Where would you rank this Man City side now?

BobbyManc

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
7,416
Location
The Wall
Supports
Man City
Meh, Eric would beat 'em on his own.
Did you come to this conclusion before or after seeing his versatility when it comes to cracking eggs?
 

Shamana

Full Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
2,328
Well domestically they are easily the best ever. But to be best ever english team they have to win the league and cl or treble. I think we can all agree that Pep is a luxury manager but the best luxury manager in the world. He will prob retire with more major trophies than fergie.
 

SteveJ

all-round nice guy, aka Uncle Joe Kardashian
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
62,778
Did you come to this conclusion before or after seeing his versatility when it comes to cracking eggs?
:lol: Ok, I'm biased.
 

nore1975

New Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
415
Supports
Liverpool
This City side is impressive in terms of personnel no doubt. Defensively I think they are suspect. Shearer is premature in defining them as the greatest EPL side ever. They do have world class players DeBruyne, Aguero, Sterling, Silva D, and Silva B, spring to mind. Add Liverpool's back 4 to City's midfield and forward line and you would have a formidable side.

Until they win the Champion's League their status as a great side is open to question.
 

adexkola

Arsenal supporter
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
38,570
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
This City side is impressive in terms of personnel no doubt. Defensively I think they are suspect. Shearer is premature in defining them as the greatest EPL side ever. They do have world class players DeBruyne, Aguero, Sterling, Silva D, and Silva B, spring to mind. Add Liverpool's back 4 to City's midfield and forward line and you would have a formidable side.

Until they win the Champion's League their status as a great side is open to question.
Liverpool's back 4 conceded one goal less than City did in the PL. I don't think there is a huge gap between the defenses of both sides.
 

nore1975

New Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
415
Supports
Liverpool
Nonsense post that ignores history. Liverpool is a club built on unearned owner investment. City won a european trophy before you and the FA cup 60 odd years before you so clearly you're a club built on owner money. Of course if you are in favour of cartel rigging corrupt ffp rules then i suppose City doing what you did seems wrong to you. Every fan who knows their stuff knows liverpool bought their trophies, everyone.
It's the scale of City's spending, the sense of financial doping and the dubious regime behind City that renders your comparisons pointless. There is no comparison to what City have done. There 'achievements' don't engender the sense of admiration in theory they should from those that love the game irrespective of club loyalties.
 

Raebareliwale

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
41
Supports
Manchester City
What are you talking about. The PL was woeful this year. You've had 1 good team, 1 lucky team & the rest were diabolical. This is the reason both you & Liverpool racked up 90 pts + Your cup runs were also incredibly easy with you only facing 1 top team in the LC & FAC.

Where do you get the impression we never faced any competition in 2008. There was 11pts separating 1st & 4th at seasons end. There was only 4pts separating 1st & 3rd. This would be classed as a competitive league. We never dominated the league as you have due to the league being alot more competitive. The poor state of the PL combined with your State funding are the reasons why you have had 2 good seasons.

You have not created a league standard. You have merely used financial doping to distort the league. The only way other clubs can reach these levels is to find a rich sap to throw a few Billion their way without expecting a return.
After ages we have 2 English teams in Champions League final and 2 English teams in Europa league final.

If you think that the EPL is less competitive now, i truly fail to comprehend your argument.

You are not saying that the quality of all the teams across Europe has suddenly diminished when compared to 2008!!! Are you?

Fact is both City and Liverpool were so good this year that other teams just couldnt catch up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ExecutionerWasp001

Full Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2019
Messages
262
After ages we have 2 English teams in Champions League final and 2 English teams in Europa league final.

If you think that the EPL is less competitive now, i truly fail to comprehend your argument.

You are not saying that the quality of all the teams across Europe has suddenly diminished when compared to 2008!!! Are you?

Fact is both City and Liverpool were so good this year that other teams just couldnt catch up.

The quality of the top teams in Europe has diminished this year which is why we have 4 European finalists. As said previously though, the CL & EL have absolutely no bearing on the PL.

I don't know why you would think a league that had a 26pt gap between 1st & 3rd & a 32pt gap between 1st & 6th competitive. The numbers alone say this isn't the case.

As a City fan you would obviously say that the league is more competitive than ever as it gives more credence to what you have done. All the data though points to the exact opposite.
 

kouroux

45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
78,420
Location
Djibouti (La terre des braves)
The quality of the top teams in Europe has diminished this year which is why we have 4 European finalists. As said previously though, the CL & EL have absolutely no bearing on the PL.

I don't know why you would think a league that had a 26pt gap between 1st & 3rd & a 32pt gap between 1st & 6th competitive. The numbers alone say this isn't the case.

As a City fan you would obviously say that the league is more competitive than ever as it gives more credence to what you have done. All the data though points to the exact opposite.
Good post. Arsenal, Chelsea are average teams but somehow they're in the final because the EL is weak
 

Chabon

Full Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
5,354
Mourinho's Chelsea team were every bit as good (and as terrifying) as this City team. It's their records which City have been taking after all, and people forget that that team could easily have racked up points totals in the high 90s in both of those seasons if they hadn't done the standard thing and mostly downed tools after winning the title early.

Conte's Chelsea were the same as City last season: they kept going after winning the title and managed a higher points total than any United team ever have. Are people really gonna argue that they were one of the best domestic sides ever?
 

Hitman Harry

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Messages
26
Supports
Liverpool
Mourinho's Chelsea team were every bit as good (and as terrifying) as this City team. It's their records which City have been taking after all, and people forget that that team could easily have racked up points totals in the high 90s in both of those seasons if they hadn't done the standard thing and mostly downed tools after winning the title early.

Conte's Chelsea were the same as City last season: they kept going after winning the title and managed a higher points total than any United team ever have. Are people really gonna argue that they were one of the best domestic sides ever?
Conte's Chelsea did well on the basis that Hazard, Costa and Kante were ever-present all season. What's scary about this Man City side is that you can take out 3 of their best players and not even notice it. Maybe the one they'd miss most would be Aguero.
 

adexkola

Arsenal supporter
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
38,570
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
Mourinho's Chelsea team were every bit as good (and as terrifying) as this City team. It's their records which City have been taking after all, and people forget that that team could easily have racked up points totals in the high 90s in both of those seasons if they hadn't done the standard thing and mostly downed tools after winning the title early.

Conte's Chelsea were the same as City last season: they kept going after winning the title and managed a higher points total than any United team ever have. Are people really gonna argue that they were one of the best domestic sides ever?
Not in an attacking sense.
 

Chabon

Full Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
5,354
Not in an attacking sense.
No, but they were much better defensively, and nearly as dominant. People seem to forget just how fecking scary they were at the time. The consensus was that they'd dominant the league for years to come.
 

diarm

Full Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
10,777
Location
Cork
If they win the Champions League and the Premier League next year, they'll be equal to the two United sides (98-01 and 06-09) who won three consecutive titles as well as a European cup during the same period.

If they win one but not the other, they'll probably take third place behind those two sides.
 

adexkola

Arsenal supporter
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
38,570
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
No, but they were much better defensively, and nearly as dominant. People seem to forget just how fecking scary they were at the time. The consensus was that they'd dominant the league for years to come.
They were better defensively (37 goals conceded over 2 years compared to City's 50). I don't think they were as dominant in open play. They could score 1 goal and shut up stop, but I never saw that team come up with a stifling performance like City have numerous times.

That was the consensus, then SAF ran them out of town (well, sort of, they were still up there).

Did they (and I'm talking about the 04-05 and 05-06 sides) have a domestic rival as strong as Liverpool's side this year?
 

adexkola

Arsenal supporter
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
38,570
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
City 18-19
City 17-18
Chelsea 16-17
Leicester 15-16
Chelsea 14-15
City 13-14
United 12-13
City 11-12
United 10-11
Chelsea 09-10
United 08-09
United 07-08
United 06-07
Chelsea 05-06
Chelsea 04-05
Arsenal 03-04
United 02-03
Arsenal 01-02
United 00-01
United 99-00
United 98-99
Arsenal 97-98
United 96-97
United 95-96
Blackburn 94-95
United 93-94
United 92-93
Invention of football by Sky

A proper ranking would be some re-arrangement of this list.
 

Treble

Full Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
10,532
No, but they were much better defensively, and nearly as dominant. People seem to forget just how fecking scary they were at the time. The consensus was that they'd dominant the league for years to come.
City 17-19 have GD of +151, Chelsea 04-06 - + 107. Obviously, City 17-19 dominated games on a different level to Chelsea 04-06, apart from being better to watch too.
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
4,638
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
If they win the Champions League and the Premier League next year, they'll be equal to the two United sides (98-01 and 06-09) who won three consecutive titles as well as a European cup during the same period.

If they win one but not the other, they'll probably take third place behind those two sides.
Exactly right.
 

Tostao_80

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
631
The quality of the top teams in Europe has diminished this year which is why we have 4 European finalists. As said previously though, the CL & EL have absolutely no bearing on the PL.

I don't know why you would think a league that had a 26pt gap between 1st & 3rd & a 32pt gap between 1st & 6th competitive. The numbers alone say this isn't the case.

As a City fan you would obviously say that the league is more competitive than ever as it gives more credence to what you have done. All the data though points to the exact opposite.
Not sure about that. What's the most often used metric for a leagues strength? It's performances in Europe of teams from that league. What was the Spanish league deemed the best league in Europe over the last 10 years? Because of how their teams in Europe were dpoing so well, not just Real and Barca, but the teams below that were also winning multiple trophies and getting far in all competitions (Sevilla).
How can you say that 4 teams from the same country in 2 finals aren't an indication of a leagues strength?
If this was Italy or Spain, people would be saying the same thing.
 

Solius

Bearded Scholes admirer
Staff
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
62,968
Location
Bristol
Last. All their achievements are void and have an asterix against them :)
 

jackwanson

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
52
Supports
Man City
City 18-19
City 17-18
Chelsea 16-17
Leicester 15-16
Chelsea 14-15
City 13-14
United 12-13
City 11-12
United 10-11
Chelsea 09-10
United 08-09
United 07-08
United 06-07
Chelsea 05-06
Chelsea 04-05
Arsenal 03-04
United 02-03
Arsenal 01-02
United 00-01
United 99-00
United 98-99
Arsenal 97-98
United 96-97
United 95-96
Blackburn 94-95
United 93-94
United 92-93
Invention of football by Sky

A proper ranking would be some re-arrangement of this list.
MY GOD. This really shows you how far behind City is compared to United in terms of prestige over even the last 25 to 27 years. A mere foot soldier against a God of War
 

Lebo

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
105
point tallies are misleading. If you use them then you have to conclude that this Liverpool side is the greatest UK team of all time based on number of points and champions league final. The United of 2008 was the team to beat then in Europe. Same as the Barca team of 2009. More so than the Madrid team that got more than 100 points.
 

Real Madras

Full Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2016
Messages
497
Location
London
I just read city will throw £50m at Juventus for Cancelo? Are you flipping joking? We need him more. What the hell is going on? He should be a target.
 

el3mel

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
30,921
Location
Egypt
United's treble team.
Current City team
Chelsea 2005 & 2006.
United 2008.
Arsenal's invincibles.

In order.
 

el3mel

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
30,921
Location
Egypt
They were better defensively (37 goals conceded over 2 years compared to City's 50). I don't think they were as dominant in open play. They could score 1 goal and shut up stop, but I never saw that team come up with a stifling performance like City have numerous times.

That was the consensus, then SAF ran them out of town (well, sort of, they were still up there).

Did they (and I'm talking about the 04-05 and 05-06 sides) have a domestic rival as strong as Liverpool's side this year?
Football is played in different ways. This Chelsea side made you feel that once they score a goal, even if it's in early minutes then it's pretty much game over, close the tv and go find something more useful to do than watching the opposition struggling to score an equalizer with absolutely no hope.

They were definitely scary and not a team you like to face, but in their own way, different than the currrent City.