Footie - 2008-2009 Season

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

What I've seen lol. I watched the Juve/Chelski games. Chelski got extremely lucky against a handicapped Juve squad. And Juve is much better now. Play those games with the current roster/coaches, and Juve wins 5-2 on aggregate. Yes, I know Chelski have an ocean of talent, but they're only good when they're interested(which isn't often, and often requires a new coach to come in and stick a wire in their asses). Liverpool has talent, but they can't overwhelm teams with it and are the ultimate hot/cold team in soccer.

Do I agree that they have more talent? Absolutely, but there's more to soccer than that. If the CL was all about talent, Chelski would have won 4 in a row. They've made 1 final, 1 first knockout round and 2 semis.

And they were beaten by Manchester United after the penalty shootout, by Barcelona, by Liverpool after the penalty shootout, by Barcelona again, and Liverpool again. So, when it mattered, nobody was able to beat them except for those other 4 teams.

I've told you once before, the CL is about two things: talent and luck in the draw. In 2005/06, the two best teams IMO were clearly Barcelona and Chelsea. They faced off in the first knockout round. Among the other matchups in that same round were Rangers-Villareal, Ajax-Inter (who lost to Villareal in the next round), and a bunch of other crappy teams.

[GeneralDisorder]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Exactly. I agree with you 100%. That's why my original point was that United, Barca, Real, Chelsea, and Liverpool should just play in a league of their own.

Yes, but I agreed first...

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by GeneralDisorder

Yes, but I agreed first...

Well, yeah, you agreed with my original point. I thought it was pretty obvious that I agreed with myself, so I didn't mention it. lmao

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

And they were beaten by Manchester United after the penalty shootout, by Barcelona, by Liverpool after the penalty shootout, by Barcelona again, and Liverpool again. So, when it mattered, nobody was able to beat them except for those other 4 teams.

That doesn't really prove anything since the only other team worth a damn that they played in the knockout rounds in those 4 years was Juve last year(but I've mentioned that). Their other two opponents that I haven't mentioned before in those four years were Porto and Valencia.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

I've told you once before, the CL is about two things: talent and luck in the draw. In 2005/06, the two best teams IMO were clearly Barcelona and Chelsea. They faced off in the first knockout round. Among the other matchups in that same round were Rangers-Villareal, Ajax-Inter (who lost to Villareal in the next round), and a bunch of other crappy teams.

But in 4 years, considering that they vastly outspent every other single team in the world making Dan Snyder cry in jealousy about the rules of EPL(lol), their results prove my point: its not all about talent. Liverpool won in 2004/5 with an inferior team(on paper) despite a very hard draw(Juventus, Chelsea and Milan). Barca beat Arsenal the following year because Arsenal crapped the bed(not saying Barca wasn't a good team, but Arsenal was much better on paper).

I think we're arguing across purposes: I don't disagree with you that there are 4 super teams(contingent on Man U doing something with the Ronaldo money*) in Europe and generally on paper, no one else should be able to beat them on a given day. But, what I'm saying is that it takes more than just talent. There's too many examples of "super teams" crapping the bed(like Chelski over the last 4 years) to declare that there's a tiny group of Haves(especially since Man U and Barca-the two most successful teams of those haves-have been dominating because they were more than just talent collections, they had great teams who could play together) and the Have-nots who have no chance against them.

*I think GD is right that Real has way too many egos and its going to be a cluster**ck, so maybe the list should be Barca and Chelski

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

That doesn't really prove anything since the only other team worth a damn that they played in the knockout rounds in those 4 years was Juve last year(but I've mentioned that). Their other two opponents that I haven't mentioned before in those four years were Porto and Valencia.



But in 4 years, considering that they vastly outspent every other single team in the world making Dan Snyder cry in jealousy about the rules of EPL(lol), their results prove my point: its not all about talent. Liverpool won in 2004/5 with an inferior team(on paper) despite a very hard draw(Juventus, Chelsea and Milan). Barca beat Arsenal the following year because Arsenal crapped the bed(not saying Barca wasn't a good team, but Arsenal was much better on paper).

I think we're arguing across purposes: I don't disagree with you that there are 4 super teams(contingent on Man U doing something with the Ronaldo money) in Europe and generally on paper, no one else should be able to beat them on a given day. But, what I'm saying is that it takes more than just talent. There's too many examples of "super teams" crapping the bed(like Chelski over the last 4 years) to declare that there's a tiny group of Haves(especially since Man U and Barca-the two most successful teams of those haves-have been dominating because they were more than just talent collections, they had great teams who could play together) and the Have-nots who have no chance against them.

Aside from Chelsea crapping the bed (you can't convince me of that lol), I can agree with that paragraph. The problem is that if those 4 or 5 teams keep dishing out 100-150 million euros in each transfer market, and the other "top" european teams not only can't spend a third of that, but lose their best players to these teams, eventually the gap will just be so big that no amount of organization will overcome it.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Aside from Chelsea crapping the bed (you can't convince me of that lol), I can agree with that paragraph.

Chelski's B team could start as Roma's starting 11. They have zero excuse not to have won much more than they have--Man U or not(which also proves my point. Man U has a very talented team, but they beat Chelski year in and year out because they're a better team, not because they're more talented).

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

The problem is that if those 4 or 5 teams keep dishing out 100-150 million euros in each transfer market, and the other "top" european teams not only can't spend a third of that, but lose their best players to these teams, eventually the gap will just be so big that no amount of organization will overcome it.

Yes and no. Those teams can only play so many players at a time(even not considering chemistry problems) and at some point, the talented players who don't want to sit on the bench for all but a few games each year will go elsewhere. I'm not saying that there will be parity, but there's too much talent floating out there that the Inter/Juve/Roma/Bayern/Arsenal/etc can get and mold into a better overall team that can compete with the super teams.

[GeneralDisorder]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Aside from Chelsea crapping the bed (you can't convince me of that lol), I can agree with that paragraph. The problem is that if those 4 or 5 teams keep dishing out 100-150 million euros in each transfer market, and the other "top" european teams not only can't spend a third of that, but lose their best players to these teams, eventually the gap will just be so big that no amount of organization will overcome it.

I agree with the post counter...

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Chelski's B team could start as Roma's starting 11. They have zero excuse not to have won much more than they have--Man U or not(which also proves my point. Man U has a very talented team, but they beat Chelski year in and year out because they're a better team, not because they're more talented).

Or because Lampard slipped.

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Yes and no. Those teams can only play so many players at a time(even not considering chemistry problems) and at some point, the talented players who don't want to sit on the bench for all but a few games each year will go elsewhere. I'm not saying that there will be parity, but there's too much talent floating out there that the Inter/Juve/Roma/Bayern/Arsenal/etc can get and mold into a better overall team that can compete with the super teams.

There aren't that many elite players that they can't all fit in those top 5 teams. I mean the ones that really make a difference and can win you a CL almost by themselves. There aren't even 10 in the world IMO. If Ibra leaves, there are currently 0 outside of the Liga and the PL (although Pato probably will become one).

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Or because Lampard slipped.

Would you consider the Eagles a successful or dominating NFL team?

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

There aren't that many elite players that they can't all fit in those top 5 teams. I mean the ones that really make a difference and can win you a CL almost by themselves.

And you can't fit those dominating players on the same pitch together at the same time. Their egos would cause too many problems. Look at Chelski lmao.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

There aren't even 10 in the world IMO. If Ibra leaves, there are currently 0 outside of the Liga and the PL (although Pato probably will become one).

C. Ronaldo, Messi, Ibra(who shouldn't be on this list frankly), Pato, Rooney(?), Ballack(?), Gigi should be on that list. Liverpool and Ac Milan showed that you don't need to assemble several of those caliber players to win a CL title.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Would you consider the Eagles a successful or dominating NFL team?

There's a difference between 2nd out of 32 and second out of every team in Europe.

Originally Posted by akhhorus

And you can't fit those dominating players on the same pitch together at the same time. Their egos would cause too many problems. Look at Chelski lmao.

Yeah, look at them. One CL final and one semifinal in the last two years. Terrible! Lol...

Originally Posted by akhhorus

C. Ronaldo, Messi, Ibra(who shouldn't be on this list frankly), Pato, Rooney(?), Ballack(?), Gigi should be on that list. Liverpool and Ac Milan showed that you don't need to assemble several of those caliber players to win a CL title.

Ibra most definitely should. I know he hasn't done much in CL play, but he's been as dominating a player in Serie A lately as I've seen, with the exception of Ronaldo.
Ballack on the other hand probably isn't among the top 100 players in the world. He's just completely finished. And Buffon isn't even the best keeper in Serie A. Julio Cesar is. And lately by far.
In my opinion, the truly elite players in Europe right now, meaning the ones that really make a difference by themselves(and that unfortunately rules out any keeper or defensive player) are Ronaldo, Messi, Kaka (when he feels like it), Ibrahimovic, maybe Rooney, and probably either Gerrard or Torres (I'll let one of our fellow Liverpool fans tell us who is the more decisive of the two). Everyone else, either because of age, position, or talent, is a step back.
As you can see, there aren't really that many, more than enough to fin in 5 teams.

And Milan showed that you do in fact need to have at least one to win it all. If those 5 teams just collect all of them, there's no point competing anymore.


Oh, and apparently Real has just signed David Villa.
So you can also scratch Valencia off the list of reamaining barely relevant teams.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

There's a difference between 2nd out of 32 and second out of every team in Europe.

Both teams have only been 2nd once recently. A better example(although I know you don't follow college football): Southern Cal hasn't won a title in several years despite having 24 1st or 2nd round picks from their team and played in 1 BCS title game since their last championship in 04: successful/dominating team or not?

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Yeah, look at them. One CL final and one semifinal in the last two years. Terrible! Lol...

Again: considering their outlay for cash, they aren't successful. I acknowledge that they made it that far, but my point is that they vastly underachieving.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Ibra most definitely should. I know he hasn't done much in CL play, but he's been as dominating a player in Serie A lately as I've seen, with the exception of Ronaldo.

I totally disagree with you on this. Ibra is a great player, but he needs a system around him(mostly another good forward to clear out the defenders). C. Ronaldo(and Ronaldo) were players who made their own greatness.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Ballack on the other hand probably isn't among the top 100 players in the world. He's just completely finished.

Hence the question mark lol

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

And Buffon isn't even the best keeper in Serie A. Julio Cesar is. And lately by far.

Gigi had an awful season, part of that was injury, part of that was his hatred for Ranieri(which is why every team seemed to be linked to bidding on him during the season). He'll rebound though.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

In my opinion, the truly elite players in Europe right now, meaning the ones that really make a difference by themselves(and that unfortunately rules out any keeper or defensive player) are Ronaldo, Messi, Kaka (when he feels like it), Ibrahimovic, maybe Rooney, and probably either Gerrard or Torres (I'll let one of our fellow Liverpool fans tell us who is the more decisive of the two). Everyone else, either because of age, position, or talent, is a step back.
As you can see, there aren't really that many, more than enough to fin in 5 teams.

Agree on the first 3 and Rooney. Torres and Gerrard have no business on this list imo.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

And Milan showed that you do in fact need to have at least one to win it all. If those 5 teams just collect all of them, there's no point competing anymore.

Rather than rehashing my arguments, I'll just say this: we'll see. If Real or Barca(if they get Ibra, which I doubt) don't win the CL title(Chelski will choke..again and barring Man U signing Ibra to replace C-Ronaldo, they aren't a super team anymore), then will you admit that your theory is flawed?

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Oh, and apparently Real has just signed David Villa.
So you can also scratch Valencia off the list of reamaining barely relevant teams.

Did I say otherwise? And I was factoring in having Villa in my comments with Real.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Both teams have only been 2nd once recently.

So if you and I run the 100 meters, whoever comes in second is comparable to the guy who finished behind Bolt at the Olympics?

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Again: considering their outlay for cash, they aren't successful. I acknowledge that they made it that far, but my point is that they vastly underachieving.

I'll agree that, out of those 5, they have been the one that has most underachieved (although Real has been horrible in CL lately). But that's still miles better than anyone else, considering the competition they have to face in the PL.

Originally Posted by akhhorus

I totally disagree with you on this. Ibra is a great player, but he needs a system around him(mostly another good forward to clear out the defenders). C. Ronaldo(and Ronaldo) were players who made their own greatness.

No. No way. I'm sorry, but this is just not true, and there is no debating it (unfortunately, since I would love for him to be worse than he is). I have no idea why he has not done well in CL (I think the relative mediocrity surrounding him may be the reason), but in the Serie A he has won BY HIMSELF, regardless of the system and the players surrounding him (actually Inter basically has had no offensive system these past 4 years. They just give Ibra the ball and get the hell out of the way). If you take Ibra away from Inter, they win 0 titles. Last year, they needed the refs to come in and save them when Ibra went down. And that still wouldn't have been enough if he hadn't scored 2 goals in 30 minutes at Parma in the last game. This year, he played in basically every game, and the title wasn't even in question from week 1, even though Quaresma and Mancini sucked, Crespo and Cruz did nothing, Balotelli is 15 years old and plays one good game out of every 5, Figo is older than my grandfather, and Obinna is a joke.
Trust me, it pains me to say this, but Ibra, at least in Serie A (and now that Kaka is gone and Totti is 33) is in a league of his own.

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Gigi had an awful season, part of that was injury, part of that was his hatred for Ranieri(which is why every team seemed to be linked to bidding on him during the season). He'll rebound though.

He will. But I don't know if he'll ever be back to his top form. In the meantime, there is no doubt that Julio Cesar is the best keeper in Italy, and he has been the last 2 years.

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Agree on the first 3 and Rooney. Torres and Gerrard have no business on this list imo.

I have my doubts on Torres as well (if not for age, I would prefer Drogba). But Gerrard has been spectacular these past few years, and if he doesn't belong it's only because of health. I don't know hwat more he could have done to help his team out.

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Rather than rehashing my arguments, I'll just say this: we'll see. If Real or Barca(if they get Ibra, which I doubt) don't win the CL title(Chelski will choke..again and barring Man U signing Ibra to replace C-Ronaldo, they aren't a super team anymore), then will you admit that your theory is flawed?

If a team that is not Barcelona, Real, Liverpool, Chelsea, or Manchester (those were my five original "out-of-everyone's-league" teams, and I stand by those) win the CL this year, I'll definitely admit I was wrong, and you can choose my avatar (if you like) for a week.

[dj_stouty]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Torres and Gerrard have no business on this list imo.

Oh please. Gerrard is widely recognized as one of the best in the world. He won the "FWA Footballer of the Year" award this season...and was close to winning PFA Player of the Year if Giggs didn't get the sentimental nod.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

So if you and I run the 100 meters, whoever comes in second is comparable to the guy who finished behind Bolt at the Olympics?

That comparison is worse than my Eagles one lol. A better 100 meters one would be if one contender spent millions of dollars more than any other runner to make himself into a world class runner, but his best finish was 2nd to Bolt once, 3rd or 4th a couple times and out of the medal stand the rest of the time, but after each the race he writes another big check for the best training staff, best equipment, best facilities, etc etc. Just because they have a silver medal doesn't make them dominating.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

I'll agree that, out of those 5, they have been the one that has most underachieved (although Real has been horrible in CL lately). But that's still miles better than anyone else, considering the competition they have to face in the PL.

Real's been drifting talentwise for awhile. Chelski doesn't have such an excuse.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

No. No way. I'm sorry, but this is just not true, and there is no debating it (unfortunately, since I would love for him to be worse than he is). I have no idea why he has not done well in CL (I think the relative mediocrity surrounding him may be the reason), but in the Serie A he has won BY HIMSELF, regardless of the system and the players surrounding him (actually Inter basically has had no offensive system these past 4 years. They just give Ibra the ball and get the hell out of the way). If you take Ibra away from Inter, they win 0 titles. Last year, they needed the refs to come in and save them when Ibra went down. And that still wouldn't have been enough if he hadn't scored 2 goals in 30 minutes at Parma in the last game. This year, he played in basically every game, and the title wasn't even in question from week 1, even though Quaresma and Mancini sucked, Crespo and Cruz did nothing, Balotelli is 15 years old and plays one good game out of every 5, Figo is older than my grandfather, and Obinna is a joke.
Trust me, it pains me to say this, but Ibra, at least in Serie A (and now that Kaka is gone and Totti is 33) is in a league of his own.

I watched a lot of Ibra this year and in the past(It must have been the coke that made me root for him lol), he's a great player, but I wouldn't put him in the same category as Christian Ronaldo or Ronaldo(in his prime) or Rooney. He doesn't even belong in the conversation as them. He's a great scorer/vulture striker who knows how to position himself right to get rebounds and pop a big strike, but he's MIA way too much(especially in the CL) to be considered a superstar.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

He will. But I don't know if he'll ever be back to his top form. In the meantime, there is no doubt that Julio Cesar is the best keeper in Italy, and he has been the last 2 years.

If it was age, I would agree. The constant injury problems to him and his CBs have taken their toll on him.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

I have my doubts on Torres as well (if not for age, I would prefer Drogba).

Whiny bitches don't get any credit lol.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

But Gerrard has been spectacular these past few years, and if he doesn't belong it's only because of health. I don't know hwat more he could have done to help his team out.

He's a great midfielder who has helped Liverpool overachieve at times in the EPL and CL. But his impact is more leadership than play IMO.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

If a team that is not Barcelona, Real, Liverpool, Chelsea, or Manchester (those were my five original "out-of-everyone's-league" teams, and I stand by those) win the CL this year, I'll definitely admit I was wrong, and you can choose my avatar (if you like) for a week.

Liverpool has no business on this list. None.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by dj_stouty

Oh please. Gerrard is widely recognized as one of the best in the world. He won the "FWA Footballer of the Year" award this season...and was close to winning PFA Player of the Year if Giggs didn't get the sentimental nod.

He is a great player, but he's not anywhere near the level of superstar players like Christian Ronaldo, Pato, Rooney, etc imo.