Between the excitement of football through pundits and analysts, the world of football always seems to have something to say about current events, whether a player isn't underperforming, a coach isn't leaving a good first impression, or simply an over-analyzation of a transfer. It makes for nice talking points in a sports studio or something to add to the word count in an article.

However, the more I mature the more I realize that as far as the hot topics are concerned, there's rarely anything new to say and all that changes is merely names. Take the debate about who is the greatest of all time or currently, when is the last time anything new was added to the conversation that mattered? With the exception of Messi winning the World Cup with Argentina, it was a long time since anything new was added. And even Messi winning the World Cup seems to have done very little.

The fact of the matter is, many of the hot topics today have been answered long ago. Here are a few examples:

More Time Is Needed

Whether it is Darwin Núñez, Graham Potter, Erik ten Hag, or even Messi during his first season in Paris Saint-Germain, the answer to their problems and struggle is always that they need more time. Erik ten Hag needed more time to establish a suitable approach, Darwin Núñez needs more time to adjust to life in England and Liverpool's style, and Potter needs more time to adjust to the new team, demands, signings, and the best way to utilize his team.

The average player takes around to adjust to life in a new country, this is due to the culture, geography, language, and many small things like their food. Yes, some players took less than that to adjust, but also a lot of players took longer. Luka Modrić is considered to be the greatest midfielder of all time by many, including me. But, while he was signed in August 2012, it took him until later March to leave a good first impression and all the way to late 2013 to become an essential part of the team.

The answer was always time, the average coach and manager need at least 3-4 years to establish his style, bring in his type of players, and control the locker room before they could be judged fairly. Arteta was practically a joke in his first two years and even some of his third years and now he is competing for the Premier League title. It's almost like it's a surprise that Arteta just needed time as a coach to master his craft and bring in the players he needed to establish his style. Who would have thought?

Needing more time isn't correlated with quality either, it's just needing more time because there are tens of reasons to need more time.

No New Reason Is Needed

During Messi's first season in Paris Saint-Germain, he struggled. This came due to many known problems, he left the clubs where he spent his entire professional career in an emotional and tiring saga, and he was playing with no familiar faces except for one. Also, the style of the team and manager didn't suit him, plus, he was no longer the goalscorer and sole star of the team.

The explanation was straightforward, everyone knew it. Yet, the issue of him not scoring or assisting at the same rate as before was constantly brought up whenever he doesn't score or assist. It's almost like the world owes people a new explanation every game. Guess what? He still needed more time today just like he did yesterday. When the average time of a player settling into a new club is a whole year, you're not owed other reasons during that period.

Now, Graham Potter is in charge of a team he joined after the season already began, he is dealing with different goals, the players are new to him, and there are still transfers waiting to happen. Under what grounds are people even judging Potter as a failure? Did Chelsea not lose before him? If they weren't, we wouldn't be seeing Potter as a manager.

Simplifying A Complicated Game

Football is a very complicated game on the pitch this is why it is baffling for me how people attempt to oversimplify it over and over. Putting together all the problems at Chelsea into a simple "Potter Out" hashtag as if the new coach won't need time as well is extremely moronic.

But, what baffles me the most is the number of people choosing not to talk about things where there are things to say. Yes, Graham Potter isn't winning with Chelsea yet for the established reasons but instead of opting to talk passionately in an area where there's little to say, shouldn't pundits, analysts, and the Twitter crowd opt to talk about things where there are actual things to say?

Empty Words

It seems like pundits, analysts, and people on Twitter don't want to go the extra small step to break down anything. Erik ten Hag isn't winning, well, that's because he's not fit for the "culture" at Manchester United as if that makes any sense. Graham Potter is failing only because "he is not used to coaching a team at Chelsea's level" as if coaches who manage top teams appear out of nowhere.

It's a circulation of empty words that below the surface mean nothing and serve only as lazy explanations. "The Premier League isn't for everyone" as if players and coaches didn't struggle anywhere else. Just lazy explanations because God forbid someone actually thinks about the subject they're talking about.

In Conclusion

On one side, I sympathize with pundits who have to come up with new things to explain something that's already been explained. but, on the other, I am just tired of listening to sentences that mean nothing. I sympathize because it's their job to address the hot topics, but I also don't because I believe these people should try picking topics that they could actually talk about.