The standard of football in this league

[Skinner]

I've only just come back from a few months absence you miserable, moaning c***.

And I did not wonder where you was once!

How you been?

 

[Stevencc]

And I did not wonder where you was once!

How you been?

Not all bad mate, how's life with the new lady?

 

[Skinner]

Not all bad mate, how's life with the new lady?

I'm currently still in bed back in Kent after just calling in for two days sick, as I can't be arsed to travel to work from here as we had a massive barney yesterday

 

[St. Juste]

Chelsea are pretty consistent when they are in Europe, I expect them to challenge for the Champions League next season. The other top teams have under-performed considering their talent and resources.

That does seem a bit presumptuous, this current Chelsea side is a completely different beast to the many that preceded it. They have done well this season partly because of a lack of European football, but it doesn't suddenly mean that Gary Cahill and Victor Moses will become European standard defenders. Plus their revolutionary 3-5-2 is meat and drink in European terms.

Bottom half has definitely got better in quality, the split in the league now is 1-7/8-20

I do genuinely think tough competition week in week out applies to PL sides now, in terms of Europe anyway. You ain't going to get away with resting key players for Bournemouth, Stoke, Palace, Watford or anyone else bar Sunderland (lol) on the road, like you can in La Liga, Buli, Serie A. It ain't the best league in the world, but it's only second to the championship in competitive terms, and even now you can argue that. I'm for a winter break personally. The league is tough, and it's killing our chances in Europe.

I actually think many of the teams you mentioned are pretty rubbish, but it's an easy thing to say (and impossible to prove) that jobber PL sides are better than their German, Spanish and Italian equivalents. They have never played against each other. Barcelona et. al do regularly heavily beat Spanish sides - just like they heavily beat Man City in Europe. They are incredibly good, and I'd wager they could quite easily put 6 past, say, Crystal Palace.

But it is uniquely English to think they have not only the most competitive league in the world, but the top two most competitive leagues in the world.

No wonder Brexit happened, Americans will look on in awe at this level of self belief.

 

[Stevencc]

 

[Renegade]

That does seem a bit presumptuous, this current Chelsea side is a completely different beast to the many that preceded it. They have done well this season partly because of a lack of European football, but it doesn't suddenly mean that Gary Cahill and Victor Moses will become European standard defenders. Plus their revolutionary 3-5-2 is meat and drink in European terms.

Chelsea generally do well in terms of recruitment of players, especially ones suitable for Europe. Even long after Mourinho's initial success with the club, they performed well in Europe and whilst Lampard, Terry and some others have moved on, they still have a strong backbone (Kante and Matic make up for any of Cahill's failings and Moses has actually been superb this season). You can cherry pick a few players from most of the top European sides and say 'big deal', but Chelsea already match up well on paper with most of Europe's elite - Hazard, Costa, Kante, Matic, Alonso, Courtois, Pedro, Willian, Azpilicueta are all blatantly top level players and Chelsea will sign more in the summer. For Moses - see Chelsea failures Juan Cuadrado and Felipe Luis for examples of players that flourish in certain systems. They had no European football this season, but they've still been far better than everyone else in the league, they should compete next year for all honours.

The Premier League has been weak in Europe's top competition for years (Chelsea excepted), this is undeniable. However, in the past two seasons, the Premier League has hoovered up most of the world's best managers, it's in a transitional period. I don't think it's implausible at all that the Premier League starts to compete for the top trophy again given that Guardiola, Mourinho, Klopp, Conte and Pochettino are managing the five best clubs in the league now. Three of those managers have incredible records in European football and the spending has only just begun.

I'm not actually that impressed by the very top level of European football at the moment. Apart from the Galacticos and Juventus, the quality hasn't been that great and I'd attribute it to the level of coaching. Real Madrid are winning Champions Leagues pretty much based on individual talent, Barcelona have dropped off due to inferior coaching this season, Monaco as beautiful as they are to watch aren't anything to write home about and they are in a Champions League semi-final after beating a pretty weak Dortmund side compared to previous (Klopp) seasons. Chelsea with vastly improved management are comparable to some of these teams already and they will spend big once again.

P.S. I'm Northern Irish and couldn't give a fuck about the strength of the Premier League.

 

[Skinner]

Surely the number of clubs that have won the title or at least challenged in the past 3-5 years is an indication that the league is more competitive than its counterparts. I mean, we can all pretend through our hatred of anything England and say Bayern have faced incredible competition for the FIFTH time in a row, Juventus have Napoli breathing down the necks and that Barca and Real aren't consistent enough to pull away from Atletico.

 

[St. Juste]

Chelsea generally do well in terms of recruitment of players, especially ones suitable for Europe. Even long after Mourinho's initial success with the club, they performed well in Europe and whilst Lampard, Terry and some others have moved on, they still have a strong backbone (Kante and Matic make up for any of Cahill's failings and Moses has actually been superb this season). You can cherry pick a few players from most of the top European sides and say 'big deal', but Chelsea already match up well on paper with most of Europe's elite - Hazard, Costa, Kante, Matic, Alonso, Courtois, Pedro, Willian, Azpilicueta are all blatantly top level players and Chelsea will sign more in the summer. For Moses - see Chelsea failures Juan Cuadrado and Felipe Luis for examples of players that flourish in certain systems. They had no European football this season, but they've still been far better than everyone else in the league, they should compete next year for all honours.

The Premier League has been weak in Europe's top competition for years (Chelsea excepted), this is undeniable. However, in the past two seasons, the Premier League has hoovered up most of the world's best managers, it's in a transitional period. I don't think it's implausible at all that the Premier League starts to compete for the top trophy again given that Guardiola, Mourinho, Klopp, Conte and Pochettino are managing the five best clubs in the league now. Three of those managers have incredible records in European football and the spending has only just begun.

I'm not actually that impressed by the very top level of European football at the moment. Apart from the Galacticos and Juventus, the quality hasn't been that great and I'd attribute it to the level of coaching. Real Madrid are winning Champions Leagues pretty much based on individual talent, Barcelona have dropped off due to inferior coaching this season, Monaco as beautiful as they are to watch aren't anything to write home about and they are in a Champions League semi-final after beating a pretty weak Dortmund side compared to previous (Klopp) seasons. Chelsea with vastly improved management are comparable to some of these teams already.

P.S. I'm Northern Irish and couldn't give a fuck about the strength of the Premier League.

Well, I don't agree that they are all blatantly top players - it's not something you can fully define until they have performed at the very highest level - i.e. either the CL or an international competition. That's why those saying Kante is the best midfielder in the world are being quite ridiculous, he might well be at some point, but he hasn't proven himself against top level opposition. Indeed, during a recent game against Spain didn't Busquets - a player who has repeatedly and abundantly proven himself at the highest level - make Kante look rather silly?

Individual games or moments don't indicate terribly much, but some of the players you have mentioned haven't proven themselves at the highest level. Some have. Some haven't. We won't know till we see next season. To expect them to do well, given the quality of football we have seen in Europe this season, is certainly presumptuous.

I think your third paragraph is very telling, English football absolutely does have more money than everyone else - it makes it relatively easy to attract coaches and players, and makes their repeated failings over the past few years all the more bewildering. England was the third country Pep chose to manage in. It's interesting that all the great managers you mention started both their coaching and playing careers in other leagues. Yes, it does have more money, this has always been its advantage, it just clearly isn't using it very well. Juventus look an even better side without Pogba. I think Glanville is correct is saying this is the 'Greed is Good' league, it doesn't mean the football is good.

I completely disagree the standard has been poor, I think it has been exceptional this season. You are aware Klopps side completely fell off a cliff towards the end? Tuchel has done a great job in stabilising them. This criticised Monaco side breezed past both Spurs and Man City, the former looked particularly hopeless and out their depth throughout their European campaign but are second in the Premier League.

Surely the number of clubs that have won the title or at least challenged in the past 3-5 years is an indication that the league is more competitive than its counterparts. I mean, we can all pretend through our hatred of anything England and say Bayern have faced incredible competition for the FIFTH time in a row, Juventus have Napoli breathing down the necks and that Barca and Real aren't consistent enough to pull away from Atletico.

It's one potential measure, but a fairly inconclusive one. What if one side is comfortably better, wins the league all the team, but the rest of teams are incredibly close and well matched? Isn't that more competitive than 3 sides winning the league, and the rest being split into fairly predictable blocks? The top of the SPL is not competitive, the bottom and middle absolutely is - some of the largest clubs like Hibs, Dundee United and Hearts have all been relegated in the past few years, with one of them concurrently winning the Scottish Cup.

Nevertheless, there have been 3 La Liga winners in the past 5 years and 4 EPL winners, Leicester being the outlier. If you look over a longer term period, e.g. 15-20 years there is no significant difference between the major leagues.

So, having abandoned the 'best league in the world' moniker it has been replaced with 'most competitive league in the world (we also have second most)'.

Good to know, it's a truly fascinating branding exercise. And it works, people actually seem to genuinely believe it regardless of the available evidence.

 

[Renegade]

I think your third paragraph is very telling, English football absolutely does have more money than everyone else - it makes it relatively easy to attract coaches and players, and makes their repeated failings over the past few years all the more bewildering. England was the third country Pep chose to manage in. It's interesting that all the great managers you mention started both their coaching and playing careers in other leagues. Yes, it does have more money, this has always been its advantage, it just clearly isn't using it very well. Juventus look an even better side without Pogba. I think Glanville is correct is saying this is the 'Greed is Good' league, it doesn't mean the football is good.

I completely disagree the standard has been poor, I think it has been exceptional this season. You are aware Klopps side completely fell off a cliff towards the end? Tuchel has done a great job in stabilising them. This criticised Monaco side breezed past both Spurs and Man City, the former looked particularly hopeless and out their depth throughout their European campaign but are second in the Premier League.

The Premier League had the most money for the last decade, but it wasn't until the past two seasons that it had the best managers. The influx of arguably three of the best five managers in the world in just over a year and a half should have some say in English success in future seasons. Prior to Klopp, Guardiola and Conte coming into the league, which managers have been in the Premier League that were comparable to those in Spain, Germany and Italy? There was Mourinho who has a phenomenal track record in the Champions League and Alex Ferguson, who won it twice. My supposition is contingent on the influx of top level managers making a difference in the next few seasons. I openly admitted the Premier league has been shit in Europe for years.

Klopp's Dortmund ran out of steam at the very end, after six seasons of incredible success. He beat the behemoth that is Bayern Munich twice to become champions of Germany and brought his side to the brink of winning the Champions league, after several impressive performances in the competition. He is a much better manager than Tuchel. They needed a fresh start, but the current Dortmund side pales in comparison to Klopp's peak Dortmund. Chelsea wouldn't have much issue with them.

Spurs played Monaco during their worst spell of the season and they for some reason appear hopeless at Wembley. The Spurs team that is currently second in the league and in absolutely blitzing form is a completely different team to the one that played Monaco in the group stages. City, well, can't defend them, they have been absolutely all over the place this season. Monaco are a more cohesive unit, I expect Guardiola will eventually get it right since it's his first season with this team. Hopefully he doesn't. Bayern, Real, Barcelona, Atletico were stronger in previous iterations of the competition. Juventus have been superb this season though, admittedly. Hopefully they win it.

 

[Modernist]

It's definitely declining, the championship too, despite having lot's of 'big' clubs it's been awful this season.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

As someone who spent years looking at the Premier League through only the glass window of the media, only to then be quite unexpectedly parachuted right into the middle of it, there's little doubt for me that the PL is over-egged by the media machine around it.

Our three best players are a jobbing Championship winger turned goal scoring machine, a defender who not long ago looked dead shaky in League One, and a full back who cost us 100k from Leyton Orient. These guys are week in week out better than the hyped up players we've paid millions upon millions for. And sometimes/often the players the opposition has paid millions upon millions for as well.

Now there's a lot to be said for good coaching over several years for the older players. But everything the media told me about the Premier League said stuff like that just wasn't possible due to the sheer standard, with the requirement being to spend big on 'Premier League proven players' or get nowhere. A few decent cameos on MOTD seems to rapidly increase a player's value.

That said we had Leicester get to the Quarters of the Champions League and only narrowly get beat by the mighty Atletico, whilst being mediocre at best, struggling at worst in the league. Add in how the previously only successful Guardiola has struggled to 'get' the PL and often struggled against the middling clubs. That seems to contradict everything!

 

[johnnytodd]

As someone who spent years looking at the Premier League through only the glass window of the media, only to then be quite unexpectedly parachuted right into the middle of it, there's little doubt for me that the PL is over-egged by the media machine around it.

Our three best players are a jobbing Championship winger turned goal scoring machine, a defender who not long ago looked dead shaky in League One, and a full back who cost us 100k from Leyton Orient. These guys are week in week out better than the hyped up players we've paid millions upon millions for. And sometimes/often the players the opposition has paid millions upon millions for as well.

Now there's a lot to be said for good coaching over several years for the older players. But everything the media told me about the Premier League said stuff like that just wasn't possible due to the sheer standard, with the requirement being to spend big on 'Premier League proven players' or get nowhere. A few decent cameos on MOTD seems to rapidly increase a player's value.

That said we had Leicester get to the Quarters of the Champions League and only narrowly get beat by the mighty Atletico, whilst being mediocre at best, struggling at worst in the league. Add in how the previously only successful Guardiola has struggled to 'get' the PL and often struggled against the middling clubs. That seems to contradict everything!

This is the problem the UK media concentrate on what 6 clubs? Every other pundit on TV is a Liverpool ex player. Its all about about TV audiences ......
Every player who does well at a club is immediately linked to the top 6 clubs so people click on the story in Asia.

its all bollocks the league standard is shite as i said in the first post.

 

[Skinner]

Well, I don't agree that they are all blatantly top players - it's not something you can fully define until they have performed at the very highest level - i.e. either the CL or an international competition. That's why those saying Kante is the best midfielder in the world are being quite ridiculous, he might well be at some point, but he hasn't proven himself against top level opposition. Indeed, during a recent game against Spain didn't Busquets - a player who has repeatedly and abundantly proven himself at the highest level - make Kante look rather silly?

Individual games or moments don't indicate terribly much, but some of the players you have mentioned haven't proven themselves at the highest level. Some have. Some haven't. We won't know till we see next season. To expect them to do well, given the quality of football we have seen in Europe this season, is certainly presumptuous.

I think your third paragraph is very telling, English football absolutely does have more money than everyone else - it makes it relatively easy to attract coaches and players, and makes their repeated failings over the past few years all the more bewildering. England was the third country Pep chose to manage in. It's interesting that all the great managers you mention started both their coaching and playing careers in other leagues. Yes, it does have more money, this has always been its advantage, it just clearly isn't using it very well. Juventus look an even better side without Pogba. I think Glanville is correct is saying this is the 'Greed is Good' league, it doesn't mean the football is good.

I completely disagree the standard has been poor, I think it has been exceptional this season. You are aware Klopps side completely fell off a cliff towards the end? Tuchel has done a great job in stabilising them. This criticised Monaco side breezed past both Spurs and Man City, the former looked particularly hopeless and out their depth throughout their European campaign but are second in the Premier League.



It's one potential measure, but a fairly inconclusive one. What if one side is comfortably better, wins the league all the team, but the rest of teams are incredibly close and well matched? Isn't that more competitive than 3 sides winning the league, and the rest being split into fairly predictable blocks? The top of the SPL is not competitive, the bottom and middle absolutely is - some of the largest clubs like Hibs, Dundee United and Hearts have all been relegated in the past few years, with one of them concurrently winning the Scottish Cup.

Nevertheless, there have been 3 La Liga winners in the past 5 years and 4 EPL winners, Leicester being the outlier. If you look over a longer term period, e.g. 15-20 years there is no significant difference between the major leagues.

So, having abandoned the 'best league in the world' moniker it has been replaced with 'most competitive league in the world (we also have second most)'.

Good to know, it's a truly fascinating branding exercise. And it works, people actually seem to genuinely believe it regardless of the available evidence.

Have you seen the bottom half of the premier league table? Or 3rd-6th?

 

[St. Juste]

The Premier League had the most money for the last decade, but it wasn't until the past two seasons that it had the best managers. The influx of arguably three of the best five managers in the world in just over a year and a half should have some say in English success in future seasons. Prior to Klopp, Guardiola and Conte coming into the league, which managers have been in the Premier League that were comparable to those in Spain, Germany and Italy? There was Mourinho who has a phenomenal track record in the Champions League and Alex Ferguson, who won it twice. My supposition is contingent on the influx of top level managers making a difference in the next few seasons. I openly admitted the Premier league has been shit in Europe for years.

Klopp's Dortmund ran out of steam at the very end, after six seasons of incredible success. He beat the behemoth that is Bayern Munich twice to become champions of Germany and brought his side to the brink of winning the Champions league, after several impressive performances in the competition. He is a much better manager than Tuchel. They needed a fresh start, but the current Dortmund side pales in comparison to Klopp's peak Dortmund. Chelsea wouldn't have much issue with them.

Spurs played Monaco during their worst spell of the season and they for some reason appear hopeless at Wembley. The Spurs team that is currently second in the league and in absolutely blitzing form is a completely different team to the one that played Monaco in the group stages. City, well, can't defend them, they have been absolutely all over the place this season. Monaco are a more cohesive unit, I expect Guardiola will eventually get it right since it's his first season with this team. Hopefully he doesn't. Bayern, Real, Barcelona, Atletico were stronger in previous iterations of the competition. Juventus have been superb this season though, admittedly. Hopefully they win it.

I don't know why you keep referring to Klopp in that context. If he really was a top manager he would not be at Liverpool. Indeed, following a pretty disastrous end to his Dortmund career he has taken a step down - to a team that hasn't been relevant in the Champions League for the past 10 years. It's nothing against Liverpool or anything, just a fact. They are, generously, a second tier European club and were Klopp as good as Guardiola, Conte (or Allegri, Ancelotti, Simeone etc.) he'd be at a genuinely top European club. At it is he isn't that good, and he's a club that isn't very good.

To reiterate, Conte had very limited success in the Champions League and Guardiola could have had his pick of jobs following leaving Barcelona and preferred the Bundesliga over the Premier League.

Would Chelsea have much issue with Monaco? The side that breezed past Man City and Spurs? Impossible to tell - I'd suggest, clearly they would have a big issue with them. As they would with a decent, if not spectacular, Dortmund side.

The Spurs team that was blitzing the Premier League is exactly the same team to the one that lost to Monaco, in pretty much every way. If anything, it is Monaco who has changed. Their most dangerous forward didn't even start a game in the group stages, and is now the most coveted young player in the world.

The gloss has gone off the Premier League, see Phil Nevilles bizarre rant yesterday. People have stopped claiming it is the best league in the world, but now they are finally acknowledging, objectively, it simply isn't that good. The two games yesterday could scarcely be more two bald men fighting over a comb, despite featuring three of the most marketed sides.

There is nothing necessarily wrong with loving the Premier League and watching it religiously, most fans of other leagues put up with far worse quality, but it's a uniquely English (or British) thing to think that your league is simply the best, even when it clearly isn't. Or having the first, and second, most competitive leagues in the world. Does humility exist in this country? No, and that's why it's hurtling off a cliff and the EU will be paying us to trade with them. Good grief.

Have you seen the bottom half of the premier league table? Or 3rd-6th?

Yes, two teams are completely marooned at the bottom.

If you want to see relegation from a competitive league, look at what just happened in the Scottish Championship - three of the four bottom sides at the bottom finishing on the same points.

 

[Pagnell]

I don't know why you keep referring to Klopp in that context. If he really was a top manager he would not be at Liverpool.

That's such a stupid, short-sighted comment. Not every manager views the pinnacle of their career as being in charge of Galacticos. A manager taking on the long-term task of taking a team back to greatness doesn't automatically render him below the top tier of management any more than David Moyes being in charge of United had him on the same managerial level of Ferguson and Mourinho.

 

[Renegade]

I don't know why you keep referring to Klopp in that context. If he really was a top manager he would not be at Liverpool. Indeed, following a pretty disastrous end to his Dortmund career he has taken a step down - to a team that hasn't been relevant in the Champions League for the past 10 years. It's nothing against Liverpool or anything, just a fact. They are, generously, a second tier European club and were Klopp as good as Guardiola, Conte (or Allegri, Ancelotti, Simeone etc.) he'd be at a genuinely top European club. At it is he isn't that good, and he's a club that isn't very good.

The top clubs in Europe would have given their left nut to get Klopp...did you miss why he chose Liverpool? It was because he wanted a project and he wanted to manage a club with a fan base comparable to Dortmund, he didn't want to go to an already made team with unlimited funds and expectation of dominance. All of the papers said Real Madrid amongst others wanted Klopp before he chose Liverpool, they had Rafa Benitez in charge at the time...but yes, it's actuallly his ability that prevented him from managing a top European club.

To reiterate, Conte had very limited success in the Champions League and Guardiola could have had his pick of jobs following leaving Barcelona and preferred the Bundesliga over the Premier League.

Would Chelsea have much issue with Monaco? The side that breezed past Man City and Spurs? Impossible to tell - I'd suggest, clearly they would have a big issue with them. As they would with a decent, if not spectacular, Dortmund side.

Conte had just dragged his team back to the top of Italy after the Calciopoli scandal. They were dominating Italy just as easily as Allegri is now and that team still has his fingerprint all over it. It was a matter of time before Juventus climbed back to the top of Europe given their fan base, their stadium, the ability to solely concentrate on Europe with no significant competition in the league. I wouldn't write off Conte in Europe just yet, since he only had a few attempts at it with a relatively nascent squad and his successor Allegri failed miserably after one good season at AC Milan. For the record I'm not writing Allegri off because of minor failures that are actually far worse than Conte's failures, just like I'm not writing off Klopp after one bad season in nine.

The Spurs team that was blitzing the Premier League is exactly the same team to the one that lost to Monaco, in pretty much every way. If anything, it is Monaco who has changed. Their most dangerous forward didn't even start a game in the group stages, and is now the most coveted young player in the world.

The gloss has gone off the Premier League, see Phil Nevilles bizarre rant yesterday. People have stopped claiming it is the best league in the world, but now they are finally acknowledging, objectively, it simply isn't that good. The two games yesterday could scarcely be more two bald men fighting over a comb, despite featuring three of the most marketed sides.

There is nothing necessarily wrong with loving the Premier League and watching it religiously, most fans of other leagues put up with far worse quality, but it's a uniquely English (or British) thing to think that your league is simply the best, even when it clearly isn't. Or having the first, and second, most competitive leagues in the world. Does humility exist in this country? No, and that's why it's hurtling off a cliff and the EU will be paying us to trade with them. Good grief.

The Premier League had the most money for the last decade, but it wasn't until the past two seasons that it had the best managers. The influx of arguably three of the best five managers in the world in just over a year and a half should have some say in English success in future seasons. Prior to Klopp, Guardiola and Conte coming into the league, which managers have been in the Premier League that were comparable to those in Spain, Germany and Italy? There was Mourinho who has a phenomenal track record in the Champions League and Alex Ferguson, who won it twice. My supposition is contingent on the influx of top level managers making a difference in the next few seasons. I openly admitted the Premier league has been shit in Europe for years.

You're completely deluded if you don't think Spurs are a much improved side from earlier in the season. They play completely differently. They were stuck in the battle for 4th, struggling to score goals. They have been hammering almost everyone since Christmas. Alli and Eriksen were average at best before Christmas, they've been two of the best players in the league since then, Alli arguably only second to Hazard. Something has changed.

I already said I believe that the Premier League's possible future success will be due to the recent influx in top managerial talent. Guardiola picked the European Champions Bayern Munich over Premier League jobs that weren't vacant because he was getting unlimited cash and he was getting a team already made to compete for the Champions League, you know the European Champions. I highly doubt the strength of the league had anything to do with his choice.

Chelsea would have trouble with Monaco, though I think both are much better sides than Dortmund who are currently 4th in the Bundlesliga. Chelsea are walking the Premier League. I said Chelsea were comparable to some of the teams in the Champions League semi-finals, ergo after strengthening in the summer I expect them to be in a position to challenge for Europe. I think Chelsea would already compete with current Atletico or Monaco. I reckon most people would regardless or not of their undying love for the great imperious Premier League.

And again, I never said it was the best. Some Premier League fans are blowhards, but there is nothing unreasonable in suggesting that the Premier League should challenge Spain, Germany and Juventus in future years for the Champions League trophy. They have taken the best managers from Germany and Spain the the past three seasons, Germany have already regressed without Guardiola and Klopp. Barcelona and Atletico have regressed this season. Monaco will have a very tough time holding onto their talent. Real Madrid and Juventus look like the only stable superpowers in Europe this season.

 

[St. Juste]

That's such a stupid, short-sighted comment. Not every manager views the pinnacle of their career as being in charge of Galacticos. A manager taking on the long-term task of taking a team back to greatness doesn't automatically render him below the top tier of management any more than David Moyes being in charge of United had him on the same managerial level of Ferguson and Mourinho.

Erm, I think they pretty much do. There is a chance that Klopp willingly chose Liverpool ahead of Real Madrid, just like there is a chance some random German player would do the same. It isn't terribly likely though. Klopp reputation had taken a bit of a dive given what happened towards the end of his Dortmund career, he might have viewed Liverpool as the best option he could feasibly get.

Regarding taking a team back to greatness, are we expecting that Klopp would also have chosen Leeds and Nottingham Forest ahead of Real Madrid too? Where does it end?

Nobody ever put Moyes in the same bracket as, say, Ancelotti - just like people shouldn't be doing with Klopp.

The top clubs in Europe would have given their left nut to get Klopp...did you miss why he chose Liverpool? It was because he wanted a project and he wanted to manage a club with a fan base comparable to Dortmund, he didn't want to go to an already made team with unlimited funds and expectation of dominance. All of the papers said Real Madrid amongst others wanted Klopp before he chose Liverpool, they had Rafa Benitez in charge at the time...but yes, it's actuallly his ability that prevented him from managing a top European club.

Conte had just dragged his team back to the top of Italy after the Calciopoli scandal. They were dominating Italy just as easily as Allegri is now and that team still has his fingerprint all over it. It was a matter of time before Juventus climbed back to the top of Europe given their fan base, their stadium, the ability to solely concentrate on Europe with no significant competition in the league. I wouldn't write off Conte in Europe just yet, since he only had a few attempts at it with a relatively nascent squad and his successor Allegri failed miserably after one good season at AC Milan. For the record I'm not writing Allegri off because of minor failures that are actually far worse than Conte's failures, just like I'm not writing off Klopp after one bad season in nine.

You're completely deluded if you don't think Spurs are a much improved side from earlier in the season. They play completely differently. They were stuck in the battle for 4th, struggling to score goals. They have been hammering almost everyone since Christmas. Alli and Eriksen were average at best before Christmas, they've been two of the best players in the league since then, Alli arguably only second to Hazard. Something has changed.

I already said I believe that the Premier League's possible future success will be due to the recent influx in top managerial talent. Guardiola picked the European Champions Bayern Munich over Premier League jobs that weren't vacant because he was getting unlimited cash and he was getting a team already made to compete for the Champions League, you know the European Champions. I highly doubt the strength of the league had anything to do with his choice.

Chelsea would have trouble with Monaco, though I think both are much better sides than Dortmund who are currently 4th in the Bundlesliga. Chelsea are walking the Premier League. I said Chelsea were comparable to some of the teams in the Champions League semi-finals, ergo after strengthening in the summer I expect them to be in a position to challenge for Europe. I think Chelsea would already compete with current Atletico or Monaco. I reckon most people would regardless or not of their undying love for the great imperious Premier League.

And again, I never said it was the best. Some Premier League fans are blowhards, but there is nothing unreasonable in suggesting that the Premier League should challenge Spain, Germany and Juventus in future years for the Champions League trophy. They have taken the best managers from Germany and Spain the the past three seasons, Germany have already regressed without Guardiola and Klopp. Barcelona and Atletico have regressed this season. Monaco will have a very tough time holding onto their talent. Real Madrid and Juventus look like the only stable superpowers in Europe this season.

Well, see above. Logically as a choice it doesn't stack up. As for paper talk, wasn't Rodgers also linked with Real Madrid after finishing 2nd? I think it's clear that Zidane was being groomed for the job for a while.

To believe that Klopp would choose Liverpool over Real Madrid is up there with Paul Merson asserting every manager around the world, besides Real and Barcelona, would love to manage Hull in the Premier League.

It's an interesting paragraph, but as pointed out, Conte has not achieved much in Europe.

Deluded, eh? Never mind the fact that the personnel and coaching staff are identical. But their contunal poor performances are excluded because they weren't playing well that month? Er, okay then. What exactly are you arguing for anyway? That Spurs are a potentially great European side who just flunked out because of a poor run in form? What out Real. Rather, they are a team who have underperformed for several years in Europe, including this years dire Europa League result, and serious questions remain as to their mentality when tested in big games, or outside the safe Premier League bubble of Stoke at home.

Right, so if Guardiola didn't have a positive influence on Bayern in Europe, why are you assuming he will have one on City? The Premier League being so great, and backing it up with the fact that great managers work here, seems a bit flat when they have all worked elsewhere - and that the highest profile one chose a German job first.

This Chelsea side hasn't been tested at all in Europe, so it's impossible to tell. There are quite a few players in it, the aforementioned Cahill, Moses and even Alonso and Kante who haven't been at that level - or are Gary Cahill. Diego Costa, Pedro and Willian are good players, but Hazard is their only potentially elite attacking player. They are a limited side, and just winning the Premier League - even comfortably - doesn't make you a patch on the genuine European elite. Indeed, it hasn't done for some years. One or two years could be an anomaly but 1 finalist in 9 years? At least you're confident the current Chelsea side will break that....

Even a regressed Barcelona hammered Man City this season, as well as PSG. They are significantly ahead of any Premier League and Atletico had little trouble easing past the current English champions. But keep up the optimism, it's undoubtedly the one thing English football doesn't lack.

 

[Pagnell]

It would appear you're unable to grasp the simple premise that a manager can be in the top echelons of footballing management whilst holding no interest in the managerial merry-go-round roles at clubs like of Real and Barcelona. As a result of that this debate really is a bit pointless.

Also, your insistence on referring to Klopp's final Dortmund season as "disastrous" (despite finishing 7th, a placement which they would have been happy with prior to his arrival given that they finished 9th and 13th in the two seasons before) whilst deliberately ignoring what he achieved whilst there is telling. Then again, we are talking about someone who defended Moyes as the choice to replace Ferguson.

 

[Stevencc]

St. Juste would have defended the Loch Ness Monster as Fergie's replacement if she had a valid Scottish birth certificate.

 

[johnnytodd]

Klopp has failed to win 52% of his games in England, i'm sure Real are chomping at the bit to get that record.

PMSL

 

[Stevencc]

But St. Juste tells us that English teams are shit in Europe so Real wouldn't have to worry about playing too many games in England under Klopp.

What's his record like on Spanish soil?

 

[johnnytodd]

Klopp is a Flopp and this was prediction number 5 of 24.........23 were spot on btw.

 

[St. Juste]

It would appear you're unable to grasp the simple premise that a manager can be in the top echelons of footballing management whilst holding no interest in the managerial merry-go-round roles at clubs like of Real and Barcelona. As a result of that this debate really is a bit pointless.

Also, your insistence on referring to Klopp's final Dortmund season as "disastrous" (despite finishing 7th, a placement which they would have been happy with prior to his arrival given that they finished 9th and 13th in the two seasons before) whilst deliberately ignoring what he achieved whilst there is telling. Then again, we are talking about someone who defended Moyes as the choice to replace Ferguson.

I grasp the premise fine, it's just completely illogical. Maybe players do it as well, maybe some of St. Mirren players have had offers from Real Madrid but are just more interested in staying in Paisley. It's possible, just extremely unlikely. There is no evidence that Klopp ever had any approach from Madrid. Is there any evidence he had any approach from anywhere except Liverpool?

Given he will only speak German and English, and he had reached his zenith in Germany, it's not completely illogical for him to go to Liverpool. However, he would never have done so by rejecting Barcelona or Real Madrid. Sorry to burst your bubble, it just wouldn't happen. Once in England Liverpool was probably the best offer he got, but there's no way it would be his first choice. Again, no need to be precious about it, football is a hierarchy and Liverpool are high, but certainly not at the top. Even their fans must surely realise this - if Real Madrid wanted any of your players they'd be gone in a heartbeat. As would any Charlton player, or whomever, were Liverpool interested.

I'm not ignoring what he has achieved at all, although for any top manager yes that was a disastrous season. And it will certainly have affected his stock for most of the top clubs around the world - do you deny this? Liverpool would have been the best offer her got, and he took it. Nothing wrong with that. Were he to be offered the Barcelona job in the summer would he take it? Er, yes.

Oh yes, did you ever come up with a viable alternative for the time? If so, I'd be interested to hear - exactly who would you have hired?

St. Juste would have defended the Loch Ness Monster as Fergie's replacement if she had a valid Scottish birth certificate.

I don't see what nationality has to do with it, I'm shocked Moyes is still in a job with Sunderland.

But at the time, there were very few viable options to replace Ferguson, and indeed, it was a relatively popular appointment at the time.

But St. Juste tells us that English teams are shit in Europe so Real wouldn't have to worry about playing too many games in England under Klopp.

What's his record like on Spanish soil?

And I thought your last post was trying a bit too hard.

 

[Stevencc]

You post tome after tome saying the same thing (Engurland is shit and that) and I'm the one trying bit too hard with a throwaway one or two-liner?

 

[Pagnell]

Were he to be offered the Barcelona job in the summer would he take it? Er, yes.

The rest of your long-winded guff is just going around in circles we've already visited but this question goes to the heart of the matter and what you're unable to grasp. I don't believe he would, for the reasons both myself and Renegade have stated.

 

[johnnytodd]

 

[johnnytodd]

Interesting that Chelsea have reached the semi final or final in 50% of their Champions league seasons.

well quite interesting

 

[johnnytodd]

You post tome after tome saying the same thing (Engurland is shit and that) and I'm the one trying bit too hard with a throwaway one or two-liner?

hey leave him be he's slagging Liverpool

 

[SALTIRE]

Klopp has failed to win 52% of his games in England, i'm sure Real are chomping at the bit to get that record.

PMSL

You could have a 90 pc win record at Real Madrid and still lose your job, they are an awful club.

 

[johnnytodd]

You could have a 90 pc win record at Real Madrid and still lose your job, they are an awful club.

Id like their trophies, 10% of them would do.