2023-2024 EPL Season

[bluesfan94]

Because of the millimeters on the goal line clearance. That goal counts and you have a (near) 100 point invincible season with a UCL double. I think winning UCL alone makes the case they were the best team that season.

I don't recall the goal line clearance, but that's part of the sport. Regardless, unless it was on the last kick of the game, it's a huge assumption to assume it would have just ended the way you want. And winning the champions league (1) doesn't affect the team in the PL and (2) doesn't mean a team is the best (see, e.g., Chelsea in 20-21).

 

[Savant]

I don't recall the goal line clearance, but that's part of the sport. Regardless, unless it was on the last kick of the game, it's a huge assumption to assume it would have just ended the way you want. And winning the champions league (1) doesn't affect the team in the PL and (2) doesn't mean a team is the best (see, e.g., Chelsea in 20-21).

I mean the best team doesn’t always win right? If you win UCL it’s not unfair to claim because the best team in a domestic league. Chelsea in 20-21 didn’t have a record breaking for a second place team year though; but again no one cares if you finish second. How many teams have gone 97 points or over in the history of the league? How many that don’t have 115 changes to their names?

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Tedious.

 

[hatterson]

It's pretty simple, winning the league in a season is a requirement for that team to be considered in the argument for the greatest ever.

No one is doubting they were an incredible team and if they had pulled off a title winning 98 point invincible season they certainly would have the inside track to the top spot.....but they didn't...so they're not.

 

[Savant]

It's pretty simple, winning the league in a season is a requirement for that team to be considered in the argument for the greatest ever.

No one is doubting they were an incredible team and if they had pulled off a title winning 98 point invincible season they certainly would have the inside track to the top spot.....but they didn't...so they're not.

Yeah that’s what I said. It’s obvious a very high bar.

 

[Peen]

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

I don't recall the goal line clearance, but that's part of the sport. Regardless, unless it was on the last kick of the game, it's a huge assumption to assume it would have just ended the way you want. And winning the champions league (1) doesn't affect the team in the PL and (2) doesn't mean a team is the best (see, e.g., Chelsea in 20-21).

genuinely think there is a very compelling argument to be made that Chelsea were actually the best team in Europe that season. that was City's worst title win under Pep (86 points, meh), there were no spectacular seasons in any of the other major leagues, and chelsea dominated in the champion's league. like, absolutely dominated. i know the Arsenal fan instinct is to pretend Europe doesn't matter, but Chelsea's European form that season (combined with it not being a 100 point City) is enough for me to say that they genuinely were the best side on the continent once Tuchel took over.

 

[hatterson]

genuinely think there is a very compelling argument to be made that Chelsea were actually the best team in Europe that season. that was City's worst title win under Pep (86 points, meh), there were no spectacular seasons in any of the other major leagues, and chelsea dominated in the champion's league. like, absolutely dominated. i know the Arsenal fan instinct is to pretend Europe doesn't matter, but Chelsea's European form that season (combined with it not being a 100 point City) is enough for me to say that they genuinely were the best side on the continent once Tuchel took over.

I acknowledge that "best on the continent" is obviously different than "best PL season" but I'm still gonna have a hard time saying that a team that finished 4th domestically was the best team on the continent just because they had a dominating run of 7 games over the course of 2.5 months in a knockout tournament.

Does beating City in a single game final but finishing 20 points lower in the league really have much power as an argument for having a better season?

 

[bluesfan94]

genuinely think there is a very compelling argument to be made that Chelsea were actually the best team in Europe that season. that was City's worst title win under Pep (86 points, meh), there were no spectacular seasons in any of the other major leagues, and chelsea dominated in the champion's league. like, absolutely dominated. i know the Arsenal fan instinct is to pretend Europe doesn't matter, but Chelsea's European form that season (combined with it not being a 100 point City) is enough for me to say that they genuinely were the best side on the continent once Tuchel took over.

They finished fourth. Come on.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

I acknowledge that "best on the continent" is obviously different than "best PL season" but I'm still gonna have a hard time saying that a team that finished 4th domestically was the best team on the continent just because they had a dominating run of 7 games over the course of 2.5 months in a knockout tournament.

Does beating City in a single game final but finishing 20 points lower in the league really have much power as an argument for having a better season?

They finished fourth. Come on.

tale of two halves of the season

tuchel took over exactly halfway through, and from the day tuchel took over chelsea had the second most points in the league behind city

they did this while also walking the UCL

obviously from august to january they were not the best team in europe

and i get why people wanna hyper-focus on the league

but IMO from january to june they were the best team on the continent

 

[bluesfan94]

tale of two halves of the season

tuchel took over exactly halfway through, and from the day tuchel took over chelsea had the second most points in the league behind city

they did this while also walking the UCL

obviously from august to january they were not the best team in europe

and i get why people wanna hyper-focus on the league

but IMO from january to june they were the best team on the continent

Even when you’re looking at one period they finished second.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Even when you’re looking at one period they finished second.

and convincingly beat the champions of la liga, the team who owns the UCL, and the team that finished first en route to a trophy that matters more. they also beat City in the FA Cup semi.

i give a lot more weight to the CL than to the PL when it comes to stuff like this, which i think is the correct way to do it. when Real Madrid were winning the UCL every year in the mid to late 2010s, they were the best team in Europe, even in the seasons where they didn't win La Liga. Madrid finished 17 points back of Barca in 2017-18 and were definitely the best team in Europe that year.

 

[luiginb]

Yeah James, Chillwell and Kante were amazing that year.

 

[bluesfan94]

and convincingly beat the champions of la liga, the team who owns the UCL, and the team that finished first en route to a trophy that matters more. they also beat City in the FA Cup semi.

i give a lot more weight to the CL than to the PL when it comes to stuff like this, which i think is the correct way to do it. when Real Madrid were winning the UCL every year in the mid to late 2010s, they were the best team in Europe, even in the seasons where they didn't win La Liga. Madrid finished 17 points back of Barca in 2017-18 and were definitely the best team in Europe that year.

I tend to think that the larger sample size of games is more significant than looking at the results of a knockout tournament decided by a single match. This is especially the case because in one scenario, everyone plays each team home and away and so the playing field is level, whereas in a knockout tournament, that isn't the case.

For instance, if Inter had fluked a win against City last season, I think we could all still agree that City was better than Inter.

Or looking at it another way, if Arsenal finish second to City this season, would you agree that Arsenal is the better team because of a couple month stretch and the fact that Arsenal would have won a two-legged knockout against City? Of course not.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

I tend to think that the larger sample size of games is more significant than looking at the results of a knockout tournament decided by a single match.

and that's alright, and a difference of opinion. but in the absence of another side on the continent having a spectacular domestic season, i will defer to the dominant UCL winner.

barcelona had 93 points in la liga in 2017-18, but i genuinely don't think anyone would suggest that they had a better season than UCL winners Madrid that year.

if city had a 100 point season but lost to chelsea in the UCL final, i'd be speaking different. but given that City won the title with the lowest points total since Leicester, i think it's pretty fair to say that the Chelsea side who beat them in the UCL final had the better season.

a UCL title matters a lot more than a PL title does.

 

[bluesfan94]

and that's alright, and a difference of opinion. but in the absence of another side on the continent having a spectacular domestic season, i will defer to the dominant UCL winner.

barcelona had 93 points in la liga in 2017-18, but i genuinely don't think anyone would suggest that they had a better season than UCL winners Madrid that year.

if city had a 100 point season but lost to chelsea in the UCL final, i'd be speaking different. but given that City won the title with the lowest points total since Leicester, i think it's pretty fair to say that the Chelsea side who beat them in the UCL final had the better season.

a UCL title matters a lot more than a PL title does.

Had the better season =/= the better team

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Had the better season =/= the better team

idk, the team that swatted away multiple of the best teams in europe and beat the only other arguable contender for "best team in europe" three times down the stretch is probably the best team in europe.

 

[hatterson]

idk, the team that swatted away multiple of the best teams in europe and beat the only other arguable contender for "best team in europe" three times down the stretch is probably the best team in europe.

Calling Atletico or Porto "one of the best teams in Europe" is a bit of a stretch

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Calling Atletico or Porto "one of the best teams in Europe" is a bit of a stretch

i was talking about Atletico and Real, and given that Atletico won La Liga that year and were at a 92 point pace in the league when the sides met in the first leg, I think the shoe fits. the consensus when the draw was made was that Chelsea were gonna get pumped.

 

[KJS14]

Posters here: I really hope Arsenal don't win the league, because their fans will be insufferable here all summer. I'd rather shill for the UAE team that cheats than see that happen.

Also posters here: We didn't win the league that year, but god damn we must have had the best PL team of all time / the best team in Europe.

 

[bluesfan94]

i was talking about Atletico and Real, and given that Atletico won La Liga that year and were at a 92 point pace in the league when the sides met in the first leg, I think the shoe fits. the consensus when the draw was made was that Chelsea were gonna get pumped.

You don't get to big up Atletico's La Liga chops and then downplay them when it comes to Real. And yes, it was expected Chelsea would lose because Chelsea wasn't considered one of the best teams in Europe that year. Because, you know, they weren't even in the top 3 of their league.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Posters here: I really hope Arsenal don't win the league, because their fans will be insufferable here all summer. I'd rather shill for the UAE team that cheats than see that happen.

Also posters here: We didn't win the league that year, but god damn we must have had the best PL team of all time / the best team in Europe.

when/if arsenal win a UCL, we can contemplate if they were the best team in europe that year. "also posters here" are making claims about teams that won stuff after, yknow, winning stuff.

let the record show that i do not think 2018-19 liverpool was the best PL team of all time (although 2019-20 liverpool is, imo, in the convo)

You don't get to big up Atletico's La Liga chops and then downplay them when it comes to Real. And yes, it was expected Chelsea would lose because Chelsea wasn't considered one of the best teams in Europe that year. Because, you know, they weren't even in the top 3 of their league.

there's no cognitive dissonance between "atletico were one of the best teams in europe because they won la liga" and "real madrid were the best team in europe in spite of not winning la liga". winning your league puts you in the convo. other variables are at play, including performance in europe.

i think we can all use our big brains here to recognize that the specificities of a league season and a european campaign matter. porto weren't the best side in europe in 03-04 just by virtue of winning the UCL. real madrid were the best side in europe in 17-18 even though they didn't win their domestic league. heck, bayer leverkusen are the best team in europe this year even though they're not even in the champions league.

in 2020-21, man city had the second lowest PL champ point total in the last decade. there were no dominant campaigns in any of the major leagues. after tuchel took over, chelsea had the second highest point total in the PL and won the UCL convincingly, including beating city in the final (as well as in the league and in the FA cup just weeks prior). with that context altogether, i think it's a reasonable claim to say that chelsea were the best team in europe from january to june, given that the played to that level and also beat the only other contender multiple times.

if city had their 2017-18 domestic season and lost the ucl final, i would not be saying this.

 

[KJS14]

when/if arsenal win a UCL, we can contemplate if they were the best team in europe that year. "also posters here" are making claims about teams that won stuff after, yknow, winning stuff.

let the record show that i do not think 2018-19 liverpool was the best PL team of all time (although 2019-20 liverpool is, imo, in the convo)

Ok, but it's quite funny to see people here so dismayed by the thought of Arsenal winning something because of Arsenal fan's potential reactions, and then in the same week those other teams' fans are here arguing about how actually they were the best team years ago.

 

[hatterson]

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Ok, but it's quite funny to see people here so dismayed by the thought of Arsenal winning something because of Arsenal fan's potential reactions, and then in the same week those other teams' fans are here arguing about how actually they were the best team years ago.

hey i didn't bring it up

i just get fed up with the pretty constant disrespect put on our 2021 ucl win. it was not 2012.