G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 23 minutes ago, David said: To be fair it only cost them £50m a bob, not sure what you expect They cost a lot but only a genius like Pep could get them defending like they showed today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 Just now, G STAR RAM said: They cost a lot but only a genius like Pep could get them defending like they showed today. That's true. Side note, I see that both Man Utd and Chelsea have conceded less goals than Man City this season. I expect the Man City owners to loosen their purse strings and fund better defenders that are suitable for the genius to work with. It's like giving Gordon Ramsey a microwave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Completely no comparison. Arsenal did it at a time when more teams in the Premier League were competitive. They also did it with a squad that cost about £90m at a time when the transfer record was around £30m. It will take a very special manager and team to equal that. There's probably more chance of our low points record going. The Premier League certainly wasn't more competitive in 2003/04. Man Utd were the only other team spending money back then. Liverpool in 4th place only finished on 60 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozza Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 Anyway, most enjoyable game of the season so far, for the neutral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jourdan Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 As most of us suspected, all it took was for a team to be brave and show some intent and City were duly unravelled. And as most of us suspected, this City team are really not on the same level as Arsenal of 2004. It’ll be interesting to see how Pep and his players respond to this. It’s only January and there are still 15 games to go. It’s a long time. The games look easy when you are in the middle of a 22 game unbeaten run but I wonder if we’ll see a little doubt creep into their minds now. They still have to host United and Chelsea and they still have to travel to Spurs, Arsenal, Everton and West Ham. Where there is time, there is opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 3 minutes ago, Jourdan said: It’ll be interesting to see how Pep and his players respond to this. Millions deposited into Arsenal's bank account on Monday morning for Sanchez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerTedd Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 4 minutes ago, Jourdan said: As most of us suspected, all it took was for a team to be brave and show some intent and City were duly unravelled. And as most of us suspected, this City team are really not on the same level as Arsenal of 2004. It’ll be interesting to see how Pep and his players respond to this. It’s only January and there are still 15 games to go. It’s a long time. The games look easy when you are in the middle of a 22 game unbeaten run but I wonder if we’ll see a little doubt creep into their minds now. They still have to host United and Chelsea and they still have to travel to Spurs, Arsenal, Everton and West Ham. Where there is time, there is opportunity. They’ll be really ******** themselves at the thought of playing West Ham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerTedd Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 1 hour ago, AndyinLiverpool said: And Liverpool don't like having comfortable leads They always say, 4-1 is a dangerous score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 5 minutes ago, Jourdan said: As most of us suspected, all it took was for a team to be brave and show some intent and City were duly unravelled. And as most of us suspected, this City team are really not on the same level as Arsenal of 2004. It’ll be interesting to see how Pep and his players respond to this. It’s only January and there are still 15 games to go. It’s a long time. The games look easy when you are in the middle of a 22 game unbeaten run but I wonder if we’ll see a little doubt creep into their minds now. They still have to host United and Chelsea and they still have to travel to Spurs, Arsenal, Everton and West Ham. Where there is time, there is opportunity. This City side is better than that Arsenal team. It will get more points come the end of the season. Spurs showed just as much intent with their pressing and they were squatted away. City just made numerous errors. All three second-half goals came from the back five giving it away in their defensive third, allowing arguably the quickest attack in the PL a free run right at them. It's the risk of playing that way, it only takes one mistake and you're in trouble. Well City made numerous, leading to three goals. Over the season, however, the reward outweighs the risk. City only need 29 points from their last 15 games to win the title. That's like Arsenal form. No way will anyone below them reach 90 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 24 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: The Premier League certainly wasn't more competitive in 2003/04. Man Utd were the only other team spending money back then. Liverpool in 4th place only finished on 60 points. Because teams at the bottom were more likely to be taking points off the top teams back then. These days there is a top 5 or 6 with 14 or 15 also rans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 Just now, G STAR RAM said: Because teams at the bottom were more likely to be taking points off the top teams back then. These days there is a top 5 or 6 with 14 or 15 also rans. These days the top teams are all much better. Back in those days the league title was shared between two teams for around a decade while Chelsea and Liverpool generally made up the top four. The managers are better these days. You have a CL winner in Benitez managing a team in the bottom half. Wenger was the 2nd best manager in the league in those days. Now, he's not even in the top five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 1 minute ago, Bris Vegas said: These days the top teams are all much better. Back in those days the league title was shared between two teams for around a decade while Chelsea and Liverpool generally made up the top four. The managers are better these days. You have a CL winner in Benitez managing a team in the bottom half. Wenger was the 2nd best manager in the league in those days. Now, he's not even in the top five. A whole season unbeaten, playing wonderful football. The game has moved on and left Wenger behind but can't see his and his teams achievement ever being matched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said: A whole season unbeaten, playing wonderful football. The game has moved on and left Wenger behind but can't see his and his teams achievement ever being matched. The achievement of going the entire season unbeaten may not be matched. But that doesn't mean there can't be any better teams. If this Man City team wins the quadruple and breaks the points record then they'll go down as having the greatest season in English top-flight history and rightly labelled over one season the best there has ever been. Going a season unbeaten is a unique achievement. But that may not make you the best. What of you won 20 and drew 18, finishing on 78 points and say 3rd in the table. Nobody would care you went the season unbeaten. Juventus went the whole season unbeaten in 2011, finishing on 84 points. Two years later they finished 18 points better off on 102 and won a domestic double. Evidently their 2013 team was better. Arsenal may have gone the entire season unbeaten, finishing on 90 points, but that was the only trophy they won that season and a year later Mourinho managed to better that points tally in his debut season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 1 minute ago, Bris Vegas said: The achievement of going the entire season unbeaten may not be matched. But that doesn't mean there can't be any better teams. If this Man City team wins the quadruple and breaks the points record then they'll go down as having the greatest season in English top-flight history and rightly labelled over one season the best there has ever been. Going a season unbeaten is a unique achievement. But that may not make you the best. What of you won 20 and drew 18, finishing on 78 points and say 3rd in the table. Nobody would care you went the season unbeaten. Juventus went the whole season unbeaten in 2011, finishing on 84 points. Two years later they finished 18 points better off on 102 and won a domestic double. Evidently their 2013 team was better. Arsenal may have gone the entire season unbeaten, finishing on 90 points, but that was the only trophy they won that season and a year later Mourinho managed to better that points tally in his debut season. I'm not saying Arsenal are the best team ever, it would be pretty embarrassing if a manager couldn't construct a better team with half a billion pounds to be honest. That is what I think makes Arsenals achievement so good and why I am happy that a team won't be being bankrolled into matching it this season at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jourdan Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 16 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: This City side is better than that Arsenal team. It will get more points come the end of the season. Spurs showed just as much intent with their pressing and they were squatted away. City just made numerous errors. All three second-half goals came from the back five giving it away in their defensive third, allowing arguably the quickest attack in the PL a free run right at them. It's the risk of playing that way, it only takes one mistake and you're in trouble. Well City made numerous, leading to three goals. Over the season, however, the reward outweighs the risk. City only need 29 points from their last 15 games to win the title. That's like Arsenal form. No way will anyone below them reach 90 points. I don't see how this City team can be considered better than that Arsenal team by any metric. They may well finish on more than 90 points but it is a small crumb of comfort. Chelsea have twice exceeded that total (2005 and 2017) and are never mentioned in the same discussion as Arsenal's Invincibles. Like I said, the games look easy when you're in the middle of a 22-match unbeaten run and when the going is good. So it'll be interesting to see if normal service resumes and they win their next four or five. Realistically, they only need 7-8 wins to seal the title and you would expect them to finish the job but in football, you never say never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 3 minutes ago, Jourdan said: I don't see how this City team can be considered better than that Arsenal team by any metric. They may well finish on more than 90 points but it is a small crumb of comfort. Chelsea have twice exceeded that total (2005 and 2017) and are never mentioned in the same discussion as Arsenal's Invincibles. Like I said, the games look easy when you're in the middle of a 22-match unbeaten run and when the going is good. So it'll be interesting to see if normal service resumes and they win their next four or five. Realistically, they only need 7-8 wins to seal the title and you would expect them to finish the job but in football, you never say never. What was so good about that Arsenal team? They were resilient, picked up draws when others may have lost but ultimately the finished the league on 90 points, scored only 73 goals and disappointed in cup competitions. This City side plays much better football, creates more chances and will score more goals (they already have 67 with 15 games to go). They will claim more points and certainly more victories. I don't see how you can consider a team to be better just because they went the season unbeaten. That Arsenal team failed to win 12 matches that season, they failed to score more than one goal in 13 matches, and more than two goals in 29 matches. In only nine games that year did they manage to score more than two goals! City, in comparison, have scored 3+ goals in 12 of their 23 games so far and have failed to score more than one goal in only four matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jourdan Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 7 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: What was so good about that Arsenal team? They were resilient, picked up draws when others may have lost but ultimately the finished the league on 90 points, scored only 73 goals and disappointed in cup competitions. This City side plays much better football, creates more chances and will score more goals (they already have 67 with 15 games to go). They will claim more points and certainly more victories. I don't see how you can consider a team to be better just because they went the season unbeaten. That Arsenal team failed to win 12 matches that season, they failed to score more than one goal in 13 matches, and more than two goals in 29 matches. In only nine games that year did they manage to score more than two goals! City, in comparison, have scored 3+ goals in 12 of their 23 games so far and have failed to score more than one goal in only four matches. There is more to football than simply attacking and scoring goals, you also have to be able to defend. Maybe if City had done that better, they would still be unbeaten. This is why that Arsenal side were so appreciated because they were a very well-balanced side. Not only could they play sparkling and incisive attacking football, but they were also strong defensively. All things being equal, I would completely see your point. But can you imagine what kind of side Wenger might have assembled if he had had the benefit of spending the equivalent of £400 million? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 4 minutes ago, Jourdan said: There is more to football than simply attacking and scoring goals, you also have to be able to defend. Maybe if City had done that better, they would still be unbeaten. This is why that Arsenal side were so appreciated because they were a very well-balanced side. Not only could they play sparkling and incisive attacking football, but they were also strong defensively. All things being equal, I would completely see your point. But can you imagine what kind of side Wenger might have assembled if he had had the benefit of spending the equivalent of £400 million? Yes, but that Arsenal side wasn't the best at defending either. Chelsea, a year later, conceded 11 goals less than them as they went on to claim the title with five more points. The Arsenal side I'm guessing are only appreciated because they went the season unbeaten. It's a great achievement, but it's just one of many which makes a 'great' side. Since then there have been teams who have claimed more points, conceded less goals, scored more goals, won more games and ultimately won more trophes in a single season. Didn't Wenger break Arsenal's transfer record that season on Jose Antonio Reyes? Judging by that, I'm not so sure he would have had assembled an even greater team. At the time, it's easy to forget that Arsenal only had one genuine title challenger in Man Utd. Liverpool under Gerard Houllier were naff, Chelsea were in their first season under Abramovic and an average Newcastle and Villa made up the top six, The fact that Mourinho came in and won the title at a canter in his first two years shows it was rather a poor league back then. Fast forward ten years and Mourinho's breaking transfer records at United and they're miles behind City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 9 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: Yes, but that Arsenal side wasn't the best at defending either. Chelsea, a year later, conceded 11 goals less than them as they went on to claim the title with five more points. The Arsenal side I'm guessing are only appreciated because they went the season unbeaten. It's a great achievement, but it's just one of many which makes a 'great' side. Since then there have been teams who have claimed more points, conceded less goals, scored more goals, won more games and ultimately won more trophes in a single season. Didn't Wenger break Arsenal's transfer record that season on Jose Antonio Reyes? Judging by that, I'm not so sure he would have had assembled an even greater team. At the time, it's easy to forget that Arsenal only had one genuine title challenger in Man Utd. Liverpool under Gerard Houllier were naff, Chelsea were in their first season under Abramovic and an average Newcastle and Villa made up the top six, The fact that Mourinho came in and won the title at a canter in his first two years shows it was rather a poor league back then. Fast forward ten years and Mourinho's breaking transfer records at United and they're miles behind City. Bris, if it was such a poor league why are Arsenal the only club to have gone an entire season unbeaten even with Abramovich's money when it arrived? I think it's fair to say you are quite a fan of Man City these days and that's fine, they are a great side but that's no reason to downplay Arsenal's Invincible's, to not come off the pitch being beaten over an entire season is an incredible achievement emulated by nobody. As you keep saying, other clubs have picked up more points, scored more, conceded less yet none have experienced a season of being unbeaten. Who is the "best" is the same as who is the "biggest", you can twist it to give you the answer you want, for you it's Man City. In 5, 10 years time outside of Man City will anyone really remember this team? In what way will it stand out in the history books? I bet if you polled Premier League fans now and asked them Which club was relegated with the fewest points in a Premier League season a large percentage without Google wouldn't be able to tell you who and what the points total was. Ask them which club went an entire season unbeaten, Arsenal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.