How far would have Chelsea gone in CL this year?

After the different groupstages they could have entered (City having the worst), what team would have stopped them on their way to the final?

Plenty of teams. They wouldn't have made it too far. They are benefiting from consistency in the league, they wouldn't have the same opportunities in CL.

The group stage would have caught them while they were still "discovering" themselves so they could have dropped key points. Then the knockouts depend on the draw ofc.

They would have been knocked out by most of the teams in the R16. Leicester and Leverkusen being the only clear exceptions, but they couldn't even draw Leicester anyway.

Group stage or R16.

To mirror Rincon's words (or steal them), having no midweek games in Europe allowed Conte to prepare his team better for once a week football (made better when they got KO'd early from the elf cup). Don't underestimate having to just focus on one competition, it really helps.

That being said, I think they would have made for the most a Quarter final appearance if they got Leverkusen or Porto. Any other team and they'll be KO'd.

Semis possibly, easily quarter finals

Group stage, last 16, quarters or semis imo.

only Juve are stronger than them. Same level as Madrid, PSG and Bayern.

so as always, depends on the draw. They could have won it this year.

Dropped to EL places or R16. Antonio Conte with his awful CL record would undoubtedly manage to mess up big time, especially with their early form.

"His awful CL record"

He had 1 bad season in CL. The other one (his first) he got us to the QF and we lost against the champions.

You mean the one where Juventus struggled to get through the great Nordsjallahsjcnaoo and Shaktar Doanzeifk?

Assuming they replaced Leicester or Spurs, they would easily finish 1st in the group. In the knockout stages they would have lost against any of the two Madrids, PSG, Bayern and Juventus.

Semis at least probably, no team is clearly stronger.

Group stage is not out of the question. They were struggling early in the season.

I'm sure they wouldn't have made it past R16 but then again the draws matter

Socur Toxanarosa wrote:Semis at least probably, no team is clearly stronger.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Group stage is not out of the question. They were struggling early in the season.

True but group stages started in September. We'd have lost maybe one match. Not sure there were more than 1 or 2 matches in the CL in September.

I do think we'd have gotten to the QF and got knocked out. This team is not the finished product, which is why it's crazy that we're almost running away with the league. In the summer, Conte will have his chance to recruit as he likes and we'll strengthen in different positions. I think we'll make at least the semi final next year but we'll see how it goes.

Not playing European competitions is a huge advantage for Chelsea, who knows if they'd be 10 points ahead otherwise ? In terms of personnel they are on par with their rivals but play less games, therefore reducing the risk of injuries and tiredness.

- Real, Bayern, Juve, PSG are clearly superior.
- Barca, Sevilla, Atletico is a very tough call.
- Won't play against an english club until later in the tournament.
- Slightly better than Napoli, Benfica and Monaco as well.
- Considerably better than Dortmund, Bayer 04 and other Porto dead woods + the 16 teams who did not qualify this far.

So assuming Chelsea had avoided the Top 4 teams in round of 16, i'd say quarter finals would have been a reasonable ambition.

Spoiler:

Warrior wrote:Not playing European competitions is a huge advantage for Chelsea

We've had several seasons in the past of making deep CL runs and winning the league at the same time. It's not new to us. Stop it.

[quote="Warrior"]who knows if they'd be 10 points ahead otherwise ?[/quotes]
Won the league by like 14 points ahead of Arsenal's Invincibles squad with a CL semi appearance too.

Warrior wrote:In terms of personnel they are on par with their rivals but play less games, therefore reducing the risk of injuries and tiredness.

This really grinds my gears when I hear opposing fans and pundits go on about this. "Oh they've been lucky with no injuries" blah blah blah. When will you lot realize that we hardly ever have any serious injuries? This goes back to at least 2000. Over those 17 years, the only serious injuries I can really remember to a key member of the squad is Essien. And then maybe Hazard's niggling injury last season as well as Courtois' but that's about it. Oh and that Zouma freak landing last season as well. It's a testament to the quality of our medical staff and physios. If it happens for a season or two then you can call it luck. But when it's been going on for over a decade and half, then it's not luck. Stop it. I heard this talking point a lot in 14-15 too when we won the title.

Luiz has been playing with an injury ever since that Aguero dangerous tackle back in early December and had his thighs taped for an extended period but you wouldn't even be able to tell from his performances. Stop saying we're lucky. We have a great medical team.

Warrior wrote:- Real, Bayern, Juve, PSG are clearly superior.
- Barca, Sevilla, Atletico is a very tough call.
- Won't play against an english club until later in the tournament.
- Slightly better than Napoli, Benfica and Monaco as well.
- Considerably better than Dortmund, Bayer 04 and other Porto dead woods + the 16 teams who did not qualify this far.

So assuming Chelsea had avoided the Top 4 teams in round of 16, i'd say quarter finals would have been a reasonable ambition.

Spoiler:

I think I agree with the rest of your post.

Chelsea are team that have been quite competitive in both European front, as well as league and can challenge on both fronts, however you can't say that no European football isn't an advantage not only for Chelsea, but most of the top teams.

While they've made deep runs and won the league title with a big gap they have also won the CL title (deep run) and finished 20+ points behind 1st place, as well as the following season playing CL/Europa and winning Europa had a gap of 14 points from 1st to 3rd (were they finished).

Again its completely guess work and Chelsea would be still walking the league for all we know, but it isn't out of the realm of possibilities the CL footy may also have lessen the gap.

Warrior wrote:Real, Bayern, Juve, PSG are clearly superior.

No

It's no question having had no European football to contend with has been a huge plus this season. It's absolutely correct that going back years and years, we just aren't a side that tends to sustain long-term injuries, almost whatsoever, much less to integral key players, regardless of how many competitions we were in or how many fronts we were competing on; but even still, physically having the team in optimal nick in terms of fitness going into each league game is immense, and mentally as well, being able to focus on pretty much a single competition is always helpful too. I'm happy to concede all that and it'd be insane to suggest otherwise. But even with that said, the fact of the matter is that this inequal advantage was evened out entirely and the playing field totally leveled during the 2½ month European recess. On the PL matchweek after the final CL Group Stage fixtures, Chelsea were 3 points clear at the top of the table. Fast-forward 2½ months, and after the number of competitions and number of fixtures for every Leaue side was all square in that time (with the exception of the deeper League Cup sides), the gap on the last matchweek before the Rof16 kicked off was......9. Other sides had ample time to make up the deficit if Europe really was their biggest domestic impediment, but instead only fell exponentially farther off the pace.

As for the thread itself, I agree with the majority that if were in the CL we'd not have gone far. Our squad isn't actually all that phenomenal in many positions, which, as Barry pointed out, is more a testimony to just how unbelievable we've been in the league this season than it is any would-be slight on us.