The choice is literally "win the league unbeaten", so why should we assume we get 38 draws?Makes no sense! You can go unbeaten in the league and finish on 38 points so to speak. Maximum points is of course way better, that’s the way you win the league
Well, that's better than Arsenal's so called invincibles, who lost to half of Europe.I'd prefer whatever gives the most points, as that is the measure of success in the league.
Also, you're not really invincible if you lose 3-0 to Roma.
Might be true. I do find that Arsenal supporters themselves remember the 1998 and 2002 sides more fondly though, which says something.Unbeaten. We would add a gold trophy to our collection.
No one remembers the Arsenal draws when you mention their season. It's just recognized as the ''invincible''. Unless you're nitpicking, of course.
And that's just BS by the way. Any club would take an emphatic title win any day of the week. Just imagine being able to rest key plays for the Cup finals at the end of the season. That would be only the only way to achieve the Quad, if any club was ever going to do it.I prefer winning the league in the last second of the last game, at goal difference. THat's a title win, not the one where you finish 20 points ahead of the 2nd spot.
I agree with you, on a team level. For a team having such a big advantage is great.How can you be invincible if you drew 12 times and got knocked out of all Cup competitions in that season??
Would it be that impressive if you won 8 games and drew 30? I would really love a mid-table team to achieve that just to highlight how dumb the Invincibles label really is.
And that's just BS by the way. Any club would take an emphatic title win any day of the week. Just imagine being able to rest key plays for the Cup finals at the end of the season. That would be only the only way to achieve the Quad, if any club was ever going to do it.
The only match I remember at all from Arsenal that season is a draw and Pires diving to get a penalty against Portsmouth.Unbeaten. We would add a gold trophy to our collection.
No one remembers the Arsenal draws when you mention their season. It's just recognized as the ''invincible''. Unless you're nitpicking, of course.
Yeah sure, but we could still get that buzz from the Cup finals. Remember that '99 season when everything was just falling for us. After that epic semi with Arsenal, it was just going to be our year. It surely has to be more exciting getting the league early then going for the Quad?I agree with you, on a team level. For a team having such a big advantage is great.
For me, as a fan, I want to see some feking action during the season, some upsets, some disappointments and then, in the last game, a title win.
Yeah it kind of is but hey, at this given moment in time, I wouldn't really give a fek to when we're winning it as long as we do it.Yeah sure, but we could still get that buzz from the Cup finals. Remember that '99 season when everything was just falling for us. After that epic semi with Arsenal, it was just going to be our year. It surely has to be more exciting getting the league early then going for the Quad?
An unbeaten season where you don’t win the league is obviously not going to count for much.From a rational point of view, 100+ points would be the obvious choice. Honestly, there is not even a debate since it is just a better result than less points with going unbeaten.
However, football's not always a rational thing. There are games which are more important due to rivalry. A considerable part of the sport is about prestige and romanticism. Invincible seasons make great stories and are much more prestigeous than 100+ point ones, you can see it in the poll. That's why I ultimately chose the unbeaten record but from a pragmatic point of view, it would be the wrong choice. I would prefer it because of the story to tell and everyone remembering it for ages but I wouldn't say it is a greater achievement. Just a more memorable one.
@Arbitrium What about a season in which your team doesn't win the league but remains unbeaten? I mean, if the current Barcelona played against one of these brillant league winning Madrid sides, this could've been the case.
Again, from a purely rational point of view, you'd have to choose the 111 points. I already said I'd choose the invincible season because all the stuff around it but it is clear from a pragmatic point of view.An unbeaten season where you don’t win the league is obviously not going to count for much.
For all the people saying maximum points, would you genuinely rather;
A) 37 wins 1 loss for 111 points
Over
B) 36 wins 2 draws for 110 points
Principles are the same.
Exactly, losing a game means nothing - it really says nothing about ultimate ability. A team can basically win 37 games and lose one on the last day by fielding their reserves, or getting a wrongful red card in the first minute, changing a game completely away to the second best team in the league. What Man City have done this year, as well as Chelsea under Mourinho, is way more impressive than what Arsenal did with their invincible team. Arsenal drew Portsmouth twice, Charlton, Fulham, Leicester, Bolton, Everton, Newcastle and Birmingham among others in the league that year, totaling 12 draws. That's 26 wins, City have 30 and counting, they will at the very least end up with 31 wins out of 38 games, which beats Arsenal easily. City will beat Arsenal by 10 points, that's all that matters.I'd definitely take having more points. Who cares about a bunch of draws? Chelsea 04-05 was more impressive than the Invincibles, for me.
Invincible/unbeatable trumps getting beat 3-2 off your biggest rival when you were 2nil up at half time and thinking you were about to win the league.Exactly, losing a game means nothing - it really says nothing about ultimate ability. A team can basically win 37 games and lose one on the last day by fielding their reserves, or getting a wrongful red card in the first minute, changing a game completely away to the second best team in the league. What Man City have done this year, as well as Chelsea under Mourinho, is way more impressive than what Arsenal did with their invincible team. Arsenal drew Portsmouth twice, Charlton, Fulham, Leicester, Bolton, Everton, Newcastle and Birmingham among others in the league that year, totaling 12 draws. That's 26 wins, City have 30 and counting, they will at the very least end up with 31 wins out of 38 games, which beats Arsenal easily. City will beat Arsenal by 10 points, that's all that matters.
Saying you prefer B is the same as saying you prefer 2 draws over 1 win and 1 loss which just goes completely against how the sport works.An unbeaten season where you don’t win the league is obviously not going to count for much.
For all the people saying maximum points, would you genuinely rather;
A) 37 wins 1 loss for 111 points
Over
B) 36 wins 2 draws for 110 points
Principles are the same.