It’s Silly Season.
The transfer window is going crazy and everyone is in their Football Manager mode, discussing who to bring, who to sell and what to do.
What you can often see are squad depth line ups such as this:
It is not a bad way to ensure crude numerical adequacy of a team, but clubs and coaches do not do it as simply.
Firstly, this kind of an image shows you have 2 right backs, for example. Sounds good? Well, not really. What if one, or even worse, two of them get injured? If those two were the only players in the whole squad who can ably cover that position, you’re royally screwed – you can’t play without a right back! You should really have at least 3 players capable of playing a position, which doesn’t mean 33 players, but 23-25 players where some of them are versatile enough to be able to cover at least one other position.
Secondly, and less obviously, analyzing teams through a starting 4-2-3-1 or some other formation is long outdated. Teams set up completely differently in possession and out of possession, which inevitably means there’s some shifting going on. To play the nowadays standard 3-box-3 with the ball while having a standard 4 at the back without it, something needs to happen in that backline.
Usually it’s a full back leaving the line of 4 and going elsewhere. At Maresca’s Chelsea that ‘elsewhere’ is almost never high and wide, but somewhere in the center of the pitch, which is popularly called ‘inverting’ a full back. And does he love to invert... We’ve done it all the past season – inverted from the left, inverted from the right, inverted into the pivot, inverted into the attacking midfield, inverted into a diamond midfield. Inverted all the things!
Example of a Maresca in-possession set up
Notably for this squad analysis, inverting from both sides interchangeably means there are plenty of different roles opening up in defence which go beyond the nominal 4 positions. We will call them positions/roles. If we’re continuing to invert from both sides equally, we’re going to have to treat all those position/roles as any other position on the pitch – we need at least 3 players capable of playing it, wherein the first two options are preferably strong, or at least solid, while the 3rd+ options are usually ‘non-ideal’ in some way for the player or the team, most frequently because that player normally prefers to play elsewhere. However, having at least one such extra player in each position/role is crucial in the case of injuries and for general rotation.
Using the above example, you may have 2 right backs on paper, but if you’re inverting from both sides, you need 3+ players who could invert from RB and 3+ players who could play the defensive RB role while the LB inverts. Those 3 may or may not be the same players. If you don’t have that, well, you can end up limited and may not be able to do what you do – even a small injury crisis and/or fatigue will derail your plans and force you to do something else.
In positions/roles you don’t use as much, like advanced full backs and inverted wingers in Maresca’s case, you can make do with 1-2 players. Otherwise we aim for 3-4. That is how we’re going to do this tactical squad audit, going by each position/role one by one, instead of simplified positions such as ‘LB’ which wouldn’t tell us much considering how Maresca plays. This Part 1 will focus only on defence which, due to inverting, is more complex than the rest of the team, with an attempt at a summary at the end.
CB that becomes central CB (CCB) in possession (whichever FB inverts)
The obvious number one is Colwill. Maresca will prefer he always plays and Colwill will prefer he always plays in this role, even though he’s capable as a LCB. The number two has been Tosin and will likely remain so if, well, he remains at Chelsea. Important thing to note here is that Colwill can, with absolutely no issue, start as a RCB in a back four and shift to the center of the in possession trio. He has done that on the rare occasion he played alongside his not-meant-to-be partner Badiashile and was clearly planned to do so with his not-meant-to-be partner Huijsen. This is meaningful as it allows us to consider the option of him playing together with another left-footer.
One of the current options for CCB is Badiashile as he posseses a similar in possession skillset to Colwill, albeit with an unfortunate Sánchez-esque tendency to inexplicably gift the ball away in most mundane situations, while also being capable of brilliantly carving through a press – we’ve witnessed both in his latest outing in the Conference League final. That is pretty much the reason his career has stalled (all the while Sánchez is still being picked!) alongside with injuries, which may or may not be linked.
Fofana has too played here whenever he was fit and we inverted from the left side, which meant Colwill shifted to LCB. Some disliked that as it meant both of our best CBs play in their less ideal roles (central vs lateral CB), but I don’t think it’s that big of a problem as both Colwill and Fofana are more than capable of it. Maresca seemingly agrees as he kept doing it with them while other times when Chalobah was Colwill’s partner, he prefered to deploy Trevoh as the LCB, even though he’s right-footed, rather than RCB turning CCB with Colwill shifting to LCB.
Other candidates are the incoming ex-Strasbourg youngster Mamadou Sarr and the possibly incoming ex-Chelsea youngster Marc Guéhi. I can’t say I’ve watched too much of Sarr, but these two seem somewhat similar, at least in the fact they are said to be able to cover all 3 of the in possession CB positions, but preferring the lateral ones.
Verdict
The strong 1st option: Colwill
The solid 2nd option: Tosin or Badiashile (but also non-ideal) or Guéhi
The non-ideal 3rd option: Fofana (but also solid)
The unknown option: Sarr
All in all, for us to be fine in this position/role, apart from Colwill we need to keep 2 of Tosin, Badiashile, Fofana, and Sarr (IF he’s solid already) or just 1 + get Guéhi. Shouldn’t be an issue. In fact, we may easily end up with even more than 3 options.
*Aaron Anselmino should not go completely unmentioned as a CCB option, but he’s almost certainly not going to be a part of the squad for the upcoming season (loan bound).
CB that becomes RCB in possession (when RB inverts)
This is another abundant position/role. The number one is definitely Fofana, who many consider to be our best CB when fit (I think it’s tied with Colwill). The number two is Chalobah, who was understandably recalled from a loan when Fofana got himself seriously injured (again). Now, both are good enough to stay next season, perhaps even when accounting for Fofana’s injury concerns (every time he gets back he’s still good) but neither is assured to stay – the former due to said concerns and the latter due to the SD’s inexplicably stubborn tendency to offload him.
Hence many thought a RCB, or in other words a right footed CB suitable for partnering Colwill (basically a new Fofana) was bound to be one of our primary targets this summer, which surprisingly isn’t happening – in fact, we seem to be looking for a LCB instead! More on those in the next section, but – what is the reason for this? Are they still hoping Fofana might stop getting injured? Perhaps they should because if that happens Fofana is likely to evolve into a top CB. However, the lad is already scheduled to miss the start of the season, and that’s with a hamstring injury, which we know can be annoyingly recurrent. It’s not looking good for Wes so there’s naturally been reports Chelsea are trying to find him a new destination, where loan is a likely initial solution (no one’s paying serious money for him now).
Possibly our best back 5 in possession set up last season (Caicedo inverted)
On the other hand, many believe the best place for him to reclaim his value and stop his injury issues is at Chelsea, with our own physios, and not elsewhere. This is where I stand. However, we still ought to have someone ready in case he breaks down again, and one player in Chalobah is not enough, while he’s not certain to stay either. So why are they not buying someone? - Enter Sarr and Acheampong. I think the club feels like we already have not one, but two top RCB prospects and, combined with the off chance Fofana can get himself sorted, means spending money here would be unnecessary as well as detrimental for Sarr’s and Acheampong’s development, who both are seemingly in line to stay with the team next season.
Of the realistic transfer targets, Marc Guéhi is the one who would be able to fill in here as well. Although right-footed, he prefers to play on the left side (he must have watched Terry too many times during his academy days at Cobham). At the same time, his right-footedness should mean he is more than capable on this side too.
Note that Tosin cannot play as a lateral CB which makes him a relatively non-versatile CB in a team of versatile ones. Not sure if Maresca is a fan of that, and that might not bode well for him when they’re deciding who to move on this summer (and you’ve noticed someone will have to go due to the sheer number of CBs). Oh and yeah, he’d represent pure profit (tm).
Verdict:
The strong 1st option: Fofana
The solid 2nd option: Chalobah or Guéhi
The developing back up options: Sarr and Acheampong
This is important as it means if we do sell Chalobah, Guéhi becomes a ‘must bring’ player, otherwise every time we’d want to invert the RB while Fofana is injured (and that might be a lot of times) we’d be stuck with teenagers at RCB – a huge no-no.
CB that becomes LCB in possession (when LB inverts)
This season it’s largely been Colwill, apart from the aforementioned quirk in which when playing alongside Chalobah, he would always stay as a CCB no matter which side we inverted from and Chalobah would always be a lateral CB, on either side. As Chalobah at LCB is less than ideal, Maresca usually preferred to rotate him with Tosin when inverting a LB, which meant Colwill shifted to LCB. Ideally, we’d have a two-footed, lateral CB who doesn’t care which side of Colwill he’s playing. This is where Huijsen came in and why he was the absolute perfect CB signing. Unfortunately, Alonso and Real Madrid came calling...
A pretty good option is the already mentioned Colwill-Fofana shifting where they always play on the same side of each other, even if that brings them to their non-ideal positions when we invert the LB. However, Fofana has his own (physical) problems, while Badiashile, who’d theoretically be a perfect LCB partner to Colwill, has got his own (mental) problems – both of which have already been discussed.
Interestingly, The Athletic recently reported Badiashile is staying next season which came as a surprise to everyone, but a deeper analysis into this position/role sheds the light on why they might want to keep him – we just don’t have many CBs turning LCBs! This is also the reason why they’ve been looking for those rather than RCBs. There’s no major prospects like Sarr or Acheampong here, and Badiashile is long past being considered as such, even if he’s not completely lost yet (or is he?).
This is why we’re strongly linked to Jorrel Hato, a major LB/LCB prospect from Ajax. Unfortunately, the links with Jarrad Branthwaite, who’s two-footed and might thus be a perfect lateral CB for (both sides of) Colwill, have been silenced by The Athletic who reported we’re not pursuing the lad (likely due to his price tag). Marc Guéhi could be a good solution, perhaps even a cheap one with one year left on his contract and the 20% discount we have on him. He may not be perfect as he’s right-footed, but this is where he’s been playing for some time now (a la Rüdiger).
Look at that Cobham back 3!
This is where we ask the question of what on earth did Renato Veiga do to not get a chance here? Him staying basically means no need for a (certainly more expensive) Hato and solves all these problems. Perhaps he’s been really persistent in wanting to be the 1st choice somewhere, but why go to Chelsea in the first place if that is your conditio sine qua non? If he’s as good as he’s reportedly been at Juventus, he’d have a decent chance of becoming Colwill’s no. 1 partner, albeit only when we’re inverting from LB – and that might be what’s bothering him.
Verdict:
The strong 1st option: Guéhi if he comes, otherwise Colwill
The solid(?) 2nd option: Hato or Badiashile or Veiga
The non-ideal 3rd option: Chalobah
All in all, if both Veiga and Badiashile leave, we will need to buy either Guéhi or Hato, alongside keeping Chalobah. This also means we cannot let all of Veiga, Badiashile and Chalobah go, unless we’re buying two players here (unlikely) or scrapping LB inversions as a frequent option (even less likely).
LB that becomes LCB in possession (when RB inverts)
This is Cucurella, and since Veiga left in January, it’s been only him. James played a few games in this role, but we’d surely prefer if he’s not the main back up here. Similarly, I also recall seeing Acheampong play this for a short while in a Conference League game.
If Veiga is sold, and Cucu gets injured, we will be practically forced to always invert from LB or watch our captain waste away here. Hence the links to Hato who, like Veiga, would fix the problems in both this section and the one above. Badiashile and Guéhi, the other two solutions in the previous section, wouldn’t be able to cover here which from this perspective makes them inferior overall solutions to Hato and Veiga.
However, there’s another candidate here. The forgotten Ishé Samuels-Smith. The kid is currently likely to go on a loan, but Maresca has shown preference for keeping the talents he likes (such as Acheampong) close and not loaning them out. By all accounts Ishé seems to be a similar level of talent to Josh, while also being just as versatile. I’m not pretending to be an expert on him, but what I’ve read about him indicates he’s a modern LB in making, capable of overlapping, inverting and staying defensive. Enzo M, are you reading this? Too bad he wasn’t called up for CWC...
Verdict:
The strong 1st option: Cucurella
The solid 2nd option: Hato or Veiga or (maybe) Samuels-Smith
The non-ideal back up options: James and Acheampong
We will need 1 of the 3 players mentioned as the 2nd option.
RB that becomes RCB in possession (when LB inverts)
There’s plenty as things stand, with James as the no. 1 option. As I’m not really a fan of him inverting, and as it seems too risky to let him run up and down the flank too much, I firmly believe this is now his best position/role, one where he could regain his world class reputation. When he’s inverted... I don’t know, but none of his best qualities shine. He won’t defend vs counterattacking wingers (where he’s a cheatcode) and he won’t get a chance to attack the right half space or the byline where he could whip his crosses from (also a cheatcode). I’m 100% certain, if him and Cucurella are playing, rather invert Cucu and keep James back and wide, with a license to roam higher up when the opponents set up in a low block (like vs Man Utd), which is very often.
Similarly to Fofana, we need to plan for James’ fragility. All of these roles need, as we’ve established, 3 capable options, but the ones with such injury prone (first choice!) players likely need 4. And we do have that, at least currently. Fofana and Chalobah have both played this several times this season, while Gusto could too, even though Maresca generally preferred to invert him when he was playing. Then there’s Acheampong who’s existence in the team is solely based on the fragileness of the first choices in his two positions, Fofana and James. If those two were any more fit, Josh wouldn’t stand much chance of getting minutes and would likely be loaned. As things stand, he can rightfully hope for a breakthrough via an injury or two and that is probably the reason why he’s staying.
Verdict:
The world class 1st option: James
The (not so) solid 2nd option: Gusto
The non-ideal 3rd options: Fofana and Chalobah
The developing option: Acheampong
This might be a good place to comment on Gusto. The boy is lost. I still believe he’s got the technical quality to be a good inverted full back, but it hasn’t gone well for him, he’s lost his rhythm and subsequently fallen off in other roles too – he was dire again vs LAFC even though he wasn’t inverting, but playing as the RB turning RCB. Unless we’re planning to advance the RB this season (unlikely) it might be time to start planning his departure. I wouldn’t sell him since his value is currently at the lowest point (similarly to his friend Nkunku), but loan him to a side that play with attacking full backs where he will likely flourish – then we sell him for a good price, or perhaps, if Maresca is gone by then (which is always a possibility in Chaos FC) we get to bring him back instead of ruing the fact we let him go too early while we are back to playing with attacking full backs.
Currently, as seen in the verdict of this section, he’s not 100% essential. Let’s see if he will be in the next one (spoiler alert: he won’t be).
Inverted RB
Chelsea FC v Liverpool FC - Premier League Photo by Harriet Lander - Chelsea FC/Chelsea FC via Getty Images
As I’ve explained, I don’t like James here. That’s not to say he’s not capable, it’s just far from ideal. Gusto has already withered away playing here, although in contrast to James his role was mostly to invert into attacking midfield, rather than defensive — I covered this topic in great detail last year.
Let’s just say most players mentioned here will likely be able to invert in both ways, but some will prefer the former, some the latter. James might be an exception, as inverting that far up will mean a lot of running up and down which we’re trying to protect him from, but my oh my wouldn’t that be interesting to see! I reckon he’d be exceptionally dangerous playing in the right half space, so let’s hope he will occasionally be able to, with time and care.
Instead of real RBs, so far the most success Maresca has found inverting from this position was when he decided to deploy a midfielder there. Apart from a single half where he didn’t look on point defending against a winger 1 on 1 (Newcastle), Caicedo was largely excellent playing as an inverted RB. We spend most of the time with the ball which meant most of the time he was playing where he’s supposed to anyway. Most importantly, this tweak allowed Maresca to field 3 of his midfielders at the same time, and wow, that just gave us a whole other dimension. We’re just so strong with midfielders that this is simply worth it to us. Even more now when Santos has arrived...
Chelsea FC Training Session - FIFA Club World Cup 2025 Photo by Darren Walsh/Chelsea FC via Getty Images
And this is where I’m dropping the bomb - You’re not gonna like it, but I think this might be Andrey Santos’ primary role this season. Why not Caicedo? – Well, we’d still prefer our best player and ball-winner remain in the center of the pitch out of possession! Enzo and Lavia were never candidates for this role due to their lack of defensive prowess, which is exactly what Santos thrives in. And even Essugo, too. For him I’d be very surprised if he gets any real minutes this whole season unless he learns to do this role well. Although he’s touted as the ‘Caicedo’s cover’, in practice other players (like Santos) are more likely to actually replace Caicedo at CM when need be.
This is Santos’ way of differentiating himself from Lavia and taking the upper hand in their competition for minutes. While Lavia can only really play as the CM, Santos can do that, learn how to play this, and also deputize for Enzo (or even compete with him) in his advanced role. Think about it, we don’t really play with proper full backs, so why not stack as many midfielders into the team, considering how many great ones we’ve got? Some may hate it, but from Maresca’s perspective (and this is Maresca’s squad audit after all), it’s a no brainer.
Verdict:
The projected 1st option: Santos
The strong, but non-ideal 2nd/3rd options: Caicedo and James
The maybe option: Essugo
The please no more option: Gusto
If I’m right about this, we’re more than covered here...
Inverted LB
Chelsea FC v Los Angeles Football Club: Group D - FIFA Club World Cup 2025 Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images
... As are we here. When I said midfielders will invert from full back position, I didn’t just mean from one side. I see no reason why Caicedo or Santos (or Essugo) couldn’t do the same from the left. I’m curious why we didn’t see it yet with Caicedo, but I suspect it’s because on this side we’ve got a fantastic option in Cucurella so it was never needed, or at least not yet. The quality and intensity we get with Cucu inverted into midfield... and not to mention the goals he’s added to his game – in my mind he’s a world class inverted LB. I was so wrong about him! Well, most of us were.
All this means there’s no specific necessity for a player like Veiga, who’s a natural LB that can invert. Nor would we require Hato to do so, and especially not Samuels-Smith who’s too inexperienced to do it just yet, even if I read somewhere he could. Our need for one of these 3 players does not stem in this role, but the one where the right side inverts and the LB has to stay behind.
Oh, and I should mention this too – Maresca may start experimenting with a 2-3 base defence on occasion, where both full backs invert and leave the 2 CBs behind. Imagine if one time he did it with 2 midfielders! I wouldn’t put it past him, honestly. If anything, it might be a slick way of fitting all 4 of our great midfielders in the same team.
Game’s definitely gone
Verdict:
The world class 1st option: Cucurella
The probably gone 2nd option: Veiga
The solid back up options: Santos, Essugo, Caicedo
SUMMARY
The above has showed us we don’t really need many actual full backs this season. In fact, we’d probably be fine with James, Cucurella and a few youngsters like Acheampong and Samuels-Smith (or at most Hato). This would allow us to pick more CBs of which we have many and is difficult to decide who to keep.
Numerically, in a season with Champions League and hopefully more cup games than the previous, we’d like to have at least 2 players per position, meaning 8-9 defenders. This may seem like a lot considering midfielders are bound to take a lot of their minutes (playing at full back), but considering key defenders’ injury proneness and the fact many of these 8-9 will be teenagers, I feel like 9 is a sweet spot. It will also be a necessary number to fulfill all the positions/roles that we discussed and not be limited in any of them. Here are two examples of what we may end up with, the first being the most likely version and the latter being my preferred one:
Likely: Cucurella, Hato, Colwill, Tosin, Fofana, Acheampong, Sarr, James, Gusto
Preferred: Cucurella, Samuels-Smith, Colwill, Guéhi, Fofana, Acheampong, Sarr, Chalobah, James.
So for me it’s Samuels-Smith, Guehi and Chalobah instead of Hato, Tosin and Gusto. (And I don’t normally have a Cobham bias, I swear haha!) I’d be fine with Hato if he’s not too expensive and/or ISS is not ready yet, but I definitely feel like Guéhi is better and more versatile than Tosin, while also not any less experienced or leader-like, which is something we wouldn’t want to lose unless we’re properly replacing. Gusto I’ve said everything about, his services seem much less needed than Chalobah’s who’s going to be essential in covering for Fofana, as he’s already been.
Quick rundown per position/role:
CB->CCB: Colwill, Guéhi, Fofana, Sarr
CB->LCB: Guéhi, Colwill, Chalobah, Sarr
CB->RCB: Fofana, Chalobah, Sarr, Acheampong
LB->LCB: Cucurella, ISS/Hato, James, Acheampong
RB->RCB: James, Fofana, Chalobah, Acheampong
LB->MF: Cucurella, Santos, Caicedo, Essugo
RB->MF: Santos, James, Caicedo, Essugo
4 options for each. Chef’s kiss!
***
See you in a few days with Part 2 where we’re also going to briefly mention advanced full backs and inverted wingers, as well as discuss the remaining positions/roles (that Maresca will actually use).
Images were created using buildlineup.com andchosen11.com