldo), or guys like Giggs, Ibra that can stretch playing at such a high level past that 15 year period to something like 20 years. Even Rooney 'only' managed 13 years.

And look at his trophy cabinet too - domestic titles in Spain and England, domestic cups in both countries too, and the whole lot with the NT. The only criticism you can have of him is he never won the CL.

He was fantastic in the 07-08 season for L'Arse - put in a real 10/10 stellar performance away to AC Milan in the CL too.
Also was great in the season where Chelsea won the league when Mourinho came back from a slightly deeper position.

All in all, he's had a great career.

 

[horsechoker]

Has signed for Como, so I'd say he has

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/62381661

 

[MyOnlySolskjaer]

Give me Cesc at his prime over Gerrard and Lampard.

 

[crossy1686]

I remember being super envious of Arsenal when he broke through, such a talented player at 16 as well, running the midfield next to Viera.

Unfortunately he never really reached the heights he seemed destined for once he left arsenal. Probably because he was better in a system and he made a bad move. Would have loved him at United at one point, would have been perfect for us.

 

[Luke1995]

I don't know why his Monaco career fell apart so badly, but given what happened, a fresh challenge in a new country may be exactly what he needs.

Of course, that's not a guarantee of sucess. I remember other big names who dropped down a level and found it to be harder than expected. But the pace of the italian game probably suits him well at this stage.

 

[Red the Bear]

Give me Cesc at his prime over Gerrard and Lampard.

Not really, I like to hear your reasoning but I never thought that highly of him.

 

[Blood Mage]

He peaked at Arsenal. Was still a good player at Barca and Chelsea also but never looked quite as dynamic.

 

[mshnsh]

"As good as Ronaldo and Messi" is not a good statement. Firstly, Fabregas was a completely different footballer from Cristiano Ronaldo and to a lesser extent from Messi And as a result occupied a different position on the pitch.

The better statement would be if he would become as good as Xavi or Pirlo or as a United fan, Scholes. I think Xavi was better but he can be mentioned in the same breath as the other 2 and at some point may have been better than them.

I'd say he was one of the best players in the world in his position at Arsenal and indeed one of the best players in the world outright in 07/08. At Barcelona, he couldn’t take Xavi's position so had to often play further up the pitch where he was very good but just not as good as at Arsenal.
Unfortunately for midfielders (with regards to his time at Arsenal), they don’t get the recognition that strikers/forwards do due to goals. Goals are glory.

 

[RedStarUnited]

I remember being super envious of Arsenal when he broke through, such a talented player at 16 as well, running the midfield next to Viera.

Unfortunately he never really reached the heights he seemed destined for once he left arsenal. Probably because he was better in a system and he made a bad move. Would have loved him at United at one point, would have been perfect for us.

So many have said this in this thread and I dont think people realise how productive Cesc was across his prime. From 06/07 to 16/17 these are his assists numbers;

13
22
16
20
16
20
13
17
24
9
15

Thats almaot 200 assists in decade of football. I would say no other midfielder comes close to a similar output.

Oh and he assisted in back to back Euros and World Cup final.

 

[GMoore23]

I honestly thought he'd retired years ago.

 

[Trequarista10]

One of the best teenagers I've ever seen, and in his last couple seasons at Arsenal he kept progressing, not many CMs I can recall who had a combination of the passing range, goalscoring and ability to drive forwards with the ball.

Not sure what happened at Barca. Combination of them having a settled midfield, him having developed a more direct style in England, and possibly mileage in the legs perhaps. I never kept a close eye on him at Barca but I was surprised when he moved to Chelsea by how much speed and dynamism he had lost. It was never his primary attribute but it sure helped. He was only late 20s so I assume he just had one of those physiques that develops early and ages early, or that playing adult football from 16 caught up with him.

 

[RedDevilCanuck]

Of course he did.

It's a shame people compare everyone to Messi and Ronaldo.

People actually think Giggs, fat Ronaldo and Ronaldinho didn't reach their potential which is absurd ludicrous.

If you win bags of trophies and are among the best in the world in your position, you've done incredibly well. Even if it's only for a few seasons.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

Has signed for Como, so I'd say he has

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/62381661

Of course that fecker would go to a place with pizza.

 

[Dante]

Yes, he did.

I think a lot of people mistakenly believe that football development is always linear and always comparable across different players. It isn't. Two 19 year olds can be at completely different stages in their physical or mental growth. Some guys can be finished by 28, while others can keep playing until 38. A 23 year old might be as physiologically old as a 29 - and vice versa.

The point I'm trying to make is that Fabregas fulfilled his potential young and was then one of the best playmakers in the world for a number of years. The fact he declined by his late twenties is irrelevant, especially considering he was already dominating games in the PL at the age of 16.

It's wrong to assume that everyone is supposed to be in their prime at 28. Biology simply doesn't work that predictably. It's more reasonable to look at how high his ceiling got and how long he was able to sustain it. On both counts, he makes the grade for world class.

 

[Lebo]

I'll hazard a guess that if you think Rooney did, you think Cesc did, too. If it's a no for you for Rooney, it's also most likely a no for you for Cesc.

For me, neither of them did.

Accolades were a given for both of them, it's not really the point. The concept of exponential growth from a starting point way, way up in the clouds, which both of them had, lends itself to them being compared to all-time greats in terms of trajectory from the outset. They are never seen as normal players nor is a good or great career for a normal player in keeping with what a good or great career is for them, which is where accolades fall short somewhat when they assessed by those generic markers.

The reality is, Cesc was a genuine marvel at 16, in a position where it's rare and pretty much unheard of for a child to come into the adult game and not only start, but be a key player. Throughout his earlier years, nobody would have been surprised if he went on to be an all-time great who could keep company with any midfielder of his type who had played the game. He didn't meet those standards, ultimately, and ended up falling back in with the pack. That's not to say he had a bad career, obviously. Same as Rooney - by the metric of normal players, not pre-destined for greatness, it'd be an amazing career, but for the both of them, irrespective of trophy cabinets, there will always be the: 'what could have been' question, and rightfully so, imo.

It's easy to acknowledge the duality or dichotomy in young prodigies: some were never destined to be anything but good pros once the rest caught up with them physically, but in others, the need to analyse what 'went wrong' is pretty much intrinsic. It doesn't mean you can't still appreciate what they did manage to do in the game, however.

I recently rewatched the 2006 champions league final. Amazing how 19 year old Fabregas was the best midfielder in that game playing in a 4-4-2. I think his downfall came when he modelled himself into an attacking midfielder more than the guy who was meant to be Vieira’s heir.

He was also the catalyst in 2010 final. Spain created almost nothing until his introduction if I remember well.

 

[Scarecrow]

He’s had a lovely career, all in all. Got to live in great places, as well.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Fabregas's time at Barcelona was underrated, it's just that he played at a time when they had two of the greatest centre midfielders of all-time, playing a system they were fundamental to and Fabregas was coming in as a slight outsider after all those years in England. It was nearly impossible for any midfielder to stand out or lead in that environment yet Fabregas still did his best to adapt and scored quite a few goals, 42 in 151. But since he gave his peak years to Barca without much recognition, he doesn't seem to have the long-term legacy he deserves. Marvellous player and we should have got him instead of Chelsea when he was available.

 

[GoonerBear]

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.

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.

Career threatening injuries were also too common a thing for Arsenal at that time, and often gets overlooked, for me that was the main part of why we really never truly kicked on.

During Cesc's time alone we had Diaby, Vermaelen, Rosicky, Ramsey, Wilshere, Eduardo, Van Persie all suffer massive injuries or be injury prone making them miss full or large chunks of seasons, and most never recovered to the same level. Even after Cesc we lost Cazorla in his prime.

I don't think we ever got a spell where we got to play all our best players in the same team for the majority of a season. We also did lose players a bit early, Flamini to Milan, Hleb to Barcelona etc. So we always seemed to be replacing, rather than actually building.

Unfortunately for me, that era will always be a 'what if' era. Over the span of a few years, your talking about having midfield options of Cesc, Flamini, Song, Diaby, Wilshere, Ramsey, Rosicky, Hleb, Nasri & Arshavin and an attack with Adebayor, Eduardo & Van Persie, Walcott, Lord Bedntner & Vela.

 

[B20]

The weirdest part of that story is that the CEO of Como is Dennis Wise. What?

 

[devips]

Had he joined United when Moyes was supposedly chasing him, he might not have to go to Como at his old age. He could still be a club legend playing for us!

 

[Donaldo]

I've said it before, will say it again. At his peak, he was the best young midfielder I've seen. Could single handedly control the tempo of games, even with the sometimes utter shite we put around him. I wish we didn't have him when the purse strings were so tight and we couldn't get that world class striker, mid around him. Instead he had perma crocks like RvP and a blow hot and cold Adebayor.

2006-2011 he was creating chances for us by the dozen each game. It was literally unbelievable to watch.

 

[Vidyoyo]

The weirdest part of that story is that the CEO of Como is Dennis Wise. What?

Como again?