EPL Title race 2018/2019

[Tommy]

Wolves would have a shot too, they've spent money but not to the same ridiculous extent as you and Chelsea. You've blocked opportunities for other clubs who have done it 'the right way' because despite the decline of some of the bigger clubs, they can't even get in to the top four.

So the right way to do it is to get into bed with a super-agent, bring in talent far beyond your current station, lose £1m a week while in the Championship & hope it pays off?

The hell is the difference between that & what City did, apart from the league they were in when it happened? If Wolves weren't tied so closely to Mendes & didn't invest well over-the-top in their squad, they'd probably not have won the title last season. They've deprived another Championship club of promotion, just like City have deprived a midtable club of European football, no?

Or is the City/Chelsea situation different because it affects Spurs?

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

They play the best football in the country, are currently in a really competitive title race, and are always entertaining to follow.

This isn't Ligue 1. City can't buy absolute complete dominance over the competition. Can they buy an advantage? Sure, but they're yet to defend the league a single time in the last 10 years, so I'm struggling to see the issue here. If it weren't for City & Chelsea, SAF would've retired with United on 25 league titles

Look at all the other clubs in contention for the PL title during Chelsea/City's takeovers. It's Man United, Arsenal, Liverpool, maybe Spurs, and a freak win for Leicester (which happened after both clubs were heavily invested in).

Where's the status-quo breaking teams there? Everton, West Ham, Newcastle? PL mainstays - the best of the rest? They've never come close. Without City/Chelsea, their Europa League finishes might instead be top 4 - "Woohoo."

I honestly could give two fecks what kind of football they play. They have two first XI's which could challenge for the league because they've spent over a billion on football players. They were not entertaining to follow last season when they pissed all over the competition, and they're in a title race this year, big wow. Liverpool have been incredible and done it the right way (spent your own money, invested wisely, and shit at least TAA gets regular starts) but you'll likely win nothing and be unable to push on because a club exists to whom money means absolutely nothing.

It doesn't have to be ligue 1. City CAN buy absolute dominance over the competition, we are seeing the start of that. If they continue spending at the same rate over the next decade they will absolutely dominate English football, inevitably. They're on for a fecking quadruple this season and got 100 points the year before, what world are you living in where you think they can't buy dominance? Liverpool having an absolutely exceptional season yet still being behind them just proves how much they've broken football.

Maybe Spurs? WE WOULD HAVE WON THE LEAGUE IN 16/17 IF IT WASN'T FOR CHELSEA, ffs. Leicester won the league, you talk about 'heavy investment' which doesn't come remotely close to the competition shattering spending that we've seen City enjoy. Guess what happens when you get top 4? Extra money, increased opportunities for a club like Newcastle to push on. You can dismiss it all you want but if a club gets a grip on consistent top 4 finishes they can push on to a title challenging level, except when clubs like City/Chelsea exist to whom CL money means nothing.

So bizarre how anybody can look at a club spending billions on players and go 'yep that's fair, two starting elevens? Great. Isn't this amazing!'

Do you have stockholm syndrome or something?

 

[RobinLFC]

We've gone totally off topic, but give me your plan to make Southampton a title-winning team in the next 5-10 years under football's current structure and I'll probably reply with some green smileys too.

But yes it's all City's fault, we've ruined football.

There's a difference between a take-over like at Leicester or what you guys are doing. "Money was the only solution" is such a simple thought. Juventus built their squad with loads of free transfers and see where they are now. Yes, maybe they could attract bigger names because of their standing and history but still, there are definitely other ways to get to consistent challenging for a top 4 place than pomping billions into a club.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

You said "plenty of clubs." And your examples are Spurs, who were obviously not the type of low to mid-table club I was referring to (undeniably Levy has done a superb job though), Leicester (who failed FFP before they won the league and have now fallen away), and Wolves (who likely creatively cheated FFP, and who closed the gap down to 6th to a manageable 14 points with their win the other night).

It's not the best list to be honest.

Newcastle pushed at the door of the top 4 in the same era, we saw Southampton on the fringes but unable to get in to Europe because of two clubs who made their way up there through sugar daddy spending. We have no idea how different football would be had that spending not taken place, it's changed football irreversibly.

Spurs were a mid-table club, so why are we not of that type? Leicester failed FFP but their spending is incomparable to the sugar daddy clubs, and Wolves have spent and acted dubiously but again, it's not on the same level. It's not comparable to sinking billions in to a football club. I'm not the biggest fan of how they've made their way up there but it's a hell of a lot more justifiable than a bunch of nutters from the middle east deciding to turn a club in to a political tool/plaything because they fancy it.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

So the right way to do it is to get into bed with a super-agent, bring in talent far beyond your current station, lose £1m a week while in the Championship & hope it pays off?

The hell is the difference between that & what City did, apart from the league they were in when it happened? If Wolves weren't tied so closely to Mendes & didn't invest well over-the-top in their squad, they'd probably not have won the title last season. They've deprived another Championship club of promotion, just like City have deprived a midtable club of European football, no?

Or is the City/Chelsea situation different because it affects Spurs?

It's not the right way to do it, I didn't hold them up as a shining example of a club. Is it better than the way Chelsea and City built their way up? Yeah, it is, absolutely. I'd rather have a club like Wolves in the league with their connections and genuine investment, than clubs like City who have done nothing but pump completely ridiculous sums of money to the point where they cannot actually fail. There's certain aspects of the Wolves model which can be admired despite their failings, City have simply spent money to a level where success is 100% guaranteed.

What is great about that? Woo, they play good football. No shit, they have two starting elevens and the highest paid manager in the world. Their fullbacks cost more than most clubs starting XI and they've spent the GDP of a small country on central defenders.

That's the way it is, fine. But jesus does it leave a bad fecking taste in your mouth when you have City fans who have the genuine nerve to come in and talk about how the way they did it was the 'only way' and paint the traditional big clubs as the REAL bad guys. It's so fecking desperate. Oh man FFP is the real crime because it's stopping new man citys how UNFAIR.

It doesn't just affect us. It affects loads of clubs who could have made their way in to Europe and tried to do something as a club if it wasn't for the fact they entered the cheat code for success. I don't get how you're struggling to understand that a team who can spend without thought or care isn't fair on the rest of the competition, the big clubs have an advantage but they still have to operate within certain parameters. There are no limitations for City, if they want to spend more they just have to invest more sponsorships.

 

[andyox]

There's a difference between a take-over like at Leicester or what you guys are doing. "Money was the only solution" is such a simple thought. Juventus built their squad with loads of free transfers and see where they are now. Yes, maybe they could attract bigger names because of their standing and history but still, there are definitely other ways to get to consistent challenging for a top 4 place than pomping billions into a club.

Newcastle pushed at the door of the top 4 in the same era, we saw Southampton on the fringes but unable to get in to Europe because of two clubs who made their way up there through sugar daddy spending. We have no idea how different football would be had that spending not taken place, it's changed football irreversibly.

Spurs were a mid-table club, so why are we not of that type? Leicester failed FFP but their spending is incomparable to the sugar daddy clubs, and Wolves have spent and acted dubiously but again, it's not on the same level. It's not comparable to sinking billions in to a football club. I'm not the biggest fan of how they've made their way up there but it's a hell of a lot more justifiable than a bunch of nutters from the middle east deciding to turn a club in to a political tool/plaything because they fancy it.

Yes obviously the scale of Leicester's investment was incomparable to City's, and perhaps that's why there were unable to sustain it? I don't see any of the current Big 6 losing their two best players if they win the league, as Leicester have. Newcastle's Entertainers wouldn't have happened without John Hall's contribution either, again not on the same scale.

My conclusion is still the same. Southampton have a great academy and have had great managers, but they've all eventually been poached. Being run well is not enough for a low to mid-table team to make it to the top. You may have the odd great season but then your team will likely be dismantled, or more likely you'll never make it at all. That's a structural problem with football. City have made that structural problem worse, but we didn't create it.

And yes, both Liverpool and Spurs played a role in creating part of that structure

 

[Tommy]

Are you saying, for the sake of justice, that you want Liverpool to win the league this season then?

(I do get what you're saying, by the way. I just don't care. Good football is good football, and City play it, so that's enough for me as someone who just wants to watch).

 

[andyox]

Are you saying, for the sake of justice, that you want Liverpool to win the league this season then?

(I do get what you're saying, by the way. I just don't care. Good football is good football, and City play it, so that's enough for me as someone who just wants to watch).

Tommy let's get this thread back on track. I think you're favourites if you beat Saints and Chelsea -- we need buffer because I think it's impossible we'll win all of our remaining 6 games given how tough some of them are, and with the added complication of our fixture schedule.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Yes obviously the scale of Leicester's investment was incomparable to City's, and perhaps that's why there were unable to sustain it? I don't see any of the current Big 6 losing their two best players if they win the league, as Leicester have.

My conclusion is still the same. Southampton have a great academy and have had great managers, but they've all eventually been poached. Being run well is not enough for a low to mid-table team to make it to the top. You may have the odd great season but then your team will likely be dismantled, or more likely you'll never make it at all.

Again, we would have a league title if it wasn't for Chelsea. We are proof that being well run is enough, we came from the middle of the table and spent very sustainable amounts of money. The only reason we haven't experienced success in the form of trophies is because of a sugar daddy club.

Southampton are a different beast, but again in 14/15 if you remove Chelsea and City from the mix, they have a good opportunity to finish 5th and get European football. Maybe they push on from there, who knows? Other clubs like Newcastle would have had top 4, we really don't know what football would look like without City/Chelsea coming in with huge spending. We're at a time where a couple of the biggest clubs are faltering with Fergie/Wenger leaving and declining, and Liverpool have only just started to get their act together.

Other leagues have seen the rise of teams like Atletico, Dortmund, Napoli etc. Sure these teams may not have been mega successful but with sustainable amounts of spending and clever ownership they've been able to challenge the top clubs despite being at a disadvantage. If you added Chelsea & City in to the mix in these leagues, would it be the same case? City may not be responsible for all the ills of modern football, but as a club you've taken in to a whole new level and made a mockery of the idea of fair competition. Literal billions pumped in to the team to the point where you can field two world class starting XI's. It's absurdity.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Are you saying, for the sake of justice, that you want Liverpool to win the league this season then?

(I do get what you're saying, by the way. I just don't care. Good football is good football, and City play it, so that's enough for me as someone who just wants to watch).

I know too many Liverpool fans, it'll be a personal nightmare if you won the league. If it wasn't for that I'd be backing you all of the way.

Also, my dad is going to the Southampton game tonight, and every time he's been to watch them play they've won (Including in a 3-1 win against you where Ricky Lambert scored) so count your title challenge over.

 

[andyox]

I know too many Liverpool fans, it'll be a personal nightmare if you won the league. If it wasn't for that I'd be backing you all of the way.

Also, my dad is going to the Southampton game tonight, and every time he's been to watch them play they've won (Including in a 3-1 win against you where Ricky Lambert scored) so count your title challenge over.

You just properly jinxed it with the edit about your dad ffs

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

You just properly jinxed it with the edit about your dad ffs

Sorry

 

[Stocar]

The amount of money that goes around in professional football is outrageous from top to bottom. What teams like Chelsea and City did only exposes the inner truth of the brutal capitalist machinery in football, and I have a certain sympathy for it in that sense.

All the talk about supposed "elite" and clubs that climbed to the top in "proper way" is ridiculous. You're either against the obscene amounts of money in football in general, or not. Anything in between is a hypocrisy. If anything, it's nice to see how Chelsea and City have upset the "elite". And on top of that, City play some fabulous football. I don't mind them at all.

 

[BobbyManc]

Newcastle pushed at the door of the top 4 in the same era, we saw Southampton on the fringes but unable to get in to Europe because of two clubs who made their way up there through sugar daddy spending. We have no idea how different football would be had that spending not taken place, it's changed football irreversibly.

Spurs were a mid-table club, so why are we not of that type? Leicester failed FFP but their spending is incomparable to the sugar daddy clubs, and Wolves have spent and acted dubiously but again, it's not on the same level. It's not comparable to sinking billions in to a football club. I'm not the biggest fan of how they've made their way up there but it's a hell of a lot more justifiable than a bunch of nutters from the middle east deciding to turn a club in to a political tool/plaything because they fancy it.

Southampton's best players were signed by Liverpool and United. Liverpool alone have spent £173m in the PL era purely on taking away Southampton's best talent. You've just used a perfect example of why you need money to compete at the top. You can grow organically all you want, but the bigger and richer clubs will take away your best talent. Rooney at Everton when they were making strides under Moyes is another example, imagine if he had stayed. The richest clubs have always won the most. It's funny how so many people who attack sugar daddy sides are silent on clubs like Real Madrid and the advantages that they've enjoyed, however because they've been established for so long at the top it's never discussed.

Also, it's interesting that you think what Wolves have done is more justifiable than City, and that having unrivalled access to the influence and power of a super-agent is somehow less morally questionable than purely bankrolling a team. I'm guessing your opinion would soon change if Wolves were to finish fourth next season and deprive Spurs of a CL place after signing some more Portuguese stars that would normally never consider joining them. And maybe we should ask fans of Championship sides last season if Wolves having access to the calibre of players that they did felt fairer than if they were simply having cash pumped into them and signing players that way.

 

[Trizy]

One thing I'm wondering.

City fans, if offered the choice between 2nd in the league/guaranteed CL win or just seeing how both of them turn out naturally, which would you pick?

They would grab the UCL win with both hands and brag about it for years to come. But since it's no guarantee at the moment, they'll pretend they're still anti-UCL because the UCL is ''anti-City'' .

 

[BobbyManc]

They would grab the UCL win with both hands and brag about it for years to come. But since it's no guarantee at the moment, they'll pretend they're still anti-UCL because the UCL is ''anti-City'' .

I'd choose a PL title over a CL every season. You invest thirty-eight games into it. There are so many highs and lows, you want that to count for something. The CL is a nice sideshow but the group games are often boring and then it comes down to knock-out games. The emotional investment is nowhere near the same, and that's why if City were to finish second I'd be devastated, but if we were to get knocked out of the CL by Spurs or Juve or lose the final I'd be annoyed but I wouldn't lose much sleep over it.

 

[RobinLFC]

I'd choose a PL title over a CL every season. You invest thirty-eight games into it. There are so many highs and lows, you want that to count for something. The CL is a nice sideshow but the group games are often boring and then it comes down to knock-out games. The emotional investment is nowhere near the same, and that's why if City were to finish second I'd be devastated, but if we were to get knocked out of the CL by Spurs or Juve or lose the final I'd be annoyed but I wouldn't lose much sleep over it.

A lot of truth to that. After last year's loss in the final, the hurt made place for appreciation after two days or so, that we've gotten that far and had such a nice run. I'm not in the "only trophies count" club like most United fans are (or act like they are), since football is a source of entertainment first and foremost. There is something really special to CL QFs and SFs though, nothing like it and I can look forward to it days if not weeks in advance. The second place in 2014 hurt until the start of the next season or so, luckily there was a World Cup to distract myself with.

I won't be that disappointed again if it happens again this time because I've quite come to terms with the fact that we're probably not winning it, and never expected it either this season. But in 13/14 we were that fecking close and the way in which we lost is what very painful.

 

[Thunderhead]

They would grab the UCL win with both hands and brag about it for years to come. But since it's no guarantee at the moment, they'll pretend they're still anti-UCL because the UCL is ''anti-City'' .

I said earlier in the thread I want to win the PL before everything else and most City fans I know feel exactly the same, it's nothing to do with UEFA.

 

[SteveJ]

But in 13/14 we were that fecking close and the way in which we lost is what very painful.

It's true - my ribs are still aching.

 

[RobinLFC]

It's true - my ribs are still aching.

 

[charlenefan]

It's true - my ribs are still aching.

 

[BobbyManc]

A lot of truth to that. After last year's loss in the final, the hurt made place for appreciation after two days or so, that we've gotten that far and had such a nice run. I'm not in the "only trophies count" club like most United fans are (or act like they are), since football is a source of entertainment first and foremost. There is something really special to CL QFs and SFs though, nothing like it and I can look forward to it days if not weeks in advance. The second place in 2014 hurt until the start of the next season or so, luckily there was a World Cup to distract myself with.

I won't be that disappointed again if it happens again this time because I've quite come to terms with the fact that we're probably not winning it, and never expected it either this season. But in 13/14 we were that fecking close and the way in which we lost is what very painful.

That also, to me at least, explains somewhat why it matters less than the league. You actively look forward to the big games and get excited for it. The spectacle of it all is as much a factor as the competition itself. I didn't want City to draw Schalke, I'd have honestly preferred a side like Madrid. Whereas when I know City have to go to Anfield or Stamford Bridge or Old Trafford in the league I don't anticipate it with excitement.

 

[BobbyManc]

Having looked at the fixtures again, I'm now of the opinion that if Liverpool win tonight they'll probably win the league. City's next three games are away to Palace, where we struggle, and then Spurs at home and United away. I'd expect 5-7 points from those but that will allow Liverpool to go top. Burnley away is another place we don't always perform to our best. The last minute winner against Spurs has tipped the balance in their favour unfortunately. I'm not so much pessimistic about City as I'm confident we'll finish strongly but Liverpool have a substantially kinder fixture list remaining.

 

[Josh 76]

Having looked at the fixtures again, I'm now of the opinion that if Liverpool win tonight they'll probably win the league. City's next three games are away to Palace, where we struggle, and then Spurs at home and United away. I'd expect 5-7 points from those but that will allow Liverpool to go top. Burnley away is another place we don't always perform to our best. The last minute winner against Spurs has tipped the balance in their favour unfortunately. I'm not so much pessimistic about City as I'm confident we'll finish strongly but Liverpool have a substantially kinder fixture list remaining.

As pep said, take it game by game. How can you possibly predict what's going to happen in 3 weeks ?
I'm sure Liverpool were saying at the beginning of January '3 points at home to Leicester and 3 points away to West ham'. Never that simple.

 

[BobbyManc]

As pep said, take it game by game. How can you possibly predict what's going to happen in 3 weeks ?
I'm sure Liverpool were saying at the beginning of January '3 points at home to Leicester and 3 points away to West ham'. Never that simple.

It defeats the object of a prediction if I'm not allowed to predict events in the near future. We may as well stop all debate on football if we can't discuss what we reckon is likely to happen as the season progresses.

 

[Josh 76]

It defeats the object of a prediction if I'm not allowed to predict events in the near future. We may as well stop all debate on football if we can't discuss what we reckon is likely to happen as the season progresses.

What I'm saying is it's hard to predict games so far ahead, due to injuries, form, and if teams have anything to play for at that stage. All these factors make it harder to predict than normal.
For example if City have won the league by the last game of the season, they may field a weaker team against Brighton to rest players for the Cup final.

 

[bosnian_red]

It defeats the object of a prediction if I'm not allowed to predict events in the near future. We may as well stop all debate on football if we can't discuss what we reckon is likely to happen as the season progresses.

Yeah. Agree with you. Liverpools fixtures are easy as piss from here on in, but this is the only one I can see a possible slip up. One would think maybe Chelsea but Sarri's style will lend itself to get destroyed IMO. Wolves on the last day.... if it wasnt the last game of the season, maybe. But the way it's set up, think City need to win every game which will be really difficult.

 

[Irwin99]

I kind of thought/hoped Southampton would spring a surprise tonight and by the sounds of things they played pretty well but realistically now, where are Liverpool going to drop points in their next 5 games? I expect Newcastle to roll over for them, Huddersfield and Wolves will have very little to play for and I don't fancy Chelsea to take points off them unless Hazard is in god mode.

For City, United obviously and Palace could be tricky.

 

[Briman63]

I kind of thought/hoped Southampton would spring a surprise tonight and by the sounds of things they played pretty well but realistically now, where are Liverpool going to drop points in their next 5 games? I expect Newcastle to roll over for them, Huddersfield and Wolves will have very little to play for and I don't fancy Chelsea to take points off them unless Hazard is in god mode.

For City, United obviously and Palace could be tricky.

And possibly Spurs.

 

[AJ10]

its their title as everything is going for them, so don't see any other result. Their luck this season has been shocking, we've been lucky in our title winning seasons but not as crazy as this.

 

[King7Eric]

Really looks like the destiny of the PL is gonna be decided at Old Trafford on 24 April. Its all well and good to say that we have to focus on ourselves and our quest for CL qualification and I know the players won't be thinking this way, but it's gonna sting real bad if it's us that's handing Liverpool the title by taking points of City.

 

[Irwin99]

And possibly Spurs.

Maybe. Having the champions league fixtures so close will be weird for both sets of players.

 

[Irwin99]

its their title as everything is going for them, so don't see any other result. Their luck this season has been shocking, we've been lucky in our title winning seasons but not as crazy as this.

We threw away a title with 6 games to go and an eight point lead. Anything is possible and both teams have champions league commitments. There could be an unexpected result, like our game vs Wigan in 11/12.

 

[United22]

If we hand over the title to Liverpool by beating City and then don't make Top 4, I'm fecking done with football forever

 

[Josh 76]

If the Liverpool celebrations tonight were annoying, imagine what it will be like when they win it.
Feck Champions league football. We have missed it before. It didn't kill us.
City have to win at OT. These Scousers are not dropping feck all points.
Come on Pep.....please please please get this title won!

 

[Josh 76]

We threw away a title with 6 games to go and an eight point lead. Anything is possible and both teams have champions league commitments. There could be an unexpected result, like our game vs Wigan in 11/12.

Don't remind us of that!

 

[AJ10]

We threw away a title with 6 games to go and an eight point lead. Anything is possible and both teams have champions league commitments. There could be an unexpected result, like our game vs Wigan in 11/12.

I hope so but i just don't see it since they should of had our game vs wigan so many times this year but they either get a offside goal or keeper error to win. It just seems like their year sadly, the amount of luck they've had this season is beyond joke now.

 

[Josh 76]

It does look that Liverpool think they have one hand on the title after their celebrations tonight.
This maybe their downfall

 

[PoTMS]

Really looks like the destiny of the PL is gonna be decided at Old Trafford on 24 April. Its all well and good to say that we have to focus on ourselves and our quest for CL qualification and I know the players won't be thinking this way, but it's gonna sting real bad if it's us that's handing Liverpool the title by taking points of City.

Can't beat Wolves but you know the feckers will hand Liverpool the title. It's a pretty easy decision for me on whether we should lay down for City now top 4 is back to being a pipe dream.

 

[padr81]

@SquishyMcSquish

The issue with posts like this my friend are where do you think Aguero, David Silva, Hazard would be plying their trade were City still a yo-yo club and Chelsea still midtable? Its completely unfathomable to think it would have played out the same way with Spurs winning that title. Chances are United would never have had their drop.

Hell United could have Pep at the helm and be lining up
DDG
Walker
Laporte
Azpilicueta
Mendy
Matic
Pogba
David Silva
Hazard
Sterling
Aguero

They might be unstoppable and the Bayern of the premier league. It's too easy to say if their was no Chelsea, Spurs would win in 16/17 or Liverpool would have won 13/14. Its impossible to call.
"Oh, if it wasn't for City, PSG and Chelsea, our way, the right way would have paid off" just doesn't add up. Chances are if it wasn't for City, PSG and Chelsea, United, Bayern, Real, Barca and Juve would be even more dominant because that is where the great players at these clubs would be plying their trade. Hell if their was no City or Chelsea weird and all as it sounds Leicester might not have their title because of the strength United would have. There is zero way of knowing.

The current Spurs situation and I mean this with no offence reminds me hugely of Villarreal. Villarreal made huge progress a few years ago and pretty much did everything modern Spurs have done in La Liga but in the end it amounted to nothing. That's what they got for doing it the right way. Couple of years knocking on doors but inevitably they got nothing. I actually remember Messi saying City needed to improve like Villarreal have improved, slowly and over time so it could be sustainable. Villarreal disappeared, City did not.

Until a club comes up and actually wins consistently the right way, there is zero proof of it being viable. There is clear proof the City, PSG and Chelsea model is successful regardless of how one thinks of it morally.