Rank the Treble winners

[FattyFooty]

I just cant look past that barcelona as i remeber during there peak, it was just so much going on with the refs. Refs with Barca kits, all the times Barca played against 10 men. (Didnt even Inter beat them with 10 men?) The Chelsea incident, the RVP red... And it just go on and on...

and City its just so much there aswell. Therefore i go:

1. United
2. Bayern
3. Inter

City and Barca is off my list for now.

 

[YikesSchmeics]

Inter had a much more competitive league than most on that list.

Did they though?

It was post Calciopoli where Juve had been relegated and everyone was in disarray, and such their 5th Scudetto in a row.

 

[adexkola]

Did they though?

It was post Calciopoli where Juve had been relegated and everyone was in disarray, and such their 5th Scudetto in a row.

Yes it was. A league can be competitive even with serial winners. Wasn't the PL competitive in 2009 or 2001?

 

[YikesSchmeics]

Yes it was. A league can be competitive even with serial winners. Wasn't the PL competitive in 2009 or 2001?

I didn't say it wasn't competitive. What I said was I disagree with the statement that Serie A was in any way a more competitive league during that period, compared to the other treble winning teams.

Inter won a 1 horse race by default 2 years in a row due to Calciopoli and then won 3 more leagues by 22 points, 10 points and then finally in their treble season by 2 points, to the mighty Roma. They came in to the season having won 4 a row.

By contrast United in 99 came in having been beaten the previous year by a great Arsenal team who won the double. Barca in 2009 were on their knees at the start of the season having finished 3rd, 18 points behind Madrid the previous season. And in 2015 had lost the league to Atletico on the last day so were competing with them and the CL winning Madrid team. I don't see how a statement declaring that Serie A was somehow more competitive in that time holds up to any scrutiny at all.

 

[adexkola]

I didn't say it wasn't competitive. What I said was I disagree with the statement that Serie A was in any way a more competitive league during that period, compared to the other treble winning teams.

Inter won a 1 horse race by default 2 years in a row due to Calciopoli and then won 3 more leagues by 22 points, 10 points and then finally in their treble season by 2 points, to the mighty Roma. They came in to the season having won 4 a row.

By contrast United in 99 came in having been beaten the previous year by a great Arsenal team who won the double. Barca in 2009 were on their knees at the start of the season having finished 3rd, 18 points behind Madrid the previous season. And in 2015 had lost the league to Atletico on the last day so were competing with them and the CL winning Madrid team. I don't see how a statement declaring that Serie A was somehow more competitive in that time holds up to any scrutiny at all.

But why are you evaluating the competitiveness of a league in 1 season by what happened before? The PL in 98-99 was competitive regardless of the year before. La Liga in 2008-09 wasn't competitive regardless of the year before. And so on.

I wouldn't say Serie A in 2009-10 was the most competitive. But it's definitely up there based on the merits of the seasons in question.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

* Blasphemy to say in this forum but United 99 was the worst in the sense that the football had evolved so much (keeping the ball forever, pressing) that they would have had an extremely tough time against ball possession teams (all except Inter 2010), and in a league between these teams where every team plays the others twice, I think United would have ranked last. But then, I think that United 2008 was quite better than United 99.

It's not blasphemy for me but lacking a bit of nuance. If you plucked that team straight from 99 and put them in a match against City they would lose more times than not.

I think what that misses though is that the greatest thing about the 99 team was adaptability. Very much in the image of Sir Alex.

The players were absolutely there to play a highly aggressive counter pressing game. It just wasn't what was needed.

If you look at a midfield of Beckham, Giggs, Scholes and Giggs it is arguable that it's one of the most technically proficient midfields ever assembled. Add in Butt if you need who is a very underrated player and if not then I would fancy Cole and Yorke to get change out of City's defence.

I think bring if that squad is put together at the same time as City's they could definitely adapt and be extremely competitive. If you don't add that context then it's just the older the worse because football does evolve. Our team from last season would probably batter the Brazil team from the 70s but not if that Brazil team had modern coaching and fitness ect.

 

[adexkola]

It's not blasphemy for me but lacking a bit of nuance. If you plucked that team straight from 99 and put them in a match against City they would lose more times than not.

I think what that misses though is that the greatest thing about the 99 team was adaptability. Very much in the image of Sir Alex.

The players were absolutely there to play a highly aggressive counter pressing game. It just wasn't what was needed.

If you look at a midfield of Beckham, Giggs, Scholars and Giggs it is arguable that it's one of the most technically proficient midfields ever assembled. Add in Butt if you need who is a very underrated player and if not then I would fancy Cole and Yorke to get change out of City's defence.

I think bring if that squad is put together at the same time as City's they could definitely adapt and be extremely competitive. If you don't add that context then it's just the older the worse because football does evolve.

Agreed. Their fundamentals were top notched. There's no reason why with the proper training they wouldn't thrive as a world class midfield today

 

[OverratedOpinion]

Agreed. Their fundamentals were top notched. There's no reason why with the proper training they wouldn't thrive as a world class midfield today

It's fun to think about too. I think if Beckham was coming through now he would be coached purely to play centrally and I think at his peak be would be a more athletic version of De Bruyne. I'm sure that'll ruffle some feathers. I know he played centrally at times but he'd been so used to playing as a winger.

 

[Revan]

It's not blasphemy for me but lacking a bit of nuance. If you plucked that team straight from 99 and put them in a match against City they would lose more times than not.

I think what that misses though is that the greatest thing about the 99 team was adaptability. Very much in the image of Sir Alex.

The players were absolutely there to play a highly aggressive counter pressing game. It just wasn't what was needed.

If you look at a midfield of Beckham, Giggs, Scholes and Giggs it is arguable that it's one of the most technically proficient midfields ever assembled. Add in Butt if you need who is a very underrated player and if not then I would fancy Cole and Yorke to get change out of City's defence.

I think bring if that squad is put together at the same time as City's they could definitely adapt and be extremely competitive. If you don't add that context then it's just the older the worse because football does evolve. Our team from last season would probably batter the Brazil team from the 70s but not if that Brazil team had modern coaching and fitness ect.

I do not disagree with any of this to be fair. They were all top notch players, and in case of Giggs and Scholes we saw how even ancient versions of them did ok at the beginning of this current football revolution.

At the same time, I also think that they lose more matches than win against every other team in the list, and in some matches might look a bit foolish. Simply cause players nowadays are fitter, stronger and the tactics/nutrition/match analysis is far better. The 99 team despite winning the UCL, I always felt that it was tactically naive, even for standards of back then.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

I do not disagree with any of this to be fair. They were all top notch players, and in case of Giggs and Scholes we saw how even ancient versions of them did ok at the beginning of this current football revolution.

At the same time, I also think that they lose more matches than win against every other team in the list, and in some matches might look a bit foolish. Simply cause players nowadays are fitter, stronger and the tactics/nutrition/match analysis is far better. The 99 team despite winning the UCL, I always felt that it was tactically naive, even for standards of back then.

Yeah I think you'd have to view this through the lens of had Sir Alex been exposed to modern tactics enough to make required adjustments. I think we saw later on in his career that he could do despite people always saying he wasn't a great tactician.

I know you get into a lot of hypotheticals when you start to consider things like that but I think it's more fun to do that sort of guess work like "what sort of player would Beckham be if he came through in 2010?"

Otherwise it really does turn into older = worse.

No debate that if you used a time machine and sent Barca of 2015 back and switched them for 99 Bayern what would happen.

 

[PSV]

Bayern's 2019-20 is less impressive if you consider the fact trebles were extremely easy to get that year, almost every confederation had one.

 

[adexkola]

Bayern's 2019-20 is less impressive if you consider the fact trebles were extremely easy to get that year, almost every confederation had one.

 

[Revan]

Yeah I think you'd have to view this through the lens of had Sir Alex been exposed to modern tactics enough to make required adjustments. I think we saw later on in his career that he could do despite people always saying he wasn't a great tactician.

I know you get into a lot of hypotheticals when you start to consider things like that but I think it's more fun to do that sort of guess work like "what sort of player would Beckham be if he came through in 2010?"

Otherwise it really does turn into older = worse.

No debate that if you used a time machine and sent Barca of 2015 back and switched them for 99 Bayern what would happen.

Even taking context into account, there is not a single advantage you can give to United compare to City 2023.

Premier League: City got 89 points, 10 more than us. They won the league a few weeks in advance, and actually could afford to just get 1 point in the final two matches and still win the league by 5 points. United on the other hand won the league by a single point and had a must-win final match. Bear in mind, EPL is the best league in the world now, it was probably third or fourth best back then.

FA Cup: City had never to come from behind, in fact, the only goal they conceded was the penalty from Bruno in the final. United was arguably outplayed from Arsenal and kinda needed a miracle goal to go to the final. More exciting yes, but not as good as City who scored 19 and conceded 1. We scored 12 and conceded 3, in comparison.

UCL: City did not lose a single match in the entire competition. Scored 32, conceded 5. Dismantled the other two main favorites Bayern and Real, defeating them 3-0 and 4-0 at home while drawing away.
We had only two wins in the group stage (albeit faced Bayern and Barca), did well against Inter, but needed a goal in the final minute against Juve at home to draw, and then needed to come back from 2-0 when away. Then Bayern totally outplayed us in the final, and we fluked it as much as Chelsea did 13 years later. 29-16 goal difference. City won 8 and draw 5, no losses. United won 5 and draw 6, no losses.

I know that we did it in style and it is far more exciting. But if you are so much better than the others, you do not need to come from behind an absurd number of times. You just lead and dismantle the others, which is what City did. Add to that, the level of competition was higher in 2023.

I think that City 23, Barca 15 and Bayern 13 are the best and probably the order can be argued to death. But it has to be one of those three. I would put Barca 09 behind them. United and Inter at the bottom. Bayern 20 no idea, they were good but it was such a weird season.

 

[united_99]

Yeah I think you'd have to view this through the lens of had Sir Alex been exposed to modern tactics enough to make required adjustments. I think we saw later on in his career that he could do despite people always saying he wasn't a great tactician.

I know you get into a lot of hypotheticals when you start to consider things like that but I think it's more fun to do that sort of guess work like "what sort of player would Beckham be if he came through in 2010?"

Otherwise it really does turn into older = worse.

No debate that if you used a time machine and sent Barca of 2015 back and switched them for 99 Bayern what would happen.

A great tactician is also very subjective. Back then I would say that Lippi, Ancelotti and a few others were better tacticians than Fergie. I would actually still say this. But I also wonder if this perception may exist because those could turn it on for big CL matches by reacting more to the opposition (Benitez is another one), whereas SAF mostly had a constantly high level in the league and when that level of his teams was at its peak he also won in Europe.
He also mostly “only” changed things tactically and squad wise (like making drastic long term changes) when his teams started getting predictable or behind domestically like not winning the league for 1 or 2 seasons. Best examples are 95 and 2004-06. Otherwise if it’s not broken why fix it.
Regarding your other point absolutely, the basics were there to play a modern game. Becks would be a brilliant modern midfielder and Keane would have been as good as he was back then. And in 99 we were already rotating Scholes and Butt in-game. Of course 2 man midfield would mostly not work nowadays so we would need more midfielders with the right balance and we would not need 4 strikers any longer, etc.

 

[united_99]

Even taking context into account, there is not a single advantage you can give to United compare to City 2023.

Premier League: City got 89 points, 10 more than us. They won the league a few weeks in advance, and actually could afford to just get 1 point in the final two matches and still win the league by 5 points. United on the other hand won the league by a single point and had a must-win final match. Bear in mind, EPL is the best league in the world now, it was probably third or fourth best back then.

FA Cup: City had never to come from behind, in fact, the only goal they conceded was the penalty from Bruno in the final. United was arguably outplayed from Arsenal and kinda needed a miracle goal to go to the final. More exciting yes, but not as good as City who scored 19 and conceded 1. We scored 12 and conceded 3, in comparison.

UCL: City did not lose a single match in the entire competition. Scored 32, conceded 5. Dismantled the other two main favorites Bayern and Real, defeating them 3-0 and 4-0 at home while drawing away.
We had only two wins in the group stage (albeit faced Bayern and Barca), did well against Inter, but needed a goal in the final minute against Juve at home to draw, and then needed to come back from 2-0 when away. Then Bayern totally outplayed us in the final, and we fluked it as much as Chelsea did 13 years later. 29-16 goal difference. City won 8 and draw 5, no losses. United won 5 and draw 6, no losses.

I know that we did it in style and it is far more exciting. But if you are so much better than the others, you do not need to come from behind an absurd number of times. You just lead and dismantle the others, which is what City did. Add to that, the level of competition was higher in 2023.

I think that City 23, Barca 15 and Bayern 13 are the best and probably the order can be argued to death. But it has to be one of those three. I would put Barca 09 behind them. United and Inter at the bottom. Bayern 20 no idea, they were good but it was such a weird season.

I believe you have said a few times over the years how we fluked the 99 final like Chelsea. You should check the actual stats and/or also the xG stats to see that United was actually the dominant team. And that’s despite playing the final without our 1st choice midfield.
And yes of course 115 charges FC will dominate more, have more points and win more easily with 5-6 expensive/1st team level players on the bench. I mean a player like Mahrez left the bench to start an FA Cup game, then scored a Hattrick and then went to the bench again for the next league game (just randomly as if he was an academy player or cheap signing).

Points totals in the leagues back then across Europe were also generally lower than they were a decade later or nowadays.
United also had 4 academy players starting the CL final vs City’s 0.
The level of competition was higher back then. Seriously I actually disagree with more or less each of your point.
For me it’s the exact opposite: There is not a single advantage you can give City 23 compared to United 99.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

Even taking context into account, there is not a single advantage you can give to United compare to City 2023.

Premier League: City got 89 points, 10 more than us. They won the league a few weeks in advance, and actually could afford to just get 1 point in the final two matches and still win the league by 5 points. United on the other hand won the league by a single point and had a must-win final match. Bear in mind, EPL is the best league in the world now, it was probably third or fourth best back then.

FA Cup: City had never to come from behind, in fact, the only goal they conceded was the penalty from Bruno in the final. United was arguably outplayed from Arsenal and kinda needed a miracle goal to go to the final. More exciting yes, but not as good as City who scored 19 and conceded 1. We scored 12 and conceded 3, in comparison.

UCL: City did not lose a single match in the entire competition. Scored 32, conceded 5. Dismantled the other two main favorites Bayern and Real, defeating them 3-0 and 4-0 at home while drawing away.
We had only two wins in the group stage (albeit faced Bayern and Barca), did well against Inter, but needed a goal in the final minute against Juve at home to draw, and then needed to come back from 2-0 when away. Then Bayern totally outplayed us in the final, and we fluked it as much as Chelsea did 13 years later. 29-16 goal difference. City won 8 and draw 5, no losses. United won 5 and draw 6, no losses.

I know that we did it in style and it is far more exciting. But if you are so much better than the others, you do not need to come from behind an absurd number of times. You just lead and dismantle the others, which is what City did. Add to that, the level of competition was higher in 2023.

I think that City 23, Barca 15 and Bayern 13 are the best and probably the order can be argued to death. But it has to be one of those three. I would put Barca 09 behind them. United and Inter at the bottom. Bayern 20 no idea, they were good but it was such a weird season.

Hmm you'll have to forgive me for not addressing every match you reference but I think you have a pretty harsh view on the 99 team and also are picking and choosing a little in regard to City.

For instance you point to the Champions League final but then not the FA Cup final where the 99 team was totally dominant and City were pretty flat and it could have easily gone either way if not for a keeper mistake.

Speaking of the Champions League final, when was the last time you watched it? There is absolutely no way we got played off the park as you claim. It was a close game just as City's was.

In fact we actually had a higher xg than Bayern whilst City had a lower xg than Inter and were quite reliant on Ederson.

The difference in the points is because that is what is needed now. As such the top teams build to do that by having massive interchangable squads. Chelsea were the first team to really push that and it's gone further and further since. If Uniteds 99 team were around today they would obviously have a bigger squad and allow them to not drop off in the league.

 

[Tyrion]

Did they though?

It was post Calciopoli where Juve had been relegated and everyone was in disarray, and such their 5th Scudetto in a row.

You're right actually. I didn't know they'd won it 5 years in a row. I thought it was pretty even after Juve fell but must have got it confused with the last few years.

 

[colombianmancunian]

For me


1. Bayern Munich 12-13

The most attacking and vertical team I remember. Pure attack, zero sideways passes. Just beautiful

2. Barcelona 14-15

The most vertical Barcelona I have seen. That trio of Messi, Neymar and Suarez is one of the best attacks in history.

3. Manchester United 98-99

Pure grit, determination and soul. Best CL final ever.

4. Bayern Munich 19-20

Well drilled and efficient. Just not as talented as teams above.

5. Inter Milan 09-10

Catenaccio at its fullest. That team could neutralize anyone by merit of its defensive tactics.

6. Manchester City 22-23

Pep finally starting to realize verticality is key for winning and stopping his obsession for possession just for the sake of it. An evolution of one of the best managers ever.

7. Barcelona 08-09

They played well, no doubt about it. But they were a bunch of cheaters, they robbed Chelsea and should have never played that final.

 

[tentan]

For me


1. Bayern Munich 12-13

The most attacking and vertical team I remember. Pure attack, zero sideways passes. Just beautiful

2. Barcelona 14-15

The most vertical Barcelona I have seen. That trio of Messi, Neymar and Suarez is one of the best attacks in history.

3. Manchester United 98-99

Pure grit, determination and soul. Best CL final ever.

4. Bayern Munich 19-20

Well drilled and efficient. Just not as talented as teams above.

5. Inter Milan 09-10

Catenaccio at its fullest. That team could neutralize anyone by merit of its defensive tactics.

6. Manchester City 22-23

Pep finally starting to realize verticality is key for winning and stopping his obsession for possession just for the sake of it. An evolution of one of the best managers ever.

7. Barcelona 08-09

They played well, no doubt about it. But they were a bunch of cheaters, they robbed Chelsea and should have never played that final.

 

[UnofficialDevil]

Wonder what the Barca sides would have achieved without the help of referees.

This. Ueafalona Fc.

 

[tenpoless]

UefaCity with the help of monay should be blacklisted

 

[tentan]

For me


1. Bayern Munich 12-13

The most attacking and vertical team I remember. Pure attack, zero sideways passes. Just beautiful

2. Barcelona 14-15

The most vertical Barcelona I have seen. That trio of Messi, Neymar and Suarez is one of the best attacks in history.

3. Manchester United 98-99

Pure grit, determination and soul. Best CL final ever.

4. Bayern Munich 19-20

Well drilled and efficient. Just not as talented as teams above.

5. Inter Milan 09-10

Catenaccio at its fullest. That team could neutralize anyone by merit of its defensive tactics.

6. Manchester City 22-23

Pep finally starting to realize verticality is key for winning and stopping his obsession for possession just for the sake of it. An evolution of one of the best managers ever.

7. Barcelona 08-09

They played well, no doubt about it. But they were a bunch of cheaters, they robbed Chelsea and should have never played that final.

 

[Tyrion]

For all the complaints about Barca, aren't they only accused of paying a Spanish ref? I haven't heard anyone allege anything going on with UEFA or even as far back as 09.

My opinion is they were the best club side of my lifetime. They were the Spanish team that dominated international football for 6 years with Messi added and had the best coach of his generation (maybe).

 

[colombianmancunian]

For all the complaints about Barca, aren't they only accused of paying a Spanish ref? I haven't heard anyone allege anything going on with UEFA or even as far back as 09.

My opinion is they were the best club side of my lifetime. They were the Spanish team that dominated international football for 6 years with Messi added and had the best coach of his generation (maybe).

They robbed Chelsea, and had no rights playing that final. There’s a reason why they are called UEFAlona.

 

[ElCholo]

Barca, City and Inter.

 

[PepG]

For me


1. Bayern Munich 12-13

The most attacking and vertical team I remember. Pure attack, zero sideways passes. Just beautiful

2. Barcelona 14-15

The most vertical Barcelona I have seen. That trio of Messi, Neymar and Suarez is one of the best attacks in history.

3. Manchester United 98-99

Pure grit, determination and soul. Best CL final ever.

4. Bayern Munich 19-20

Well drilled and efficient. Just not as talented as teams above.

5. Inter Milan 09-10

Catenaccio at its fullest. That team could neutralize anyone by merit of its defensive tactics.

6. Manchester City 22-23

Pep finally starting to realize verticality is key for winning and stopping his obsession for possession just for the sake of it. An evolution of one of the best managers ever.

7. Barcelona 08-09

They played well, no doubt about it. But they were a bunch of cheaters, they robbed Chelsea and should have never played that final.

Interesting point about verticality, totally wrong about the possession for the sake of it and the Guardiola sides.. You can find the exact quotes on the net but Pep hates it and for him personally that is the meaning of tiki-taka. His teams NEVER played tiki-taka.
What Guardiola did differently this time to all of his previous CL campaigns is that he put the focal point of his team to be not all out attacking but more balanced. Actually this City side is the most defensive one in his career playing with a classic CF that is targeted with crosses..

 

[rcoobc]

Interesting point about verticality, totally wrong about the possession for the sake of it and the Guardiola sides.. You can find the exact quotes on the net but Pep hates it and for him personally that is the meaning of tiki-taka. His teams NEVER played tiki-taka.
What Guardiola did differently this time to all of his previous CL campaigns is that he put the focal point of his team to be not all out attacking but more balanced. Actually this City side is the most defensive one in his career playing with a classic CF that is targeted with crosses..

If we're claiming that Peps Barcelona didn't play tiki-taka then that terms lost all meaning and needs to be retired.

 

[Oranges038]

Interesting point about verticality, totally wrong about the possession for the sake of it and the Guardiola sides.. You can find the exact quotes on the net but Pep hates it and for him personally that is the meaning of tiki-taka. His teams NEVER played tiki-taka.
What Guardiola did differently this time to all of his previous CL campaigns is that he put the focal point of his team to be not all out attacking but more balanced. Actually this City side is the most defensive one in his career playing with a classic CF that is targeted with crosses..

He has said that he hates pointless possession, his Barca and Bayern team would just endlessly work the ball around and from side to side to create overloads and openings on the opposite side. There was always a point to it, but there were long periods where it would look and feel totally pointless and boring.

This City team has seen him evolve into a manager with such a fear of losing that he has them playing the most boring and ugly football we've ever seen from one of his teams. It's worked and he's won the CL but he's slowly morphing into Mourinho.

 

[PepG]

If we're claiming that Peps Barcelona didn't play tiki-taka then that terms lost all meaning and needs to be retired.

Nope, because that therm was invented not for the play of Barcelona but for the way the national team of Spain played during Luis Aragones and Vicente Del Bosque spells..

 

[rcoobc]

Nope, because that therm was invented not for the play of Barcelona but for the way the national team of Spain played during Luis Aragones and Vicente Del Bosque spells..

Sure, but, sorry, there needs to be a name for the brand of football Barca played and that term is tiki-taka. Can it tiki-taka 2.0 or Barca tiki-taka, or whatever, but if I'm down the pub and want to criticise or praise a brand of football that looks like Barca 09, 10, 11 etc, then the term were using is tiki taka.

If I want to watch highlights of it on YouTube then again search for tiki taka.

Language evolves and Barca played tiki taka

 

[PepG]

Sure, but, sorry, there needs to be a name for the brand of football Barca played and that term is tiki-taka. Can it tiki-taka 2.0 or Barca tiki-taka, or whatever, but if I'm down the pub and want to criticise or praise a brand of football that looks like Barca 09, 10, 11 etc, then the term were using is tiki taka.

If I want to watch highlights of it on YouTube then again search for tiki taka.

Language evolves and Barca played tiki taka

But there is a therm for the way Guardiola's Barcelona played already..It is called positional play and that is the basic style of all Guardiola teams..

 

[ThinkTank@Cafe]

Manchester United 98/99. Call me biased. United treble was the most epic and dramatic.

First treble ever. Blockbuster drama in each of the tournaments. Premier League: the come back against Spurs. That was just a final day of an adrenaline title race against an arch-rival. FA Cup Semis vs Arsenal and that Giggs goal. CL Semis vs Juve. CL Final was a worthy culminating episode of the show.

Football was mostly shit.

 

[rcoobc]

But there is a therm for the way Guardiola's Barcelona played already..It is called positional play and that is the basic style of all Guardiola teams..

Man city are the ultimate positional play team. Positional play is if you move from one line to another your team mates will move as well... Not necessarily into the same position but into the same horizontal and vertical lines you vacated so you've always got options, you can always make triangles and diamonds. You can't have too many players in the same horizontal or vertical axis.

Barcelona... Yeah there was an element of that but that's not how that played in 07-11


Look at how close the Barca players get to each other. Look at how deep Messi will drop and how close he gets to Xavi and Iniesta.

In modern man city positional play that would be completely wrong. Messi shouldn't be 2.5 yards from Xavi.

It's different. Man City 2023 is very different from Barcelona 2009

 

[Solius]

If it’s legitimate trebles you should only be ranking 6.

 

[united_99]

Manchester United 98/99. Call me biased. United treble was the most epic and dramatic.

First treble ever. Blockbuster drama in each of the tournaments. Premier League: the come back against Spurs. That was just a final day of an adrenaline title race against an arch-rival. FA Cup Semis vs Arsenal and that Giggs goal. CL Semis vs Juve. CL Final was a worthy culminating episode of the show.

Football was mostly shit.

If you mean the football United played in 99 then no idea what you were watching. Especially in Europe we played some of our best and most entertaining football and scored the most goals.
Too open at times (that’s why we went behind so often), but way more fun, attacking and entertaining and less cautious than for example in 2008.

 

[ThinkTank@Cafe]

If you mean the football United played in 99 then no idea what you were watching. Especially in Europe we played some of our best and most entertaining football and scored the most goals.
Too open at times (that’s why we went behind so often), but way more fun, attacking and entertaining and less cautious than for example in 2008.

I meant the final. forgot to mention

 

[united_99]

I meant the final. forgot to mention

I see. I was thinking „WTF“.

 

[ItzdoctorZ]

1. Barcelona 14-15
2. Barcelona 08-09
3. Manchester United 98-99
4. Inter Milan 09-10
5. Bayern Munich 12-13
6. Bayern Munich 19-20
7. Manchester City 22-23

 

[Lost bear]

Left a few blank as I wasn't really sure.

1. Manchester United 98-99
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. Manchester City 22-23

 

[PepG]

Man city are the ultimate positional play team. Positional play is if you move from one line to another your team mates will move as well... Not necessarily into the same position but into the same horizontal and vertical lines you vacated so you've always got options, you can always make triangles and diamonds. You can't have too many players in the same horizontal or vertical axis.

Barcelona... Yeah there was an element of that but that's not how that played in 07-11


Look at how close the Barca players get to each other. Look at how deep Messi will drop and how close he gets to Xavi and Iniesta.

In modern man city positional play that would be completely wrong. Messi shouldn't be 2.5 yards from Xavi.

It's different. Man City 2023 is very different from Barcelona 2009

The reason why the execution of the positional play is different at Barcelona and City is very simple. They have different type of players with different qualities and the main goal of Guardiola as a coach is to maximize their strengths and hide their weaknesses. The basic principles remain the same though.