|
Post by The Escapist on Jul 15, 2020 16:43:59 GMT -5
Liverpool will not break the record for most points scored in a premier league season.
|
|
|
Post by Aman on Jul 16, 2020 6:31:07 GMT -5
Liverpool will not break the record for most points scored in a premier league season. Hilarious how their fans are pretending it doesn't matter now when a few months ago they had a different viewpoint...
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Jul 16, 2020 9:25:50 GMT -5
For most of this season, I thought Liverpool were better than the Invincibles. But as we end the season, I now believe that the Invincibles were the better squad.
Sure, Liverpool have more wins and more points, but that Arsenal squad had zero losses, and a more competitive league compared to this lackluster Premier League. It’s close but Arsenal just about edges it.
|
|
|
Post by Ross on Jul 17, 2020 8:08:23 GMT -5
For most of this season, I thought Liverpool were better than the Invincibles. But as we end the season, I now believe that the Invincibles were the better squad. Sure, Liverpool have more wins and more points, but that Arsenal squad had zero losses, and a more competitive league compared to this lackluster Premier League. It’s close but Arsenal just about edges it.
What about the treble winning United side or Man City winning with 100 points?
|
|
|
Post by Aman on Jul 17, 2020 10:05:16 GMT -5
Mourinho's Chelsea 95 point 04/05 win right up there too.
They conceded FIFTEEN league goals.
That's mental.
|
|
|
Post by robg1979 on Jul 17, 2020 14:21:11 GMT -5
Mourinho's Chelsea 95 point 04/05 win right up there too. They conceded FIFTEEN league goals. That's mental. As an impartial who doesnt support Arsenal, Chelsea or Man City, when you look at the all time great Premiership sides, this Chelsea one would have to be up there. Only 1 loss and 15 goals conceded?? Amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Ross on Jul 17, 2020 14:53:30 GMT -5
Mourinho's Chelsea 95 point 04/05 win right up there too. They conceded FIFTEEN league goals. That's mental.
Yeah Chelsea changed the game you could no longer get away with playing your way into the season you had to get a fast start.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jul 17, 2020 15:43:49 GMT -5
God, Guardiola's such a neurotic dweeb. Ranting about Arsene Wenger apparently spending shitloads for his success at Arsenal (first I knew about it). He'll never have anything on Wenger's achievements with his plastic club and bought trophies though.
|
|
|
Post by The Escapist on Jul 18, 2020 22:09:04 GMT -5
Next season is gonna be fireworks. City will go big having bodied UEFA, Liverpool have a title to defend for the first time in decades, United are looking exciting again, and Chelsea are building something good as well. Then you have Wolves, Sheffield United, and Leicester just outside. Hardest one to predict for a while, I think.
|
|
|
Post by MacaRonic on Jul 27, 2020 5:06:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jul 31, 2020 18:33:50 GMT -5
Fingers crossed for Arsenal tomorrow, definitely deserve the cup (especially after Arteta's tactical masterclass against City a couple weeks back).
|
|
|
Post by The Escapist on Aug 1, 2020 5:39:43 GMT -5
I think there'll be lots of goals today. Both have great attacks and weak defences. I think Giroud could have a field day against Arteta's preferred back three, but Aubameyang'll licking his lips too. Hoping Chelsea win, personally.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 1, 2020 11:54:53 GMT -5
I hope these water breaks don’t become normal. Ever closer to the soul destroying Americanization of the sport.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 18, 2020 9:45:29 GMT -5
For most of this season, I thought Liverpool were better than the Invincibles. But as we end the season, I now believe that the Invincibles were the better squad. Sure, Liverpool have more wins and more points, but that Arsenal squad had zero losses, and a more competitive league compared to this lackluster Premier League. It’s close but Arsenal just about edges it. What about the treble winning United side or Man City winning with 100 points?
Or Man City's Fourmidables? City ended up with 98 points in the Prem while winning all four domestic competitions. Liverpool put all their eggs in one basket this season and ended their Premier League campaign with only one point higher than that. Hell, City's Centurions won the League Cup as well.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 18, 2020 13:54:35 GMT -5
What about the treble winning United side or Man City winning with 100 points?
Or Man City's Fourmidables? City ended up with 98 points in the Prem while winning all four domestic competitions. Liverpool put all their eggs in one basket this season and ended their Premier League campaign with only one point higher than that. Hell, City's Centurions won the League Cup as well. There is a recognition though that City spend eye watering amounts. Liverpool did for Van Dijk but it was on what they earned and by playing blinders wheeling and dealing in the transfer market. You also have the majority of that Liverpool team not being bonafide superstars but becoming so thanks to the coaching of Klopp (I mean, come on, even as a Scot I didn’t foresee Andy Robertson being this good). There you have proper leadership and management yet far greater limitations than City, and he far outweigh Guardiola at City (also having actually won the biggest prize there is - the Champions League). Guardiola at City simply buys the finished product for ridiculous sums (£400 million spent on a still abject defence - that’s just the defence...). And with all that spent, the biggest club competition victory - Champions League - still eludes them. There’s no admiration in that, which is why these clubs are not held in the same esteem as Wenger’s Arsenal or Klopp’s Liverpool and of course Fergie’s Man Utd (Class of 92 being the greatest generation of talent ever developed by a manager). Context is everything, and you can win all you can but it’s how you go about it that seals the reputation.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 18, 2020 14:03:18 GMT -5
For most of this season, I thought Liverpool were better than the Invincibles. But as we end the season, I now believe that the Invincibles were the better squad. Sure, Liverpool have more wins and more points, but that Arsenal squad had zero losses, and a more competitive league compared to this lackluster Premier League. It’s close but Arsenal just about edges it. For a single league campaign, Arsenal’s Invincibles is still the litmus test. Klopp taking them to the top for the first time in 30 years is the main headline for Liverpool but we’re not talking about an achievement like that Arsenal side. For a season in general though, the treble winning United is going to take one hell of a beating.
|
|
|
Post by The Escapist on Aug 18, 2020 17:21:59 GMT -5
Or Man City's Fourmidables? City ended up with 98 points in the Prem while winning all four domestic competitions. Liverpool put all their eggs in one basket this season and ended their Premier League campaign with only one point higher than that. Hell, City's Centurions won the League Cup as well. There is a recognition though that City spend eye watering amounts. Liverpool did for Van Dijk but it was on what they earned and by playing blinders wheeling and dealing in the transfer market. You also have the majority of that Liverpool team not being bonafide superstars but becoming so thanks to the coaching of Klopp (I mean, come on, even as a Scot I didn’t foresee Andy Robertson being this good). There you have proper leadership and management yet far greater limitations than City, and he far outweigh Guardiola at City (also having actually won the biggest prize there is - the Champions League). Guardiola at City simply buys the finished product for ridiculous sums (£400 million spent on a still abject defence - that’s just the defence...). And with all that spent, the biggest club competition victory - Champions League - still eludes them. There’s no admiration in that, which is why these clubs are not held in the same esteem as Wenger’s Arsenal or Klopp’s Liverpool and of course Fergie’s Man Utd (Class of 92 being the greatest generation of talent ever developed by a manager). Context is everything, and you can win all you can but it’s how you go about it that seals the reputation. I think you're doing a Guardiola a bit of a disservice here. What he did with Sterling is incredible. Turned him from a good dribbler into a world-class winger, and he's doing the same thing with Foden, Jesus, and Walker. Good players have a tendency to turn great under him, and he knows how to keep the great ones firing. Obviously City are a very rich club, but to simply put their achievements down to spending ignores a lot of the subtleties of what Khaldoon's done, for me. After all, their record signing is till only around £60m, far below their direct competitors, and they don't have a single entry in the top ten most expensive transfers, not even in the EPL, I believe. I'd definitely say that City's Centurions are the best Premier League side ever seen, too.
|
|
|
Post by Ross on Aug 19, 2020 9:48:40 GMT -5
For most of this season, I thought Liverpool were better than the Invincibles. But as we end the season, I now believe that the Invincibles were the better squad. Sure, Liverpool have more wins and more points, but that Arsenal squad had zero losses, and a more competitive league compared to this lackluster Premier League. It’s close but Arsenal just about edges it. For a single league campaign, Arsenal’s Invincibles is still the litmus test. Klopp taking them to the top for the first time in 30 years is the main headline for Liverpool but we’re not talking about an achievement like that Arsenal side. For a season in general though, the treble winning United is going to take one hell of a beating. That Arsenal achievement is overrated winning the double is a bigger achievement. And just as far as the league goes getting 100 points feels like a bigger achievement.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 19, 2020 12:35:01 GMT -5
For a single league campaign, Arsenal’s Invincibles is still the litmus test. Klopp taking them to the top for the first time in 30 years is the main headline for Liverpool but we’re not talking about an achievement like that Arsenal side. For a season in general though, the treble winning United is going to take one hell of a beating. That Arsenal achievement is overrated winning the double is a bigger achievement. And just as far as the league goes getting 100 points feels like a bigger achievement. I disagree with both statements. Even speaking objectively.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 20, 2020 23:44:36 GMT -5
There is a recognition though that City spend eye watering amounts. Liverpool did for Van Dijk but it was on what they earned and by playing blinders wheeling and dealing in the transfer market. You also have the majority of that Liverpool team not being bonafide superstars but becoming so thanks to the coaching of Klopp (I mean, come on, even as a Scot I didn’t foresee Andy Robertson being this good). There you have proper leadership and management yet far greater limitations than City, and he far outweigh Guardiola at City (also having actually won the biggest prize there is - the Champions League). Guardiola at City simply buys the finished product for ridiculous sums (£400 million spent on a still abject defence - that’s just the defence...). And with all that spent, the biggest club competition victory - Champions League - still eludes them. There’s no admiration in that, which is why these clubs are not held in the same esteem as Wenger’s Arsenal or Klopp’s Liverpool and of course Fergie’s Man Utd (Class of 92 being the greatest generation of talent ever developed by a manager). Context is everything, and you can win all you can but it’s how you go about it that seals the reputation. Apart from everything The Escapist said, let's not pretend that Arsenal, United, and Liverpool haven't spend ungodly amounts of money over the years as well, particularly when adjusting for inflation. Let's also not pretend that throwing money at players brings greatness. One only needs to look at the state of United since Fergie left to see that money only gets you so far. And yet, no other English men's team has ever won all four domestic competitions in one season, but they did, while attaining 98 points in the Prem. No other club has reached 100 points in England, Germany, France, or Italy. Just because you personally don't like how City got its money—or how much they spend it—doesn't mean their accomplishments aren't valid and shouldn't be in the conversation.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 21, 2020 20:51:00 GMT -5
There is a recognition though that City spend eye watering amounts. Liverpool did for Van Dijk but it was on what they earned and by playing blinders wheeling and dealing in the transfer market. You also have the majority of that Liverpool team not being bonafide superstars but becoming so thanks to the coaching of Klopp (I mean, come on, even as a Scot I didn’t foresee Andy Robertson being this good). There you have proper leadership and management yet far greater limitations than City, and he far outweigh Guardiola at City (also having actually won the biggest prize there is - the Champions League). Guardiola at City simply buys the finished product for ridiculous sums (£400 million spent on a still abject defence - that’s just the defence...). And with all that spent, the biggest club competition victory - Champions League - still eludes them. There’s no admiration in that, which is why these clubs are not held in the same esteem as Wenger’s Arsenal or Klopp’s Liverpool and of course Fergie’s Man Utd (Class of 92 being the greatest generation of talent ever developed by a manager). Context is everything, and you can win all you can but it’s how you go about it that seals the reputation. Apart from everything The Escapist said, let's not pretend that Arsenal, United, and Liverpool haven't spend ungodly amounts of money over the years as well, particularly when adjusting for inflation. Let's also not pretend that throwing money at players brings greatness. One only needs to look at the state of United since Fergie left to see that money only gets you so far. And yet, no other English men's team has ever won all four domestic competitions in one season, but they did, while attaining 98 points in the Prem. No other club has reached 100 points in England, Germany, France, or Italy. Just because you personally don't like how City got its money—or how much they spend it—doesn't mean their accomplishments aren't valid and shouldn't be in the conversation. I don't doubt their achievements, but the greatest? Quadruple? Come on, it's a domestic treble - Community Shield isn't a recognised trophy (add to that, nobody really cares for the League Cup). But for the centurions, I admit they are a great team. They play attractive football and it's a far cry from the dull football that lots of champions play (although you wouldn't know it as the Etihad struggles for full capacity...). But they aren't close to Fergie's treble winners and never will be. A team with a backbone of local lads, flourished with overseas talent - it's the stuff of dreams, and the way Ferguson littered his teams with academy graduates was just amazing. That's football romance right there, just ideal and until City emulate that story, they will always be in the shadow of their neighbours. The great teams have to have a compelling narrative behind it like this. Man City are like the Lord of the Rings films, incredible to look at, wins everything but ultimately a meaningless experience to follow. And to achieve that level of legendary status that Utd had, you have to win the biggest prize of all - the European Cup.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 21, 2020 21:02:48 GMT -5
There is a recognition though that City spend eye watering amounts. Liverpool did for Van Dijk but it was on what they earned and by playing blinders wheeling and dealing in the transfer market. You also have the majority of that Liverpool team not being bonafide superstars but becoming so thanks to the coaching of Klopp (I mean, come on, even as a Scot I didn’t foresee Andy Robertson being this good). There you have proper leadership and management yet far greater limitations than City, and he far outweigh Guardiola at City (also having actually won the biggest prize there is - the Champions League). Guardiola at City simply buys the finished product for ridiculous sums (£400 million spent on a still abject defence - that’s just the defence...). And with all that spent, the biggest club competition victory - Champions League - still eludes them. There’s no admiration in that, which is why these clubs are not held in the same esteem as Wenger’s Arsenal or Klopp’s Liverpool and of course Fergie’s Man Utd (Class of 92 being the greatest generation of talent ever developed by a manager). Context is everything, and you can win all you can but it’s how you go about it that seals the reputation. I think you're doing a Guardiola a bit of a disservice here. What he did with Sterling is incredible. Turned him from a good dribbler into a world-class winger, and he's doing the same thing with Foden, Jesus, and Walker. Good players have a tendency to turn great under him, and he knows how to keep the great ones firing. Obviously City are a very rich club, but to simply put their achievements down to spending ignores a lot of the subtleties of what Khaldoon's done, for me. After all, their record signing is till only around £60m, far below their direct competitors, and they don't have a single entry in the top ten most expensive transfers, not even in the EPL, I believe. I'd definitely say that City's Centurions are the best Premier League side ever seen, too. I'll give you Jesus, he's good and developed nicely. And Foden too - if and when he starts to utilise more youth academy products, then I'll give him his credit. But Sterling was a £50 million player from Liverpool, a key player in almost winning them the league in 2014. He's certainly improved a lot since then but he's not a surprise in any way. But I fully disagree about Kyle Walker, I think his best stuff was at Spurs - he had a great first season that he continued his form from Spurs but since then has been inconsistent many times and being dropped by Southgate for England was humiliating. I'd love to see him do what Klopp did - until he does, he won't be the best manager in the world. Take over a joke side like Liverpool and turn them into something special, or take a club that was bankrupt like Dortmund and win two leagues and reach a Champions League final (with a starting eleven that cost something like £30 million pounds). That's a challenge he should take on to prove he's better. Look, I'll admit, I'm probably far too stingy on Guardiola and I honestly don't doubt his world class quality (the frequent humiliation of Mourinho has always been a highlight). But to be the best? I love to see quality managers up against it, working with real limitations. Take on a proper project, to be ambitious take on something like Arsenal or Spurs where there are greater limitations but masses of potential at the club. Do AC Milan for god sake, there's a sleeping giant right there! He talks much about Bielsa as a great influence, fucking hell if Bielsa can do wonders in the league (I'd say mid table would be great for them), I'd love to see him succeed the brilliant madman and take over Leeds (again, another sleeping giant). Okay, that's taking things to the extreme and I've probably been playing too much Football Manager, but a club of Leeds Utd reputation deserve huge managers. A sleeping giant, that's what I'd love to see him take on.
|
|
|
Post by Ross on Aug 22, 2020 5:34:42 GMT -5
That Arsenal achievement is overrated winning the double is a bigger achievement. And just as far as the league goes getting 100 points feels like a bigger achievement. I disagree with both statements. Even speaking objectively.
Claiming that you are speaking objectivley does not make it so. Arsenal lost 7 games that season just in other competitions and in my opinion getting more points is better than drawing a few more matches. That is not to say going undefeated in the league is not impressive as it clearly is just that there are bigger achivements.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 25, 2020 9:20:59 GMT -5
Apart from everything The Escapist said, let's not pretend that Arsenal, United, and Liverpool haven't spend ungodly amounts of money over the years as well, particularly when adjusting for inflation. Let's also not pretend that throwing money at players brings greatness. One only needs to look at the state of United since Fergie left to see that money only gets you so far. And yet, no other English men's team has ever won all four domestic competitions in one season, but they did, while attaining 98 points in the Prem. No other club has reached 100 points in England, Germany, France, or Italy. Just because you personally don't like how City got its money—or how much they spend it—doesn't mean their accomplishments aren't valid and shouldn't be in the conversation. I don't doubt their achievements, but the greatest? Quadruple? Come on, it's a domestic treble - Community Shield isn't a recognised trophy (add to that, nobody really cares for the League Cup). But for the centurions, I admit they are a great team. They play attractive football and it's a far cry from the dull football that lots of champions play (although you wouldn't know it as the Etihad struggles for full capacity...). But they aren't close to Fergie's treble winners and never will be. A team with a backbone of local lads, flourished with overseas talent - it's the stuff of dreams, and the way Ferguson littered his teams with academy graduates was just amazing. That's football romance right there, just ideal and until City emulate that story, they will always be in the shadow of their neighbours. The great teams have to have a compelling narrative behind it like this. Man City are like the Lord of the Rings films, incredible to look at, wins everything but ultimately a meaningless experience to follow. And to achieve that level of legendary status that Utd had, you have to win the biggest prize of all - the European Cup. Are we just going to forget that Andy Cole, who played on that 1999 side, was the most expensive British transfer ever at the time? Although stadium attendance is completely irrelevant to the conversation, City's average attendance rate for 2019/20 was fifth in the Prem… with an average capacity of 55,017, making for a percentage of 98.9%. (Liverpool, by the way, was sixth in the Prem with an average capacity of 54,074, making for a percentage of 98.3%.) And since you mentioned United, if the Community Shield isn't a recognized trophy and nobody cares about the League Cup, how come both of them are featured in their digital Trophy Room under "United's Major Honours"? Also, can you please stop moving the goalposts? To you, City can't be in the conversation of best English side ever because they: spend too much money, don't play enough players from their academy, win meaningless trophies, don't have enough fans in the stadium, haven't won the Champions League, and have a chequebook manager. "98 points and winning all four domestic competitions they were in? Meaningless! Bullshit trophies and they didn't win in Europe!" "100 points? No fans!" Are you even hearing yourself? I fear there is no pleasing you. If City won the Premier League, League Cup, Community Shield, FA Cup, and the Champions League in the same season while winning every game in every competition, you'd find a way to tear them down.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 25, 2020 10:17:31 GMT -5
I don't doubt their achievements, but the greatest? Quadruple? Come on, it's a domestic treble - Community Shield isn't a recognised trophy (add to that, nobody really cares for the League Cup). But for the centurions, I admit they are a great team. They play attractive football and it's a far cry from the dull football that lots of champions play (although you wouldn't know it as the Etihad struggles for full capacity...). But they aren't close to Fergie's treble winners and never will be. A team with a backbone of local lads, flourished with overseas talent - it's the stuff of dreams, and the way Ferguson littered his teams with academy graduates was just amazing. That's football romance right there, just ideal and until City emulate that story, they will always be in the shadow of their neighbours. The great teams have to have a compelling narrative behind it like this. Man City are like the Lord of the Rings films, incredible to look at, wins everything but ultimately a meaningless experience to follow. And to achieve that level of legendary status that Utd had, you have to win the biggest prize of all - the European Cup. Are we just going to forget that Andy Cole, who played on that 1999 side, was the most expensive British transfer ever at the time? Although stadium attendance is completely irrelevant to the conversation, City's average attendance rate for 2019/20 was fifth in the Prem… with an average capacity of 55,017, making for a percentage of 98.9%. (Liverpool, by the way, was sixth in the Prem with an average capacity of 54,074, making for a percentage of 98.3%.) And since you mentioned United, if the Community Shield isn't a recognized trophy and nobody cares about the League Cup, how come both of them are featured in their digital Trophy Room under "United's Major Honours"? Also, can you please stop moving the goalposts? To you, City can't be in the conversation of best English side ever because they: spend too much money, don't play enough players from their academy, win meaningless trophies, don't have enough fans in the stadium, haven't won the Champions League, and have a chequebook manager. "98 points and winning all four domestic competitions they were in? Meaningless! Bullshit trophies and they didn't win in Europe!" "100 points? No fans!" Are you even hearing yourself? I fear there is no pleasing you. If City won the Premier League, League Cup, Community Shield, FA Cup, and the Champions League in the same season while winning every game in every competition, you'd find a way to tear them down. But nothing will top the United treble winners, nobody seriously thinks they rank up there with them! I’m not denying that United side spent money, I’m not denying great teams don’t spend money but relatively, they didn’t spend anywhere near as much as City. I’m not talking as a United fan, I’m not even talking about them of late as they’ve been an utter joke but objectively speaking, City have come nowhere close to that level of achievement. That United side is based on the foundations of the Class of 92 - a compelling story. City? Sign this player and that player (and here’s a super sub too) for £60 million each. There’s no skill in that, there’s no admiration in that.It’s simply buying your success. And that success is hollow without any meaningful story behind it. Any City fan would trade their moments of success with United’s. And I will always find a way to tear them down like many football fans but there’s legitimate reasons for that. United’s finances, like Liverpool’s, is backed by their own commercial growth and I can’t criticise their success - they spend what they earn, and not through some foul despotic oil based regime like City’s. That’s only the surface of it remarkably. There’s nothing wrong with calling out the sportswashing of human rights abuse and instant gratification of success that City are proponents of. Its fair to despise these state sponsored projects and have genuine concerns about their role in football.
|
|