Do City leave you cold?

[GuybrushThreepwood]

The thing that surprises me in this thread, (and perhaps it shouldn’t) is how genuinely unaware so many fans are that what is happening with City in terms of dominance is the same as what happened with Utd, only over a far longer period 7 of the first 9 Premier Leagues, between 1993 and 2001. Then a brief gap then 5 out of of 7 between 2007 and 2013. I can assure you that that was pretty damn boring for all non Utd fans but I’m pretty sure I don’t remember single Utd fan giving a flying feck!

The absolute height of Utd’s dominance was probably the 1999-2001 period, following up the treble by sealing the title with 4 games left in 2000 (finishing 18 points clear), and then sealing the title with 5 games left in 2001 (before switching off and losing their final 3 games of the season but still finishing 10 points clear). So it was 7 titles in 9 titles, 3 titles in a row and back to back one horse races / processions.

City will probably win their 4th title in 5 seasons; Utd did that on 3 separate occasions from 1993-1997, 1999-2003 and 2007-2011.

I personally enjoyed watching Man Utd‘s style of play in those years more than the current City team’s, and likewise I preferred Arsenal’s style of play during the first 8 years or so under Wenger, but of course that’s all subjective.

 

[Stookie]

City leave me cold because the colors of their uniform are those of a cartoon ice cube.

Or, as my brother says, dishwater blue.

 

[Orion.]

Don't forget, this City team finished level on points with LVG's side that went on that December run back in 2014. Once Pep fecks off, they will return to the realm of mortals.

And then what happened? P£p came in a spent a billion on top of a spine of some of the best players the league had ever seen. Had Pellegrini been given those players he’d likely collected as many titles and league cups - it’s a default setting when you’re disproportionately better equipped than your opposition.

For me, there are two reasons Guardiola has prolonged his stay at City; the first being that other clubs like Bayern, PSG and Juventus sack managers for a lack of European regardless of collecting should-win league titles, whereas the Abu Dhabi lot and lottery winning, PTSD from Division 2 fanbase will never hold him to the same standards.

Secondly, and in my opinion the biggest factor in him staying is that he knows whoever else takes over will match - and likely even eclipse with European success - what he’s done if they take over this squad, shattering the illusion of his genius. He was holding out for the FFP sanctions to handicap his successor, but when the owners neutralised them he was stuck - his ego won’t allow him to go.

 

[Orion.]

The absolute height of Utd’s dominance was probably the 1999-2001 period, following up the treble by sealing the title with 4 games left in 2000 (finishing 18 points clear), and then sealing the title with 5 games left in 2001 (before switching off and losing their final 3 games of the season but still finishing 10 points clear). So it was 7 titles in 9 titles, 3 titles in a row and back to back one horse races / processions.

City will probably win their 4th title in 5 seasons; Utd did that on 3 separate occasions from 1993-1997, 1999-2003 and 2007-2011.

I personally enjoyed watching Man Utd‘s style of play in those years more than the current City team’s, and likewise I preferred Arsenal’s style of play during the first 8 years or so under Wenger, but of course that’s all subjective.

United did it with 5/6 academy graduates either starting or as squad players; spare parts at City like Stones, Grealish and Mahrez would start for every other team in the league.

Wenger and Ferguson built great teams with your development and clever scouting; Pep flat packed his success.

 

[sangria]

The thing that surprises me in this thread, (and perhaps it shouldn’t) is how genuinely unaware so many fans are that what is happening with City in terms of dominance is the same as what happened with Utd, only over a far longer period 7 of the first 9 Premier Leagues, between 1993 and 2001. Then a brief gap then 5 out of of 7 between 2007 and 2013. I can assure you that that was pretty damn boring for all non Utd fans but I’m pretty sure I don’t remember single Utd fan giving a flying feck!

The dominant United team had a load of academy graduates, many of them playing in midtable teams after their time at United.

 

[footballistic orgasm]

United did it with 5/6 academy graduates either starting or as squad players; spare parts at City like Stones, Grealish and Mahrez would start for every other team in the league.

Wenger and Ferguson built great teams with your development and clever scouting; Pep flat packed his success.

Like Pep did with Barca in his first season? I'm sure you (ore someone else) will roll out the "he had generational talents" hindsight argument again now...

Like it or not, Pep's teams are dominant because of the way he makes them play.

 

[NicolaSacco]

The dominant United team had a load of academy graduates, many of them playing in midtable teams after their time at United.

The dominant United team had a load of academy graduates, many of them playing in midtable teams after their time at United.

You were still dominant is my point . And for fans of any other teams the proportion of academy graduates would not make your dominance any less boring.

 

[sangria]

You were still dominant is my point . And for fans of any other teams the proportion of academy graduates would not make your dominance any less boring.

Dominant, but fair. Producing your own players is never unfair.

 

[Zen86]

Like Pep did with Barca in his first season? I'm sure you (ore someone else) will roll out the "he had generational talents" hindsight argument again now...

Like it or not, Pep's teams are dominant because of the way he makes them play.

Well, having the best squad in the league certainly helps.

 

[Dancfc]

Well, having the best squad in the league certainly helps.

Is there a thread on here from 2008 dedicated to Pep's appointment at Barca?

If so i would bet my account they'll be more comments laughing at Barca for reacting to a 3rd place finish by appointing a rookie than there was people saying he'll be successful.

 

[moses]

The always excellent Ken Early has put himself in the firing line recently by saying that City leave him cold. He just can’t bring himself to get any enjoyment out of their undoubted excellence.

I’m the same. I just don’t care about them. I should hate them and every goal should be a knife through my heart but it’s all just “meh”. Their football is amazing. Probably the best the PL has ever seen. But it’s all about establishing total and utter dominance. Which ruins games as a spectacle. It’s just relentless crushing of butterflies on a wheel.

Knowing how much money they spent to get where they are now takes away the sting from their constant accumulation of trophies. They basically looked at the best team on the planet - Barcelona - and rebuilt their entire outfit in another country. Personnel and all. That’s a once in a lifetime financial flex we’ll never see again. So everyone else is just feeding off the scraps from their table. Dull dull dull.

I’m old enough to have lived through bitter rivals rubbing our noses in it before (Liverpool) and never stopped caring the way I do now. I despise Liverpool but the Klopp squad is definitely more entertaining and interesting than City. Possibly because they have more flaws? They definitely don’t leave me numb like the berties do these days.

Particularly interested in thoughts from non-United fans. Do you find anything entertaining or exciting about the Manchester City project?

I'm going to have to fully disagree, in that Ken Early really annoys me and that I really like the way City play. I love the thinking behind it and the way the idea is coached into players and how they all buy in. It slightly annoys me that we are currently the antithesis of this but life just isn't fair.

Maybe the inorganic nature of their success and the memory of how awful they were for decades makes it easier to digest than success for other clubs.

 

[moses]

Well, having the best squad in the league certainly helps.

Of course it helps, but that just means that they are annoyingly well run as well as annoyingly well coached.

 

[moses]

How's their global fanbase currently?

I swear I hardly ever see any City fans on social media. Very few.

Given that they are so dominant in the most marketable league in the world you'd expect them to have great international significance and fan following.

Compare that to Chelsea(who also suddenly became a top top club post Roman) who have a huge international fanbase and its pretty surprising.

Yet City hasn't been able to gain enough fandom globally.

Really? Are we changing the metrics now? Who cares about their marketing and cache? They play technically brilliant football and are sitting on top of the league, again. I'd swap our global partnership with Epson for that. You could even throw in the deal we have with that motorcycle manufacturer in Thailand.

My point being if its not about football, it's just too depressing all round.

 

[MUFC OK]

Well, having the best squad in the league certainly helps.

It does but it's clearly also the system and the discipline in place that has guaranteed sustained success.

 

[moses]

Dominant, but fair. Producing your own players is never unfair.

We had a nice blend of academy and transfer records in fairness.

 

[MUFC OK]

How's their global fanbase currently?

I swear I hardly ever see any City fans on social media. Very few.

Given that they are so dominant in the most marketable league in the world you'd expect them to have great international significance and fan following.

Compare that to Chelsea(who also suddenly became a top top club post Roman) who have a huge international fanbase and its pretty surprising.

Yet City hasn't been able to gain enough fandom globally.

Yet how do know that? Seriously, City and Liverpool will probably be the most supported English teams amongst the younger generation with Chelsea and United behind them.

There are so many factors behind what builds a large global following (I wrote my dissertation on this topic a few years back), it's certainly not just down to success on the pitch. With Chelsea, being a London club will be huge in that regard, for example, and something they have over City.

 

[moses]

I think the two games at home against Liverpool and City tell the story well. Liverpool blew us away, like a Hollywood gore fest, a rollercoaster with obvious flaws in the plot, bizarrely a few what ifs despite it being 5-0, but City's 2-0 was a much more controlled and comprehensive dismantling, like some slow moving psychological thriller that you take days to get over.

 

[MUFC OK]

I think the two games at home against Liverpool and City tell the story well. Liverpool blew us away, like a Hollywood gore fest, a rollercoaster with obvious flaws in the plot, bizarrely a few what ifs despite it being 5-0, but City's 2-0 was a much more controlled and comprehensive dismantling, like some slow moving psychological thriller that you take days to get over.

Tarrantino/Kubrick

 

[NicolaSacco]

Dominant, but fair. Producing your own players is never unfair.

I’ve never considered it unfair, the OP specifically asked for non Utd fans opinions and I find any kind of long term domination boring to an extent, the specific funding pattern does not affect my my objective comparison of the fair/unfair issue or boring/exciting question.

 

[Trex]

Yet how do know that? Seriously, City and Liverpool will probably be the most supported English teams amongst the younger generation with Chelsea and United behind them.

There are so many factors behind what builds a large global following (I wrote my dissertation on this topic a few years back), it's certainly not just down to success on the pitch. With Chelsea, being a London club will be huge in that regard, for example, and something they have over City.

Here in Nigeria, City fans are non existent, you have Chelsea, Man utd, Arsenal, Madrid and Barcelona, Liverpool have a few.
Man city arrived too late to the scene, and it won't change easily even with the younger fans.
City is seen as a plastic club (somehow Chelsea isn't probably because of Mikel, Victor Moses influence) Clubs like Arsenal and United would always maintain their fan base except they become totally irrelevant.

 

[Dirty Schwein]

Like Pep did with Barca in his first season? I'm sure you (ore someone else) will roll out the "he had generational talents" hindsight argument again now...

Like it or not, Pep's teams are dominant because of the way he makes them play.

But could he make Stoke play like that? To be fair, he probably could

 

[MUFC OK]

Here in Nigeria, City fans are non existent, you have Chelsea, Man utd, Arsenal, Madrid and Barcelona, Liverpool have a few.
Man city arrived too late to the scene, and it won't change easily even with the younger fans.
City is seen as a plastic club (somehow Chelsea isn't probably because of Mikel, Victor Moses influence) Clubs like Arsenal and United would always maintain their fan base except they become totally irrelevant.

Interesting, have gotten the impression, from social media that Chelsea has a large African following, as you say: Mikel, Moses, but also Essien and Drogba. I believe they've also got a larger than average US following. City have a big following in South America though for example. I could talk about this all day

 

[Trex]

Interesting, have gotten the impression, from social media that Chelsea has a large African following, as you say: Mikel, Moses, but also Essien and Drogba. I believe they've also got a larger than average US following. City have a big following in South America though for example. I could talk about this all day

Yes Chelsea have a large and loud fan base here, the most irritating.
Arsenal fans are quiet, that's because they don't have anything to brag about.
We United fans are seen as annoying and entitled.
Liverpool only have a ghost fan base.
City is a plastic club, the club everyone will rather see win if theirs isn't because no one cares.
The Spanish duo has a strong fan base as well, but its always seem more like a Messi-Ronaldo thing, so its seem on the decline.
Bayern and Juve are respected but no fans, PSG is seen as plastic.

 

[TenonTen]

Really? Are we changing the metrics now? Who cares about their marketing and cache? They play technically brilliant football and are sitting on top of the league, again. I'd swap our global partnership with Epson for that. You could even throw in the deal we have with that motorcycle manufacturer in Thailand.

My point being if its not about football, it's just too depressing all round.

Ofcourse. No one will deny they are an amazing Football team and play lovely Football regularly. I totally get your point about the sporting success they have. Their administration and coaching is brilliant.

But I was commenting on the narrative "Do enough people care about the club?" from a global standpoint. I feel that point is also very relevant to this thread.

While they're winning many trophies, they don't have as much fan following as you'd expect them to have, given their exploits.

I'm not talking about the sponsorships but more about Football fans following the club.

Personally, the project doesn't seem that interesting. Its all too mechanical and has no soul. They are too perfect to be true at times as a squad.

I think the two games at home against Liverpool and City tell the story well. Liverpool blew us away, like a Hollywood gore fest, a rollercoaster with obvious flaws in the plot, bizarrely a few what ifs despite it being 5-0, but City's 2-0 was a much more controlled and comprehensive dismantling, like some slow moving psychological thriller that you take days to get over.

That's a pretty good way to put it.

Yet how do know that? Seriously, City and Liverpool will probably be the most supported English teams amongst the younger generation with Chelsea and United behind them.

There are so many factors behind what builds a large global following (I wrote my dissertation on this topic a few years back), it's certainly not just down to success on the pitch. With Chelsea, being a London club will be huge in that regard, for example, and something they have over City.

The London point makes a lot of sense.

I partially disagree on the first point. City will indeed get fans from this generation based on current success. But this generation of Football fans are also extremely star-player centric. City don't tend to buy the big names generally. If they did buy these type of players more they'll instantly catch on even more in terms of attention and clicks.

But winning a CL or two will also be massive in terms of expanding their brand.

Yes Chelsea have a large and loud fan base here, the most irritating.

You are absolutely spot on there. They manage to annoy me within 2 minutes on social media. So many "Lukaku is the best striker in the world" comments when he signed.

 

[Zen86]

Of course it helps, but that just means that they are annoyingly well run as well as annoyingly well coached.

It does. But some people like to suggest that Pep turns water into wine. City will remain title favourites for the foreseeable future regardless of Pep's presence.

 

[Zen86]

Is there a thread on here from 2008 dedicated to Pep's appointment at Barca?

If so i would bet my account they'll be more comments laughing at Barca for reacting to a 3rd place finish by appointing a rookie than there was people saying he'll be successful.

You'll find people laughing at pretty much every manager at every club at some point. People aren't a good measure. I mean, there was a Pep sackwatch thread not all that long ago.

 

[moses]

It does. But some people like to suggest that Pep turns water into wine. City will remain title favourites for the foreseeable future regardless of Pep's presence.

I don't know, people often underestimate the fragility of dominance.

 

[moses]

Ofcourse. No one will deny they are an amazing Football team and play lovely Football regularly. I totally get your point about the sporting success they have. Their administration and coaching is brilliant.

But I was commenting on the narrative "Do enough people care about the club?" from a global standpoint. I feel that point is also very relevant to this thread.

While they're winning many trophies, they don't have as much fan following as you'd expect them to have, given their exploits.

I'm not talking about the sponsorships but more about Football fans following the club.

Personally, the project doesn't seem that interesting. Its all too mechanical and has no soul. They are too perfect to be true at times as a squad.

Yeah, fair enough, my apologies, I can only cope by not looking behind a clubs function of creating a football team, I find the further you get from the actual team the more depressing the conversation is.

 

[Trex]

Ofcourse. No one will deny they are an amazing Football team and play lovely Football regularly. I totally get your point about the sporting success they have. Their administration and coaching is brilliant.

But I was commenting on the narrative "Do enough people care about the club?" from a global standpoint. I feel that point is also very relevant to this thread.

While they're winning many trophies, they don't have as much fan following as you'd expect them to have, given their exploits.

I'm not talking about the sponsorships but more about Football fans following the club.

Personally, the project doesn't seem that interesting. Its all too mechanical and has no soul. They are too perfect to be true at times as a squad.



That's a pretty good way to put it.



The London point makes a lot of sense.

I partially disagree on the first point. City will indeed get fans from this generation based on current success. But this generation of Football fans are also extremely star-player centric. City don't tend to buy the big names generally. If they did buy these type of players more they'll instantly catch on even more in terms of attention and clicks.

But winning a CL or two will also be massive in terms of expanding their brand.



You are absolutely spot on there. They manage to annoy me within 2 minutes on social media. So many "Lukaku is the best striker in the world" comments when he signed.

They said he has become world class and we missed out, they mocked us after his goal against Arsenal.
Now they see what we already knew already.

 

[Zen86]

I don't know, people often underestimate the fragility of dominance.

Depends. The game has never seen this kind of financial clout before. We'll see what happens when City inevitably get into a d*ck measuring contest with Newcastle's billions.

 

[moses]

Depends. The game has never seen this kind of financial clout before. We'll see what happens when City inevitably get into a d*ck measuring contest with Newcastle's billions.

That's a whole other conversation. As it stands they get much more value for their millions than we do.

 

[Zen86]

That's a whole other conversation. As it stands they get much more value for their millions than we do.

I think pretty much everyone gets more value for their millions than we do, besides maybe Barcelona

 

[moses]

I think pretty much everyone gets more value for their millions than we do, besides maybe Barcelona

Thank god for them.

 

[Orion.]

Like Pep did with Barca in his first season? I'm sure you (ore someone else) will roll out the "he had generational talents" hindsight argument again now...

Like it or not, Pep's teams are dominant because of the way he makes them play.

As in Xavi, Puyol and Iniesta, who’d just won the Euros with Spain? Or Messi, who was already well on his way to becoming the best player in the world?

Ferguson integrated and developed the class of 92, then had the likes of Brown, Fletcher and O’Shea playing 200+ games across numerous title wins.

Where’s the evidence he could win the league without having the best players job the league? Could he ‘make them play’ the same way without the default technical superiority in every position? I think the fact he’s never taken a difficult job that would legitimise his legacy gives you your answer.

 

[Dancfc]

As in Xavi, Puyol and Iniesta, who’d just won the Euros with Spain? Or Messi, who was already well on his way to becoming the best player in the world?

Ferguson integrated and developed the class of 92, then had the likes of Brown, Fletcher and O’Shea playing 200+ games across numerous title wins.

Where’s the evidence he could win the league without having the best players job the league? Could he ‘make them play’ the same way without the default technical superiority in every position? I think the fact he’s never taken a difficult job that would legitimise his legacy gives you your answer.

If we're going to use this type of basis. Pep did it with Victor Valdes in goal while Fergie had Schmeichel or VDS for most of his titles. Pep also had Pedro on the other wing for 3 of his 4 years and as decent as he was he lagged comfortably behind Fergie's band of flying wingers. I mean even one of the two Pep CB's were let go by Fergie because he wasn't displacing Rio or Vidic anytime soon.

Euros or no Euros it's still hindsight. Let's not pretend in 2008 it was widely popular opinions that Xavi/Iniesta could become the best midfield duo of modern if not all time or Messi would become in the conversation with Maradona and Pele or that the general consensus thought it was anything other than lunacy that a rookie coach was walsing in and binning Ronaldinho and to an extent Deco off.

If you can find me regular posts from summer 2008 that (paraphrasing) said "he'll be fine look at the team he's got" I'll say fair enough (even more so if it came after his first two games) but I think we all know that they'll be very very few if any.

 

[Terry Chango]

Do city leave me cold ?....Yes and there's so many factors as to why. It would make no difference as to who the manager was, what style of football they play or what types of characters they have in their squad. It's not because it's city, if any club without a rich history of success was brought and started to dominate I'd feel the same way...

We knew once the takeover happened that they would probably reach the top, even FFP and all the rule changes to investment made no difference. It's been farcical.

It's not city's fault, but modern day football as a whole leaves me a little Cold. City's success is hollow, with city they are still so irrelevant which is quite telling when you look how they've dominated in England and how popular the league is around the world. Literally no one other than city fans give a shit. That's not a barb aimed at city fan's on here it's just the truth.

United fans should be constantly hurting, and i mean HURTING at city's success over the years and probably again this season but I'm pretty sure to most of us it's just a little meh despite our hatred for them. Imagine if they had the same success but somehow did it the right way without the sports washing, the hatred and jealousy would be rife as it would hurt United fans more and so it should do.

I also feel Cold regarding United and the glazers and the attitude of some of our players at times and football in general is just a different breed these days to what it used to be...Such a boomer thing to say right but it's true.

 

[footballistic orgasm]

As in Xavi, Puyol and Iniesta, who’d just won the Euros with Spain? Or Messi, who was already well on his way to becoming the best player in the world?

Ferguson integrated and developed the class of 92, then had the likes of Brown, Fletcher and O’Shea playing 200+ games across numerous title wins.

Where’s the evidence he could win the league without having the best players job the league? Could he ‘make them play’ the same way without the default technical superiority in every position? I think the fact he’s never taken a difficult job that would legitimise his legacy gives you your answer.

If we're going by this logic, can you tell me why the Italian players who won the euro last summer haven't become world beaters since then?

As for your last paragraph, maybe you should ask yourself why the biggest clubs all want him and are ready to do do anything to have him, they won't all want him if he wasn't a great coach.
What he did at Barca from his first season there made sure that he was only going to get only top class gigs afterwards until he starts falling off.
Almost all his peers and players he's coached already consider him the best, yet you think he still needs legitimization from some armchair commentators ?

 

[Noot]

It does. But some people like to suggest that Pep turns water into wine. City will remain title favourites for the foreseeable future regardless of Pep's presence.

I think you'll be very surprised with how much worse we get when he leaves. Without Pep I reckon we'd have won 1 or 2 titles these last few years and certainly never got near 100 points. It's a deep squad but the usual starting XI isn't THAT good that you could realistically expect regular 95+ point seasons.

 

[Noot]

As in Xavi, Puyol and Iniesta, who’d just won the Euros with Spain? Or Messi, who was already well on his way to becoming the best player in the world?

Ferguson integrated and developed the class of 92, then had the likes of Brown, Fletcher and O’Shea playing 200+ games across numerous title wins.

Where’s the evidence he could win the league without having the best players job the league? Could he ‘make them play’ the same way without the default technical superiority in every position? I think the fact he’s never taken a difficult job that would legitimise his legacy gives you your answer.

To be fair, I'd say Pep has enough background in improving not-very-special players (including plenty in his time at City) to suggest it's not that unlikely he could get very good things out of a mid-table squad. He turned Zinchenko into an excellent left-back, why shouldn't he be able to get a tune out of players like Richarlison or Maddison?

 

[berbatrick]

Could he ‘make them play’ the same way without the default technical superiority in every position? I think the fact he’s never taken a difficult job that would legitimise his legacy gives you your answer.

Their backline for the 09 CL final was: a CB playing at RB, a rookie CB, an attacking midfielder, and a 40-year old about to retire. Puyol since Alves was out, Pique in his 1st full season, Yaya Toure to cover for Puyol, and Sylvinho since Abidal was out. About as shoddy a back 4 as you can get.
Up against (potentially) Ronaldo, Rooney, Tevez, and Berbatov.
They won, as we know, very comfortably.