When talking about "who is the best side in the premier league era", quite simply, no, because those are the only 2 sides that accomplished everything they set out to. At the start of the season, did Pep dream off 100 or 98 points? Or a premier league and Champions League double. It's quite simple really. It's a great side, and if they win the CL and the league next season, they will be right up there and probably above Uniteds best sides. But as of now, they haven't gotten past the quarter finals, so thats the end for their discussion. We're talking about "the best". We shouldn't lower the bar, it should be a ridiculously tough achievement. Win the main trophies you set you to and any club would dream of, and you get in. Simple as.
Where would you rank this Man City side now?
- Thread starter tentan
- Start date
But everyone knows that UEFA has been against them since the 1910s -- doing whatever it takes to make sure they never succeed in the Champion's League.
No one really cares. They're not money. Which is strange since they're doing everything right on the pitch.
I cannot agree more with this post. Infact you've just posted my exact thoughts on the progression of football (I can't speak for other sports tbh) over time. I've always wondered how Messi and Ronaldo would fare having being born in the 1950s and how Maradonna and Pele would fare being born in the 80s. Would Maradonna have had the determination and dedication that Ronaldo and Messi has now? Would Messi have put up with the brutal defending that Pele come against aswell as Maradonna?
It's impossible to call but I do think with all the advancements in sports and the world in general (science, medicine, media coverage, money) the level of football is increasing year in year out.
But I also could be completely wrong and the teams of the past may well wipe the floor with modern teams.
Yup. Just look at their knockout round results since Pep took over:
- 16/17 - lost on away goals to Monaco in round of 16. 6-6 aggregate
- 17/18 - ro16 beat Basel 5-2 agg; lost to Liverpool 5-1 agg. in quarter finals.
- 17/18 - ro16 beat Schalke 10-2 agg., lost on away goals to Spurs in quarter finals, 4-4 agg.
The simple answer is that this City side ranks below the United side of 2008, 1999 and any other English side (Liverpool in the 70/80s?) who've managed to win the league and also win the European Cup. It takes incredible management and skill to win on both fronts, which City hasn't achieved. It's unacceptable really because they've spent more than anyone else and had a joke of cup runs, while only Liverpool challenged them at all (all other "big" teams were rubbish).
I don't know if the league was tougher in England, most top end talent back then was concentrated in Italy and Spain still...
Biggest differences between now and then: fitness/energy levels, and depth. 20 years ago a great side like United would get outworked due to lower energy about half the time in the league. Nowadays City get outworked due to lower energy maybe 2-3 times.
No VAR to rule out that tight offside and City very well may have won the quadruple.
If VAR was around during Barca’s 08/09 treble winning season, they would have likely been eliminated against Chelsea in the semi finals.
If VAR was around during Barca’s 08/09 treble winning season, they would have likely been eliminated against Chelsea in the semi finals.
I will disagree. I'm curious as to how you rank the strikers by tier. If you say Aguero is a much better striker than Peak Torres or Peak Rooney..
This is peak only of strikers 95 onwards. Let's say I rate who I consider the two best strikers of the last 25 years.
Brazilian Ronaldo Tier of his own
T1 Henry
Where do you have Aguero and peak Torres than? Since Aguero is much better.
These kind of comparisons are ridiculous.
No-one will ever know good how today's top players would be if there wasn't the massive over protection from referees that the top players didn't get.
How much better would Pele and Maradona have been if they played after tackling was banned.
If VAR was used this season the league table would likely look a lot different too
No-one will ever know good how today's top players would be if there wasn't the massive over protection from referees that the top players didn't get.
How much better would Pele and Maradona have been if they played after tackling was banned.
Coulda been woulda been.
If VAR was used this season the league table would likely look a lot different too
Last edited:
Tactics.
Possession-based football + high pressing ensures a much better control over games and amplifies the difference in quality between teams to a greater extent. In other words, modern tactics reduces uncertainty much more efficiently.
There was a thread several weeks ago which discussed the differences between football back in 2009 and 2019: much more completed passes and much fewer tackles. The top teams in the past didn't control games to the extent City do now and this is the main reason why none of them got close to 100 pts, let alone 2 seasons in a row. I think United 07-09, Chelsea 04-06 and Arsenal 02-04 had probably better players, at least in the first 11 (how many City players would be guaranteed starters for United 08?) but Guardiola's combination of possession-based slick football + intensive high pressing amplifies the difference in quality with the opposition to a higher extent that the top teams in the past were able to.
Last edited:
They are exquisite but any success they achieve will be asterisked forever.
I hope their supporters enjoy being eternally irrelevant in the footballing fraternity at large.
I hope their supporters enjoy being eternally irrelevant in the footballing fraternity at large.
They're the best English domestic side I've ever seen. There's no point denying it when I think it. Their level of consistency is unparalleled with anything I've seen in this country before.
Many people thought their 100 point season was a once in a life time achievement. I always said it was their level and they got 98 points despite not being out of second gear for most of the season. With minor improvements, they will get even better.
They have only dropped three points since boxing day. I mean come on ffs!
Many people thought their 100 point season was a once in a life time achievement. I always said it was their level and they got 98 points despite not being out of second gear for most of the season. With minor improvements, they will get even better.
They have only dropped three points since boxing day. I mean come on ffs!
Last edited:
Manutd 2007-08 should have won the treble, denied by disgraceful decision.
This city side should have won League and league Cup at best, they had unbelievable luck against Swansea. They have been knocked out against Swansea.
This city side should have won League and league Cup at best, they had unbelievable luck against Swansea. They have been knocked out against Swansea.
They’re a fantastic team. Which kinda makes it all the funnier that absolutely no one cares.
Last edited:
Any United fan who makes the ridiculous claim that they are the best ever cannot be older than 10.
There cup ties were about as easy as a team could ever get. Out of them all, they faced 2 top sides, losing in the biggest competition to Tottenham. People talk about Liverpool's luck but City had the luckiest draws in both domestic cup competitions.
Being fair, it is a great achievement. Up there with the best in English football but it's behind our 2008 double, 1999 treble, Liverpool's 1984 treble. There are also some achievements by other clubs that are far more impressive considering their standing, Leicester, Forest etc.
Give any side £2billion+ and they'll win loads. That's the biggest caveat to City's success.
There cup ties were about as easy as a team could ever get. Out of them all, they faced 2 top sides, losing in the biggest competition to Tottenham. People talk about Liverpool's luck but City had the luckiest draws in both domestic cup competitions.
Being fair, it is a great achievement. Up there with the best in English football but it's behind our 2008 double, 1999 treble, Liverpool's 1984 treble. There are also some achievements by other clubs that are far more impressive considering their standing, Leicester, Forest etc.
Give any side £2billion+ and they'll win loads. That's the biggest caveat to City's success.
Pretty clueless point, Giggs' passing and delivery was as big a strength as his dribbling and pace. Go and watch utd from that era before holding such a strong opinion on them.
They are the most impressive and consistent side for sure but I don't think it's so clear that they are the best. To call them a better side than 99/08 United or 05 Chelsea is really difficult IMO.
I actually feel they have the weakest starting lineup of the four sides but have the best squad.
Agree
This City team will dominate the league for the next 3 or 4 years, until Pep gets bored/burnt out and leaves. Will be interesting to see how they fare when he goes.
They are a phenomenal side though. 198 points out of 228 is insane.
They are a phenomenal side though. 198 points out of 228 is insane.
There the best in a generation, of assembled players, buy a association that can offer players, Managers the top Incentive to come to play football. As for teams of years gone by there cannot be a comparison, as years gone buy the playing field was more even.
If you want to compare say 20 yrs ago, UTD are still the same club, as For City and PSG, they are not. And it's not fan base that has changed it?.. good luck to them they deserve what's coming to them, they've earned it.
If you want to compare say 20 yrs ago, UTD are still the same club, as For City and PSG, they are not. And it's not fan base that has changed it?.. good luck to them they deserve what's coming to them, they've earned it.
Best PL team ever by a mile.
I'd rank them top of the financial doping league - being the only trophy they actually deserve.
They are by far the best domestic side of the PL. You can look at the United side of 99 or 07-08 to find a team that can compete with them if you're arguing sides that are the best teams fighting on both domestic and european fronts, but purely domestically there is no question that it is City. They're the only male side to win a domestic treble and they broke the 100 point barrier. That's two seasons and two records broken. Last season they absolutely smashed the league to pieces and weren't challenged mentally as much as they could have been. This season Liverpool took up the mantle of emotionally battling them and City showed that when push comes to shove they are bloody relentless. 198 points in two seasons is a joke.
Football has money, boo hoo.
They're bloody good but I'm hesitant to rank them too highly, mainly because it means that logically I'd have to rank this season's Liverpool right up there too considering how close they were to them in the league, particularly if they go on to win the Champions League. The only way I might get away if it is keying on the moments of luck that Liverpool had go their way in this season's league campaign.
There's money that's been fairly earned, and then there's money that hasn't. It's up to you if want to whitewash the difference.
Not as good as Joses first Chelsea team, Uniteds 2008 side, or Wengers invincibles.
I would wager that Joses first Chelsea side was SO good it could probably have won this league with even more points as the competition is just simply weaker today than it was then.
Jose got 95 points in an actual competitive league.
I would wager that Joses first Chelsea side was SO good it could probably have won this league with even more points as the competition is just simply weaker today than it was then.
Jose got 95 points in an actual competitive league.
I think they have by far the best squad ever seen in the Premier League which is why they have been able to compete in all 3 domestic competitions. We always used the League cup during our Premier League dominance period to blood youngsters so different times/different agenda.
The arsenal invincible side of 2004 were amazing not least because they were our main competitors sharing 6 titles between us 99-04. We won 3 in a row. Wenger did that on a shoe string budget - buying players and making them great compared to us - we spent more. He had the same style of play as Guardiola but not the budget to get the very best back up players so they would tire as a squad. They played some wonderful stuff.
Then obviously the huge financial investment at Chelsea and a brilliant young manager 04-06 coincided with us rebuilding the treble winning team. They had not won it since 55 so an amazing achievement to come in and win back to back titles and integrate so many new players so quickly into a title winning team. They also played some amazing attacking football
We then wrestled back the title from Chelsea in 07-09 - 3 in a row again with the combination of Ronaldo/Rooney but with greater CL dominance. We were great to watch in this period. Only Barcelona stopped us from winning more CL titles
Then Man City investment - which has allowed then to build a fantastic squad - they have Sane we had J Cruyff/Cooke for instance. Again a brilliant young manager who has steered then to 2 PL titles. When things got tough they had their best player back for the run in - KDB and a fit captain fantastic Kompany (our Steve Bruce). I think their first title wining team deserve more praise because they had not won it since 68 and it took alot character to score that 2012 goal. If Man City continue and win the PL and the CL next season then definitely should be with us at the top of the pile. Will be very hard as the European big guns are rebuilding after a very poor season by their standards.
So my choices
1) 99, 2000, 2001 - Man United
2) 04 Arsenal
3) 04-06 - Chelsea and 12 & 14 Man City and Man United 92-94
4) 07-09 Man United
5) 18-19 Man City
The arsenal invincible side of 2004 were amazing not least because they were our main competitors sharing 6 titles between us 99-04. We won 3 in a row. Wenger did that on a shoe string budget - buying players and making them great compared to us - we spent more. He had the same style of play as Guardiola but not the budget to get the very best back up players so they would tire as a squad. They played some wonderful stuff.
Then obviously the huge financial investment at Chelsea and a brilliant young manager 04-06 coincided with us rebuilding the treble winning team. They had not won it since 55 so an amazing achievement to come in and win back to back titles and integrate so many new players so quickly into a title winning team. They also played some amazing attacking football
We then wrestled back the title from Chelsea in 07-09 - 3 in a row again with the combination of Ronaldo/Rooney but with greater CL dominance. We were great to watch in this period. Only Barcelona stopped us from winning more CL titles
Then Man City investment - which has allowed then to build a fantastic squad - they have Sane we had J Cruyff/Cooke for instance. Again a brilliant young manager who has steered then to 2 PL titles. When things got tough they had their best player back for the run in - KDB and a fit captain fantastic Kompany (our Steve Bruce). I think their first title wining team deserve more praise because they had not won it since 68 and it took alot character to score that 2012 goal. If Man City continue and win the PL and the CL next season then definitely should be with us at the top of the pile. Will be very hard as the European big guns are rebuilding after a very poor season by their standards.
So my choices
1) 99, 2000, 2001 - Man United
2) 04 Arsenal
3) 04-06 - Chelsea and 12 & 14 Man City and Man United 92-94
4) 07-09 Man United
5) 18-19 Man City
Last edited:
Plenty of teams have had money which has been fairly earnt or otherwise and haven't done what City have done.
It seems like you’re underrating De Bruyne to be honest. Giggs was a very good passer but De Bruyne is incredible. One of the best I’ve ever seen.
There the most consistent team the league has ever seen. There certainly not the best.
4 English teams are in the European finals, never done before and never done by another country. What's more, the champions are not one of those 4 teams. The league is at its competitive best but people are reluctant to admit it because the best 2 teams are City and Liverpool.
Nah. City have blown away every one of their records and the league was not particularly competitive. Arsenal’s “Invincibles” shat the bed after losing at OT, United in third was, for my money, the worst Fergie team of the PL era and in fourth place was a really poor Everton side.
Big Sam’s Bolton were three points off the Champions League places and McClaren’s Boro were only three points behind them in 7th. The league was unquestionably weaker in 2004-05 than it is today.
I don't think they're measurably better than the best United and Chelsea teams, and even Arsenal are in with a shout for their immortal season, though probably not quite there by modern standards. Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that during City's few years of prominence, all the other top teams have taken turns having hilariously awful seasons. There hasn't been so much as a single consistent competitor, literally all the other clubs have had disaster seasons throughout this period. It has been the easiest ever period of time in which to look amazing since you get to easily harvest several wins per seasons against what would normally be a top side but is currently undergoing some kind of catastrophe, rebuilding phase or a spell of managerial chaos. The PL has been in total disarray for about eight years - look no further than to the fact that bloody Leicester won a title - and when judging a team's success during such a time, it has to be measured against the various mitigating factors of the period.
City haven't even reached a CL final yet. Since the 2008 takeover, there have been seven English finalists and they haven't got there yet. Under Pep they've been knocked out in the ro16 by Monaco, the quarters by Liverpool and now the quarters by Tottenham. Early knockouts to clubs that they should sweep aside if this is really the best ever PL squad. They've proven absolutely nothing in Europe and their domestic success rides on the back of the fact that literally all other competitors are coming into or out of a period of major upheaval. Under these circumstances, I don't think they can be called the best ever English side. There's just too many ifs and buts and missing pieces to be able to say so.
City haven't even reached a CL final yet. Since the 2008 takeover, there have been seven English finalists and they haven't got there yet. Under Pep they've been knocked out in the ro16 by Monaco, the quarters by Liverpool and now the quarters by Tottenham. Early knockouts to clubs that they should sweep aside if this is really the best ever PL squad. They've proven absolutely nothing in Europe and their domestic success rides on the back of the fact that literally all other competitors are coming into or out of a period of major upheaval. Under these circumstances, I don't think they can be called the best ever English side. There's just too many ifs and buts and missing pieces to be able to say so.
Last edited:
True - they've taken financial doping to a whole new level.
This is probably the worst time in history to claim the league is not competitive therefore total points mean nothing. People will continue with this idea until they steamroll the opposition domestically again AND win the CL, which seems just a matter of time. It wasn't that long ago that everyone mocked and laughed at Kompany's quadruple prediction and yet they were millimeters away from beating Spurs.
Who is this Jose fella you speak off? We ought to hire him.
The league was tougher during the 00s or at least the top 4 was. The gap between City and Chelsea was 26 points this season. During the 07/08 campaign, we finished 4 points ahead of Arsenal in 3rd, in comparison. If Arsenal and United weren't so poorly run then this season, for example, City wouldn't be gifted 12 points by them and Liverpool 8.
City and Liverpool lost just 1 game each to other top 6 teams.
City and Liverpool lost just 1 game each to other top 6 teams.
City domestically are unreal at the moment. 198 points in 2 seasons is phenomenal, the football they play is on another level, they are relentless. They’ll be expected to repeat the feat next season and rightly so be favourites to do so in all 3 domestic comps.
United 93-96 were pretty good domestically, people will argue the strength of the league back then but winning the double twice, is a fine achievement.
94 PL winners FA cup Winners LC Runners up
95 PL 2nd FA cup Runners up
96 PL winners FA cup Winners
Europe then become the one SAF wanted, we didn’t have the squad depth of a modern day Man City to compete on 4 fronts, so whilst the League was the number one priority, SAF gave less importance to the domestic cups.
United have won 3 PL’s in a row on 2 separate occasions and from 06-13 won 5 out of 7, losing one by a single point and one by goal difference. Adding a CL and 2 league cups in that time.
Whilst City are domestic top dogs for now, and have overcome the first hurdle by winning back to back titles, I think we’re still a way from calling them the best ever. We could be here in 2 years time, City have won 4 in a row, then they’ll be no doubt to where they rank domestically.
Plus back in the day, Fergie was limited by the nationalities (incl home countries) he could buy or play at any one time. He was fighting with one hand tied.