On the Mudryk vs. CHO discussion, I don’t think anyone said that CHO isn’t basically done at Chelsea and Mudryk isn’t at the beginning.
When a team spends like 100M euros compared to being an academy player, you’ll get a very long leash, but if we are to be honest, CHO’s end product numbers at Chelsea are actually quite decent over a very long sample. Mudryk’s are weak over a small sample.
Now maybe it’s easy to remember Mudryk looking “close” to being effective and you hope over a longer sample that translates better than it has so far, while with a player like CHO that isn’t viewed as part of Chelsea’s future like Chelsea fans still hope from Mudryk, it’s easy to have a selective memory remembering when he’s struggled. However, let’s not get this twisted, CHO has been the more effective of the two so far at Chelsea.
And the initial point was never to directly compare which of the two is better. I don’t know how it turned into that.