Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by Fortitude, Mar 3, 2018.
What say you?
Poll, por favor?
Well they will have won the bigger trophy for sure.
City's season is beyond impressive regardless but old big ears will always be more special.
Chelsea won the league with 95 points in 2005.
Liverpool had 58 points in 5th and won the CL.
Who had the better season..
The CL is bigger than the PL. I'm sorry but it's true.
No but with the way everyone are going on about City you’d think that if they don’t at least reach the CL final it would be a disappointment.
Definitely. CL wins are exceptionally rare.
Only exception would be Liverpool I think. I'd imagine the league to them would be more meaningful than the CL.
The CL is more prestigious than the PL, but I'd say that City will have had the better season due to their domination of the league, which imo is the true litmus test of quality. They won the LC as well (which only really mattered in 2013 though).
Champions League by another team based on it being a better trophy and on the fact that City winning anything won't be impressive in the slightest.
I was actually just thinking about this. If say, we were to finish 2nd and beat them in the UCL final, I think it'd be considered an injustice by many... but if we finish 2nd and lose the final to them there would be people brushing us off as first-losers. As far as the narrative goes, they have already had the best season ever, are the best team ever, and ever will be.
Winning the league is the bread & butter, and I think the best team wins the league... but would I have traded winning the league for winning the Champions League at the start of the season? Yes... without a doubt.
Disclaimer: It's not impossible that we win the CL this season, but it remains improbable.
CL trumps PL by a long shot in my opinion. Give me 6th place and a CL win over 1st place in the PL everytime.
That's why the scousers and media don't shut up about it, and why you'll barely ever hear anything about Chelsea's 2005 season.
No. I'd say they'd have a more memorable and famous one, but the harder one to get is definitely the league trophy and it reflects a whole seasons accomplishment.
This of course just goes for this season in this league. I'd say the German league for example is harder to evaluate. If a German club that isn't Bayern won the Champions League and did well but didn't win the Bundesliga, i'd rate that achievement over Bayern winning the Bundesliga.
That's all subjective however. I don' think there is a right or wrong answer here.
Its a bit like the PL or CL debate, no?
Well that win did help us become one of the top teams in Europe and get us to another CL final 2 years later
i would like my team to be 17th on the premier league table but win the champions league
champions league >>> PL
it's not even worth debatable
Depends almost entirely on how you win it. Fluke your way to the CL with favourable draws and the neutral fan will still give City more credit for their dominant PL win. On the other hand, say we drew and KOd Real, Barca, Bayern etc on the way to the CL win, you'll need to be a bitter blue/red to say that's easier than winning the PL. These are the cream of Europe we're talking about.
Yeah, i'd say that too matters a lot. I was thinking more of a standard fluke one or two games but generally playing well either offensively or defensively to win the CL.
You have to be the best team in your country over the entire season to win the PL. You can win the CL by only being the 5th or 6th best team in your country but by having a good/lucky few knockout games. Just look at Liverpool and Chelsea.
So I would say no, but history remembers CL wins more than PL wins.
Genuinely think it depends on how the Champion's league is won and how City finish the season. If they continue to batter the league into submission and stand triumphant atop a sea of bones by the end then that's greater and more memorable than a hypothetical team spawning the Champion's league against the run of play - unless that team is Spurs.
It would be a great season for both clubs.
I will always value a league competition over a cup competition. In my opinion City would have had the better season. But I see the merits of the other side.
That will be very debatable and each to his own reference really. Imo I think they'll still be considered the best English team this season but the team who won CL will take far more credit from everyone.
Like others have said, history remembers the CL wins more, because they’re rare. I’d take a CL win over the league every time.
Who had the better season is subjective but City would be considered the better team. That is objectively true.
That team is widely regarded as one of the best in PL history (by many ahead of the Invincibles, and, imo, rightly so). Scousers talk about 2005 because they don't have anything else to talk about for the past 2 decades
Although I still prefer CL to PL btw
History? What history do you talk of?
better season, but probably not a better team
Well it's hard to argue that the biggest nights of United's "history" aren't 68, 93, 99 CL and 08 is it not?
With City, their season has been incredibley impressive but in 10 years time when people will look back I think Leicester will hold a bigger regard for their achivement than City with theirs. United have won the league by 15+ points before, Chelsea the same and Man City will do the same this season but all these are by teams expected to win (and dominate) based on financial power and squads.
The Champions League on the other hand is such a rarity that as an individual trophy it will be recognised for longer - this being said I would take the league over the champions league any day simply because of the concistancy required to win it.
City will have had the best season. When they win the PL by a country mile they will have cemented their place as the best team in England this season. If us or any other PL team win the CL it will be a great accomplishment but it will feel slightly hollow as they will have absolutely no claim to being the best team in Europe. When we won it in 99,08 and many times that Barca, real and Bayern have won it we could all feel we were the top dogs in Europe coupled with the domestic success at the time. If city win the CL, sadly few could argue then that they arent the best team in Europe. If we win it I will love it of course but it won’t mean the same as the last 2 as clearly we aren’t the best team in Europe, England or even Manchester currently.
Hmm, more that City are being lauded as this impressive, all-conquering machine, but I seriously doubt they would be remembered as such, even by the summer, if another PL club wins the CL. I think it would seriously undermine their league accomplishments and render it as more of a footnote than this awesome thing. Someone mentioned Liverpool top-trumping Chelsea when they won the CL that season, and I'd go along with that.
I think in a normal PL season, it would be the age old PL vs. CL question, but City's utter dominance of the league, and the praise they will get for it if things remain (and no other PL team wins the CL) is very different from what we've come to expect.
Just something to think about at a time where Guardiola may well be considered a revelation - if he then goes on to be overshadowed, I should think he and the club will be miffed, to the say the least.
This. I think any team and their fanbase would not mind to even be relegated if they miraculously win the CL.
City with their league title would have had better season for me but if another Pl team goes on to win Champions league while defeating City on route then City season would be remembered more for its loss in Cl to league opponents rather than their amazing season in league.
No City will set another PL record (total points) and have already set the most consecutive wins.
The league winners have the best season.
The CL winners have the best cup run.
IMO they can't be compared really. Two different competitions that can be prioritised based on likelihood of winning
That team will have had a memorable season and one to potentially ignite a title challenge next season.
Not sure if it's a 'better' season. But then I personally value the league slightly above the CL due to the latter being a cup competition ultimately.
As much as City want to win the CL, I'm sure they would like to win the title slightly more (if given the option) given it's been three seasons since their last (in the context of bringing in Pep and the flood of money spent on the team).
Every top team has proved it's harder to win the CL than their own domestic league. This influences your standing in world football and everything that comes with that. The relevance of winning the PL is more for those who have never won it than those like us who have. Our significance of winning them over the years was to overtake Liverpool. Tbh I think there's as much significance of qualifying for CL as winning it. Does anyone see the significance of Chelsea winning it 5mins after they lifted it?
No chance @Minimalist, you're talking 3 years vs. 124 years.
There's no way we get a shared narrative if both things happen. The CL winner will take all the media's best columns and soundbites and City will be reduced, greatly, in the narrative until the new season starts and MotD, Sky and BT update their collages to incorporate 2017/'18 in their opening credits.
Personally, I think it'd be a disaster for City's PR team if any PL team but them wins the CL this season. I bet they're all geared up for quite the PR rollout over the summer as things stand, and that would have to be revised.
Aye, which is why some of the opinions in here are bizarre.
SAF had 16 top flight league titles vs. just 2 Champions League/European Cup wins. The CL is the big boy, make no mistake.
I know what you're saying but City have a lot of catching up to do for both league titles and (obviously) the CL. If I was a City supporter, I'd want to starting clocking up some league titles to overtake Chelsea and Arsenal in that table. At present they've only won as many top flight titles as Newcastle - with (some digging for this) Chelsea, Sunderland, Villa, Everton and Arsenal ahead of them (before you even remember Liverpool and United). Perhaps I'm not on the pulse of these things but if City are building something long-lasting - it would be my first priority over the CL. Although getting the first CL wouldn't be right behind on the priority list obviously.
Think the fact ZZ has as many CL wins as Ferguson would point to it being less about managerial brilliance.
Brian Clough said it years ago and I personally subscribe to the same thoughts - the league title is the big one for managers in terms of their influence.
Separate names with a comma.