retired_lyriclemelodee

Fair enough - I was just pointing out that I probably had more jusitfication for thinking than Mikel would be rated higher than Haregaves in a couple of years than you do regarding your four Arsenal players. Although I'm not entirely sure which four you meant - Cesc, Denilson, Diaby and Diarra?

runronnirun

He does have everything in his game, i think he has the ability to be the best midfielder in the world at some stage. Thats just my opinion, obviously but just did a great job today, he has a better range of passing than I thought aswell.

I think Essien-Mikel will be far superior to Anderson-Hargreaves. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Mikel doesn't get goals, he's got little/no pace, he's a poor tackler and, to quote a Chelsea-supporting OTFer, he 'needs to expand his long passing'. playing in a three-man midfield (alongside Essien) hides his defensive deficiencies.

can say with extreme confidence he won't be better than Fabregas so that's at least one person he'll always be behind in the 'best midfielder in the world' stakes. quietly confident Anderson will outstrip him as well. Essien-Mikel has the potential to be excellent. better than Anderson-Hargreaves? possibly, but again, we return to my point. Mikel in for Anderson isn't attacking enough for my (and i suspect SAF's) liking, and Mikel in for Hargreaves leaves us a relatively soft touch in the middle.

runronnirun

well Hargreaves an entirely different player to Cesc/Essien really, especially Cesc. not many better in the world at the role Hargreaves plays, and as i've said, no way is Mikel ever becoming better at that role than him. as we'll have Anderson pulling all the strings as well as getting forward more, no need for Mikel. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, wish I had seen more of Anderson, but see no reason why Mikel/Anderson couldn't play together. Mikel can play deep effectively, although he's not really a 'harrier' like Hargreaves. </BLOCKQUOTE>

well that's my point. Mikel/Anderson seem essentially to be similar players. primarily creative, Anderson with perhaps more of an eye for the telling pass, Mikel maybe better at keeping things ticking along in midfield with short passing and movement. but there'd be no-one there good enough at winning the ball, no-one with any real tackling ability. Anderson much better off paired with a Hargreaves, and i wouldn't swap Anderson for Mikel. and so we're back at my original point.

retired_lyriclemelodee

Woudn't list his "long passing" as a weakness. Not a strength either tbf.

I dunno, I'm fairly confident that Mikel wil go on to become a world-class player, and that in two/three years I would prefer him to pretty much anyone, but guess he will wait and see.

retired_jessicadon

Slightly devil's advocate, maybe not 4.

Cesc, Diarra and Diaby all potentially as good as any young midfielders around though. The former arguably better than any midfielders, anywhere, any age.

runronnirun

Anderson far closer to possessing the necessary skill-set to be deemed 'a complete midfielder' (whatever that is) btw, not that it makes any difference really when debating who's better.

retired_lyriclemelodee

Depends how you want your team to play - for his age Mikel keeps possession better than anyone I've ever seen, and is solid defensively, you say Anderson is a creative player. Not every top team has an out-and-out "ball-winner", I reckon those two would probably be quite effective together (based on what you say about Anderson). Totally understood your point about Hargreaves though.

Anyway in two-three years Carlos will be your manager, you'll be playing 4-5-1 and when we sell you Mikel for £30 million there would be plenty of room for both of them \o/

retired_amadhani

Well today he just strolled through the game with ease, whenever he received the ball in some awkward situation always dealt with it perfectly, would love to know the stats on how many times he lost the ball because i would be surprised to see hit higher than twice. I do know it was against West Ham but still made it look easy, broke up the play well and protected the back four.

His passing was good today, at one stage in the 2nd half he did a magnificent chip through to Kalou, left him one on one but he missed controlled.

I think that you are correct with the 3 man midfield issue because when I posted Essien-Mikel greater than Haregreaves-Anderson, I realised they play in a 3 so Mikel's job is easier in a way and until he plays in a 4 then maybe he might be exposed.

Obviously goalscoring is a problem but hes playing so deep at the minute, he rarely gets the chance. I've seen him score a screamer in the FA cup so he has the technique but like Cesc he just needs something to click one season, to get underway as a goal scorer.

All that into account what i've seen so far, i see no limit for him really and I think he has all the talent to be the best midfielder in the world.

retired_lyriclemelodee

Cesc is godly.

Diarra just not as good as Mikel from the times I have seen him play in central midfield, but could go on to be very very good.

Diaby has looked excellent the few times I've seen him play, but like I said would rank Mikel higher because I've seen him do it more often, on bigger stages. How old is Diaby?

runronnirun

phfft, it'll be Veloso-Anderson if that happens.

Veloso a very interesting comparison with Mikel actually.