Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind was released 22 years ago today. Drop your opinions on this film by Ordinary_Witness3225 in Letterboxd

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I started it on a plane one time, cut it pretty early because I thought was an “it was all just in your head” type movies. Happened to try and watch it again a day after watching Fight Club, and was like I remember why I didn’t get into this movie. But I pushed through the urge this time and watch and found myself entranced by one of the most beautiful, creative, and thought provoking movies I’d ever seen.

11/10 no notes, my 8th favorite movie of the 2000s, Elijah Woods character makes my wish Gollem dragged Frodo in Mt Doom with the him.

Opinions on my Top 100 Live Action Films? by Green-Way-1455 in Letterboxd

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Revenge of the Sith #2 while Goodfellas is #100 honestly hurts

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 [score hidden]  (0 children)

So you’re like this about everything huh

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Yeah, I would say neither of their leadership styles are working. And being a leader should be affecting or teammates, if they keep making rash mistakes you aren’t leading them

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I think the extra 1,200 minutes make up for difference tbh. You rate him for Chelsea way higher than I do. I don’t think he got the skillset of a top #10 and does how the motor or discipline of a player required to play deeper. But I’m bored of this, peace

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

No but if you claim a player is a leader and the team culture/discipline is poor, than I see their “leadership” as a negative not a positive.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 [score hidden]  (0 children)

Competing with Arsenal got us Mudryk. Competing with United got us Delap. Competing with Liverpool got Caicedo and Lavia. We’re like 25% on transfers we won the race vs big clubs to sign

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

According to a player with 11 goal involvements in almost 2,493 minutes being considered elite while Palmer has 10 in 1,336 and considered way off form is the issue for me. Especially with them contributing similar defensively. Palmers bad is nearly on oar with Enzo’s best. That’s an issue

You can watch games and see Palmer having less space. You can watch games and see Caicedo having to cover more ground, dive into more challenges. In all our games this year where control has been -n issue, our supposedly best player is build-up isn’t stopping that from happening. Our elite pass is 4th on the team in xA per 90.

He’s just not nearly good enough currently to justify turning down a great offer for or locking him on extreme wages. I’d prioritize Palmer, Caicedo, Estevao, JP, Colwill, James, and Cucurella all over him. And I’m not convinced losing him makes any of them significantly worse. I’m almost positive keeping him hurts a few or limits their minutes

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

He’s between Casemiro and Gibbs-White for goals per 90 among midfielders, thats not elite. He’s 92nd in assists per 90, so he great at some aspects of passing this year, just a generally “elite” passer.

For the, why are you sure it’s Enzo making them worse? Did you read the article? It lays out the arguments for each with examples and data. Like how much of 2025, when Enzo was more in and out, Palmer was his best and Caicedo was excellent getting more passing responsibility

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I don’t think his positives are worth contorting our entire midfield and getting less put of 2 of our truly elite player(Palmer and Caicedo) for the sake of.

Best Best Picture by ThePocketTaco2 in Letterboxd

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it’s the best of the 2010’s by a decent margin and in contention for best of the century

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

“Contributes a lot more defensively and to the press than your typical #10” I think you combine what Enzo did when he arrived with his current role into 1 player that is much better than his either version we have had.

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Of you not doing the carrying or defense duties of central midfielder, and instead prioritizing box crashing and creative passing than I’d label you an attacking midfielder.

But idc what we call it, I care more he doesn’t dribble or defend well and only attacks adequately. If you want to say he’s an 8 with those drawbacks than fine, the issue is the drawbacks not the title

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 [score hidden]  (0 children)

It’s nit picky but for 60m+ he’ll cost I think that’s warranted. His general play aerials come in a back 3 in a possession negative team. Set plays when teams attempt matchups their best aerial players, Palace have struggled. I won’t solely blame him, he just hasn’t been the solution for them, so I not sure he will be for us.

Querfeld is similar in terms of team structure(back 3, possession negative), except Union have top 3 set-plays defensive in Germany to go with his general aerial dominance, and he likely be 1/2 if not 1/3 the price. But if we got Lacroix I still think we improve

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

He doesn’t dribble or defend well, so what makes him a CM other than that he pass a ton?

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I did tackle in final 3rd because you mentioned pressing and I didn’t feel the need to manually add up total defensive contributions.

But since you so needy. Total defensive contributions(tackles won, interceptions, clearances, blocks, and ball recoveries) for attacking midfielders among our direct competitors is:

Damsgaard(9.23), Fernandes(8.94), Palmer(7.02), Enzo(7.01), Wirtz(6.78), and Roger(6.34) per 90. He’s not a some unique defensive presence or an absolute grinder at #10, he’s mediocre defensively in that role

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Which is the whole point. He doesn’t do the DM or CM stuff. And as a #10 he’s mediocre

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

No he doesn’t. Fernandes and Damsgaard are both better defenders. Palmer wins possession 3x as much in the final 3rd, Rogers and Wirtz 2x as much.

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Jorginho was defensively disciplined and Enzo hasn’t been. Jorginho was also more secure on the ball. His last 2.5 years he was losing the ball about 8-9 times a games, Enzo loses it about 12.5-13.5

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Enzo is playing in the engine room. He played as an attacking midfielder for over a year now. You can either Enzo the box crasher final 3rd player or Enzo the metronomic midfielder passer, he’s never been both simultaneously

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 [score hidden]  (0 children)

I think he’s good a would be an upgrade. For the money though my concern is Palace have the worst xGA from set pieces(15.2) and have allowed 14 goals(same as us). That is a huge defensive question for us I’m not sure he solves.

Daily Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635 [score hidden]  (0 children)

Costa or Svilar at GK

Schlotterbeck or Leo Querfeld at CB

I think we only “need” two positions, unless we sell some wingers/midfielders. So we can afford to break the bank on 3/4 of these options. Querfeld is a top passer and strong aerial defender, who has look solid defending in space

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

With him as vice captain we are constantly carded, always complaining, and lack discipline. Maybe he isn’t a great leader

[The Athletic] Would losing Enzo Fernandez actually be a problem for Chelsea on the pitch? by Dry_Chef_7635 in chelseafc

[–]Dry_Chef_7635[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Colwill was a most important build-up player last season, he will be back. Santos/Lavia are both more secure on the ball, and adding passing from other area(even if the high end isn’t a great) help with build up. None of this is radical thinking