- Mar 12, 2021
- Real Madrid
Well the problem is that there isn't a single argument being made on the thread. Many are being made, and there are certainly people arguing that City have great signings and an unbelievable squad, because they're the only ones who can afford to, and that's why Guardiola is winning.You look at the amount he spend and the improvement he got for his squad, and we see that this is good as he has probably the best squad in the PL, but not impressive as a lot of his signings did not really qualify as a success. It doesn't really matter how expensive single players are for this argument, when he can find world class for less than the most expensive fees that's nice, but when he tries to get better CBs, spends a lot, but not the most extreme money on half a dozen failures (failures as in: did not really improve the squad) it is fair to criticize him for that.
I think your argument is better, I just don't believe it's true. I am looking at this list of City's signings since Guardiola was appointed manager. It looks pretty good. There are three high-profile failed signings: Mendy, Danilo, and Bravo. Mendy was the only truly expensive one. Danilo had an average price, the transfer was resolved easily (used to acquire a better player), and Bravo was 'cheap' (perhaps not for his age). Most of the players on the list still remain at the club, including Mendy. The list does not look obviously worse than the transfer dealings at other clubs.
Only four players from City's 2015-2016 squad remain in the club. Guardiola revamped the whole squad over 5 years. The renewal was not arbitrary: the majority of players who've left have not had equivalent performances elsewhere, many of them are already retired from football. During this process, City accelerated its rate of title wins, with 3 PL titles and 5 cups in 5 years, as opposed to 2 PL titles and 3 cups in the previous 6.
These things, as well as the historical record, are enough evidence for me that City are performing excellently, and all explanations for that reflect well on Guardiola. However, that's with a very simple model.
Is it possible he isn't? Sure. A more sophisticated model could show that. It's just not easy at all to make that model. It's not always simple to find that the best performing team is actually underperforming, nor is it simple to find out that a complex combination of 'things that look good but are worse' and 'things that look bad but are better' are combining to mislead us into reaching wrong conclusions about a club's performance. It's not simple, but it can be done. It's just not done on this thread. Instead, I just see a bunch of gut feelings that "it should look better."