I'm glad we agree with each other. Chelsea last season, post Tuchel arrival, had ok league form. Fair to them, did well in the CL. But it's a cup competition, where variance is more of a factor. Based on that, everyone assumed they were league championship caliber. That's a status that is earned over an entire season, not based on the merits of a successful European FA Cup campaign.
So going into this season, Chelsea had everything to prove in terms of showing they had the ability to put in consistent performances week in week out, as City and Liverpool have demonstrated over the last 4 years.
Which is why I keep on going back to this idea that "Lukaku is disrupting an otherwise great system". We don't know if that system is great honestly, there isn't enough evidence. All I see is their attackers (sans James and Chilwell, I concede that point) misfiring, and their xG behind their other 2 competitors (one of which doesn't have an actual striker) That's not a Lukaku problem, that's a Chelsea problem.
But we know Lukaku's strengths and weaknesses already. He's shown them for Inter and United. And he's definitely no Werner. So two questions:
1. Did Chelsea expect to slot Lukaku in and expect things would hum along as usual, without rejigging things to suit Lukaku's strengths better (like Conte did at Inter)?
2. Forget Lukaku for a moment. What elevated Chelsea to league favorites above Chelsea and City? Why have they been granted that status (which Lukaku is supposedly holding them back from now)? What is their true level without Lukaku? My contention is that it's behind Liverpool and City until proven otherwise.