Do City leave you cold?

Orion. said:
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.
Click to expand...
This argument is completely ridiculous. As if it somehow negates Guardiola's achievements. He works with the best players and under the best conditions because he's earned the right to do so. If your argument that anyone could do a similar job to Guardiola in the same circumstances were true, City's board wouldn't have moved heaven and earth to appoint him. Our entire setup had basically been shaped around the eventual arrival of Guardiola.

There's no evidence to suggest he could do what he does at a club with weaker resources, you're right. But there's also no evidence to suggest that he couldn't. Guardiola is in the position he is because he's the best in the world. On his own merit. And if being the best means you get the most advantageous jobs, then anyone in any profession would take that. He doesn't have to prove anything at say an Everton or an Aston Villa. His consistency and longevity far outweighs any doubts.
 
Noot said:
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.
Click to expand...

Assuming you don't completely balls up on Pep's successor (which, knowing City, they'll most certainly have a plan in place already), I think you'll still be top of the table. Unless of course some members of the squad decide to down tools after he leaves, which is a possibility.
 
Noot said:
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?
Click to expand...
Well it depends what they would consider success for Pep if he took a "proper challenge".

If they are expecting him to walse into Burnley and have them dominating the PL then yes he will probably "fail" but I'm struggling to see why he wouldn't be able to do at the very least an excellent job scaled for resources that we saw/see from say Sarri at Empoli or Bielsa at Bilbao and Leeds.

The only bit of luck he's got was getting the Barca job so early, he wouldn't have lasted in such jobs for a decade and a half if he wasn't good enough. Club legend tax only goes so far as Lampard, Dalgish, Ole, Pirlo and all the AC Milan legend managers of a few years ago found out, Xavi could be next.
 
What a load of bollocks. City bought the board of Barcelona and moved them to Manchester ready for Guardiola as they are a wannabe Barcelona. Consider this, if Lewis Hamilton drove a Williams, would he be World Champion? Nope. City seem to get favourable draws in all the Cup competitions over the years. Their PR department work overtime to bullshit the media. They have got away with breaking the FFP rules and it would surprise me if they get caught again making iffy payments or something like that. They tried to sign Cavani from Napoli before he went to PSG but the Owner of Napoli said they wanted the published transfer fee to be less than they actually would have paid, it was on TV. Of course City fans will go on about United being in debt but they have a bigger debt to Sheik Mansour who has visited the Emptyhad once since he shelled out £400m to Tamsin and a billion in transfers and wages (two wages to Mancini). The old City fans are ok but the nouveau riche ones are garbage. The Beat,es we’re right, ‘Money can’t buy you love’.
 
MongeySpangle said:
This argument is completely ridiculous. As if it somehow negates Guardiola's achievements. He works with the best players and under the best conditions because he's earned the right to do so. If your argument that anyone could do a similar job to Guardiola in the same circumstances were true, City's board wouldn't have moved heaven and earth to appoint him. Our entire setup had basically been shaped around the eventual arrival of Guardiola.

There's no evidence to suggest he could do what he does at a club with weaker resources, you're right. But there's also no evidence to suggest that he couldn't. Guardiola is in the position he is because he's the best in the world. On his own merit. And if being the best means you get the most advantageous jobs, then anyone in any profession would take that. He doesn't have to prove anything at say an Everton or an Aston Villa. His consistency and longevity far outweighs any doubts.
Click to expand...

I just think there is a difference between the likes of Guardiola and Fergie. Fergie saw off Chelsea, Arsenal and City without spending silly money and played sub-par players in his final seasons. Guardiola left Barca when they lost the league. Since then he's walked into World class squads and with a huge budget to do whatever he wants to do. And I think he does it very well. He is imo high on the list of the greatest of all time, but I think there are plenty of other managers in their prime I would take over Guardiola to elevate a club if all conditions are not right.
 
Offsideagain said:
What a load of bollocks. City bought the board of Barcelona and moved them to Manchester ready for Guardiola as they are a wannabe Barcelona. Consider this, if Lewis Hamilton drove a Williams, would he be World Champion? Nope. City seem to get favourable draws in all the Cup competitions over the years. Their PR department work overtime to bullshit the media. They have got away with breaking the FFP rules and it would surprise me if they get caught again making iffy payments or something like that. They tried to sign Cavani from Napoli before he went to PSG but the Owner of Napoli said they wanted the published transfer fee to be less than they actually would have paid, it was on TV. Of course City fans will go on about United being in debt but they have a bigger debt to Sheik Mansour who has visited the Emptyhad once since he shelled out £400m to Tamsin and a billion in transfers and wages (two wages to Mancini). The old City fans are ok but the nouveau riche ones are garbage. The Beat,es we’re right, ‘Money can’t buy you love’.
Click to expand...
Username checks out.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
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?
Click to expand...

Mate get a grip we have spent more than them and there football is beautiful. You sound like a fair weather fan.
 
Some people prefer classic English kick and rush football some prefer tiki-taka. The thing with this current City is we strangle the life out of games but we're not as good a team nor squad as the 100 point squad. We saw with United last couple of games and Klopps early Liverpool, playing high octane, end to end football whilst dominating the ball leads to either blowing teams away or getting screwed, same with Pep's first season. Pep countered this by removing a lot of the risk from our attacking game. Its still great football in my humble opinion but its more inline with Spain 2010 (though not quite that level of monotonous) than it is with our own team 4 years ago.

Liverpool adapted won a couple of trophies and this season have gone back to the end to end vertical football at breakneck speed and are paying a price for it (still a great team).
Current City is pragmatism with the ball as opposed to Tuchel/Jose styled pragmatism. The City of 3 years ago where we'd gladly concede one or two to score 3 or 4 is gone, now if we get ahead the game is pretty much dead.

After the Chelsea game KDB said its all about control for City. Its all about not getting into the kind of crap shoot United got into the last 2 nights where they ran themselves ragged trying to play high press, high octane football non-stop. Its a myth Liverpool could do it (their success came when they tempered it) and City have no interest in doing it. The sacrifice in doing it is either giving up the ball or being more careful with it. Both City and Liverpool have sacrificed much of their excitement to become well oiled machines. Despite the lower points totals it makes games feel even more one sided than the last better, more dominant City team because the opposition rarely threaten.

I can totally see how its boring to people who want end to end breakneck high paced football. City are the opposite of the football a lot of people grew up with in the 90's.
 
padr81 said:
Some people prefer classic English kick and rush football some prefer tiki-taka. The thing with this current City is we strangle the life out of games but we're not as good a team nor squad as the 100 point squad. We saw with United last couple of games and Klopps early Liverpool, playing high octane, end to end football whilst dominating the ball leads to either blowing teams away or getting screwed, same with Pep's first season. Pep countered this by removing a lot of the risk from our attacking game. Its still great football in my humble opinion but its more inline with Spain 2010 (though not quite that level of monotonous) than it is with our own team 4 years ago.

Liverpool adapted won a couple of trophies and this season have gone back to the end to end vertical football at breakneck speed and are paying a price for it (still a great team).
Current City is pragmatism with the ball as opposed to Tuchel/Jose styled pragmatism. The City of 3 years ago where we'd gladly concede one or two to score 3 or 4 is gone, now if we get ahead the game is pretty much dead.

After the Chelsea game KDB said its all about control for City. Its all about not getting into the kind of crap shoot United got into the last 2 nights where they ran themselves ragged trying to play high press, high octane football non-stop. Its a myth Liverpool could do it (their success came when they tempered it) and City have no interest in doing it. The sacrifice in doing it is either giving up the ball or being more careful with it. Both City and Liverpool have sacrificed much of their excitement to become well oiled machines. Despite the lower points totals it makes games feel even more one sided than the last better, more dominant City team because the opposition rarely threaten.

I can totally see how its boring to people who want end to end breakneck high paced football. City are the opposite of the football a lot of people grew up with in the 90's.
Click to expand...
Well said. Thanks for the explanation.
 
padr81 said:
Some people prefer classic English kick and rush football some prefer tiki-taka. The thing with this current City is we strangle the life out of games but we're not as good a team nor squad as the 100 point squad. We saw with United last couple of games and Klopps early Liverpool, playing high octane, end to end football whilst dominating the ball leads to either blowing teams away or getting screwed, same with Pep's first season. Pep countered this by removing a lot of the risk from our attacking game. Its still great football in my humble opinion but its more inline with Spain 2010 (though not quite that level of monotonous) than it is with our own team 4 years ago.

Liverpool adapted won a couple of trophies and this season have gone back to the end to end vertical football at breakneck speed and are paying a price for it (still a great team).
Current City is pragmatism with the ball as opposed to Tuchel/Jose styled pragmatism. The City of 3 years ago where we'd gladly concede one or two to score 3 or 4 is gone, now if we get ahead the game is pretty much dead.

After the Chelsea game KDB said its all about control for City. Its all about not getting into the kind of crap shoot United got into the last 2 nights where they ran themselves ragged trying to play high press, high octane football non-stop. Its a myth Liverpool could do it (their success came when they tempered it) and City have no interest in doing it. The sacrifice in doing it is either giving up the ball or being more careful with it. Both City and Liverpool have sacrificed much of their excitement to become well oiled machines. Despite the lower points totals it makes games feel even more one sided than the last better, more dominant City team because the opposition rarely threaten.

I can totally see how its boring to people who want end to end breakneck high paced football. City are the opposite of the football a lot of people grew up with in the 90's.
Click to expand...
This current city team is better than the 100 points City team IMO. They create just as much, but are much more solid and more immune to counter attacks now.
Their games against Liverpool or other top European teams in CL aren't boring because those teams aren't afraid to try and test their defense more than the teams in PL do.

Offcourse their games might seem boring to some, but that's mostly due to other teams lack of ambition against them IMO. Their opponents refuse to take risks against them for fear of conceeding more goals if they open up. Getting a team to play the way they do is simply a thing of genius.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
This current city team is better than the 100 points City team IMO. They create just as much, but are much more solid and more immune to counter attacks now.
Their games against Liverpool or other top European teams in CL aren't boring because those teams aren't afraid to try and test their defense more than the teams in PL do.

Offcourse their games might seem boring to some, but that's mostly due to other teams lack of ambition against them IMO. Their opponents refuse to take risks against them for fear of conceeding more goals if they open up. Getting a team to play the way they do is simply a thing of genius.
Click to expand...

I don't think we're better or even close to as good. We're different and brutally effective. I mean Sane, Aguero, Sterling and Mahrez (who arrived next season) with David Silva, KDB and prime Fern are level above any current front 6 we can put out. At the back we're much better.

I do agree that teams make games more boring by parking the bus and part of the reason City play as they do now without the Sane and Aguero like explosion up top is lack of space. The more teams sat in the more Pep had to move away from it but we aren't an end to end team.
 
They are an exceptional team but they are missing the "it factor" a bit because they don't have a superstar offensive player.
 
City lost the pace of the previous seasons but gained more control. And lets be honest here controlling the games is actually the ultimate goal of Guardiola's football so basically now City is the closest to what Guardiola wants of his team than ever.I do agree that it lacks a bit of a flair that one superstar offensive player can bring but the collectiveness of this team is astonishing..its a joy to watch actually..
 
padr81 said:
I don't think we're better or even close to as good. We're different and brutally effective. I mean Sane, Aguero, Sterling and Mahrez (who arrived next season) with David Silva, KDB and prime Fern are level above any current front 6 we can put out. At the back we're much better.

I do agree that teams make games more boring by parking the bus and part of the reason City play as they do now without the Sane and Aguero like explosion up top is lack of space. The more teams sat in the more Pep had to move away from it but we aren't an end to end team.
Click to expand...
KDB, Sterling and Mahrez are still there. Pep prefered Jesus to Aguero that season, and current Rodri suites City and Pep's game plan more than Fernandinho did. Also Foden brings more to their game than Sané did other than speed IMO.

They still create as much and are much better defensively now. Then most people and other teams thought of them as being exciting to watch but still very beatable (which made teams still have a go at them, taking the risk of opening themselves up behind), now they put the fear of God in teams even before the game starts which makes them a better team than the 100 points team IMO.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
KDB, Sterling and Mahrez are still there. Pep prefered Jesus to Aguero that season, and current Rodri suites City and Pep's game plan more than Fernandinho did. Also Foden brings more to their game than Sané did other than speed IMO.

They still create as much and are much better defensively now. Then most people and other teams thought of them as being exciting to watch but still very beatable (which made teams still have a go at them, taking the risk of opening themselves up behind), now they put the fear of God in teams even before the game starts which makes them a better team than the 100 points team IMO.
Click to expand...

Gonna disagree again buddy.

While Aguero played less games than Jesus it was mostly down to injury. He played 25 PL games to Jesus 29 and scored 21 goals, probably his best season at City minute for minute. Sergio actually played 300 more minutes in total than Jesus in the PL, given his injury record that shows who was most important.
He had one spell when fit where Jesus was preferred for about 3 games in October (when he was available after the car crash and he was rotated every 2nd game). Other than that he missed 8 of the last 9 games with a knee injury. People constantly try to rewrite Pep as not fancying Kun but its simply untrue, checking how much he played of each game on transfermarkt shows just how much he played when available.
Kun, Sane and Sterling had 85 combined goal contributions that season in the PL alone, 110 in all competitions. We've had nothing close to that since.

We don't create nor finish nearly as much as that team either. We had 106F 27A in the PL that season and followed it with 95F 23A getting 198 points. So that team essentially score 201 goals and condeded 50 in 2 seasons.
The current team won the title last season with 86 points and had 83F 32A (a worse record both offensively and defensively than the other). This season we're on course for 95 points, 90F and 22 A. So even in the form we are right now, we're not on course to match either of those teams. Still on course for an impressive season but we are not as good a football team.

If things follow the course over 2 seasons it will be.
17-19 - 198pts, 201F, 50A
20-22 - 181pts, 173F, 54A

Taking xg and pts metrics into account.
17-19 - xpts 182, xg 185, xga 51
20-22 xpts 173, xg 167, xga 56
How I arrived at this current teams stats. 20-21 xpts83, xg78, xga31, (this season averaging things out to keep consistent for the rest of the season, rounded the numbers up where over .5 and down where below.) xpts 90, xg89, xga25.
So even excluding last season this season we are statistically a weaker team than either of those seasons. As good and all as we've been this season its still likely to come in below our best seasons.

People like to make out the other team couldn't defend as well, but if anything they played a more attacking game and defended equally as well. That's not to say this team isn't phenomenal, I love it, and its more suited to cup football, but in every metric its comes up short. Trophies, points, goals, defensively at least on a par, even removing last season. This team has more control of games and is better between boxes but its not nearly as good in front of the goal and if better only slightly better than the previous one at the back.

Don't get me wrong I love this team and its phenomenal, I'll enjoy it while its here but its simply not as exciting or good as the last one.
 
Over the years, I’ve come around from perennially mocking that lot, to hating them for buying their success, and now respecting them for what they’ve achieved. They play wonderful, fluid football.

The Pep Guardiola-led Manchester City is the best ever PL side for me, simply because they don’t let any other team even have a sniff at the title. The difference between City and the fourth PL side may be 30+ points by the end of the season again. To be able to do that repeatedly is crazy!
 
padr81 said:
Gonna disagree again buddy.

While Aguero played less games than Jesus it was mostly down to injury. He played 25 PL games to Jesus 29 and scored 21 goals, probably his best season at City minute for minute. Sergio actually played 300 more minutes in total than Jesus in the PL, given his injury record that shows who was most important.
He had one spell when fit where Jesus was preferred for about 3 games in October (when he was available after the car crash and he was rotated every 2nd game). Other than that he missed 8 of the last 9 games with a knee injury. People constantly try to rewrite Pep as not fancying Kun but its simply untrue, checking how much he played of each game on transfermarkt shows just how much he played when available.
Kun, Sane and Sterling had 85 combined goal contributions that season in the PL alone, 110 in all competitions. We've had nothing close to that since.

We don't create nor finish nearly as much as that team either. We had 106F 27A in the PL that season and followed it with 95F 23A getting 198 points. So that team essentially score 201 goals and condeded 50 in 2 seasons.
The current team won the title last season with 86 points and had 83F 32A (a worse record both offensively and defensively than the other). This season we're on course for 95 points, 90F and 22 A. So even in the form we are right now, we're not on course to match either of those teams. Still on course for an impressive season but we are not as good a football team.

If things follow the course over 2 seasons it will be.
17-19 - 198pts, 201F, 50A
20-22 - 181pts, 173F, 54A

Taking xg and pts metrics into account.
17-19 - xpts 182, xg 185, xga 51
20-22 xpts 173, xg 167, xga 56
How I arrived at this current teams stats. 20-21 xpts83, xg78, xga31, (this season averaging things out to keep consistent for the rest of the season, rounded the numbers up where over .5 and down where below.) xpts 90, xg89, xga25.
So even excluding last season this season we are statistically a weaker team than either of those seasons. As good and all as we've been this season its still likely to come in below our best seasons.

People like to make out the other team couldn't defend as well, but if anything they played a more attacking game and defended equally as well. That's not to say this team isn't phenomenal, I love it, and its more suited to cup football, but in every metric its comes up short. Trophies, points, goals, defensively at least on a par, even removing last season. This team has more control of games and is better between boxes but its not nearly as good in front of the goal and if better only slightly better than the previous one at the back.

Don't get me wrong I love this team and its phenomenal, I'll enjoy it while its here but its simply not as exciting or good as the last one.
Click to expand...
I remember Pep preferring Jesus in the big games that season over Aguero.

I didn't say this current team outscores that team, i said they create as much which the xg stat you posted attests to, given that this season still has a lot of games to go.

That 100pts team was exciting to watch no doubt but we also have to look at the context, teams opened up more against that team than they do against this current team as they felt that that City team had vulnerabilities.
This current City team reduces even Liverpool to barely 2 or 3 goal occasions, the way they control games now has reached Barca 10/11 level all without exceptional talents like Xavi, Iniesta and Messi.

Where you can also really tell that this current City team is better than that 100pts City team IMO is in the CL.
 
Man City don't even excite the so called Man City fans. Look at their empty seats. It is painfully obvious to those lot themselves.
 
I was listening to TalkSport on the way to the chippy earlier, just after they’d beaten Norwich. An American woman phoned in, described herself as a massive City fan……...since February 2021. Through thick and thin man, fair fecks.
 
They are a great team, but they lack any soul or history and there's just nothing there to give a shit about one way or another. They are a great team built on oil money. They will never invoke the same emotion, whether that be love or hate, as clubs like United and Liverpool

City remind me of when I used to use a hex editor to give myself unlimited money on the old champ manager games. Fun for an hour or two, and then I was bored to death of it.
 
AndySmith1990 said:
They are a great team, but they lack any soul or history and there's just nothing there to give a shit about one way or another. They are a great team built on oil money. They will never invoke the same emotion, whether that be love or hate, as clubs like United and Liverpool

City remind me of when I used to use a hex editor to give myself unlimited money on the old champ manager games. Fun for an hour or two, and then I was bored to death of it.
Click to expand...

Very true but unfortunately the media will never highlight it because too busy kissing their arses
 
AndySmith1990 said:
They are a great team, but they lack any soul or history and there's just nothing there to give a shit about one way or another. They are a great team built on oil money. They will never invoke the same emotion, whether that be love or hate, as clubs like United and Liverpool

City remind me of when I used to use a hex editor to give myself unlimited money on the old champ manager games. Fun for an hour or two, and then I was bored to death of it.
Click to expand...

Guarantee you will be feeling differently if Pep stays for 10-15 years coming closer and closer to the Perch.

United fans are gonna hate it.
 
They don’t bother me at all really. Would be worse if we were anywhere near them.
 
flameinthesun said:
Think a large part of this for united fans would be the fact that our team is nowhere near them, so whilst our games are still derbys, apart from local pride most of the time we are not fighting them for titles. I'm sure if we were fighting them to the end for a league we would feel something more. For example in fergies last years I definitely felt a lot hatred for them after tevez, them winning, then fergie winning in his last season. Now we haven't been even close to challenging them.

In terms of city and pool, they both play more exciting football than us.
Click to expand...
Oldham play more exciting football than United right now
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
I was listening to TalkSport on the way to the chippy earlier, just after they’d beaten Norwich. An American woman phoned in, described herself as a massive City fan……...since February 2021. Through thick and thin man, fair fecks.
Click to expand...

You can mock but you must know many United fans did similar right? I remember putting my football boots on in the 90s when you were starting to win trophies and hearing a lad saying to another lad 'I used to support Liverpool too, but United are the team to support now'.
 
DaGOAT said:
Guarantee you will be feeling differently if Pep stays for 10-15 years coming closer and closer to the Perch.

United fans are gonna hate it.
Click to expand...

It will happen, obviously not with Pep, but its going to happen and everyone knows it. There's no doubt, or uncertainty to it. Which adds to how boring and empty it all feels. We've had years to get used to it. What with our general decline, and the fact the only thing that can stop City in the long run will be....Newcastle United.
 
TheLord said:
As an opposition fan, it is easy to downplay all their success, but in all honesty, this period of success will go down in history as the period of most intense domination of the English game.
Click to expand...

Not unless their domination grows stronger and continues for a decade more. In the thirteen seasons since the Mansour takeover, they've won the league five times. They might very well do it a sixth time this year, but it's not at all guaranteed; they're only three points clear if Liverpool beat West Ham at home on Saturday, which is nearly certain. So five titles and a good chance at a sixth, in fourteen seasons since the financial doping started. Even if we generously discount the first four seasons as they were adjusting to becoming effectively a different football club entirely, that's ten seasons wherein they've won only half the titles. In that same time, four other clubs have also won the league, including fecking Leicester, and if they hadn't done it, Arsenal or Tottenham would have. They aren't all that dominant. They've been the best English team for the last decade, but certainly not the most dominant in history.

This period isn't even remotely close to the dominance of Liverpool between 1975 and 1990, wherein they won ten out of fifteen league titles and four European Cup wins in five final appearances. It's even further from the 1992-2009 period where we won eleven out of seventeen titles in the midst of Arsenal's best ever generation, including three consecutive titles on two different occasions nearly a decade apart, and two Champions League trophies, including a treble. City win the league less often than United or Liverpool in their respective eras of dominance, and have only had a single CL final with no win. Hell, they aren't even that prominent in the FA Cup, although they do have a firm grasp on the league cup that nobody cares about.

If they continue for another decade and grow more dominant than they are now, it may go down in history as "the period of most intense domination of the English game." If not, that would be a lie. As it stands now, two other clubs have had a firmer grasp on English football, and we don't even have to look back into ancient times for it. It can be said that City have done well to win so much when the league is this competitive, but that doesn't factor into the degree of dominance. Nobody would say that Bayern aren't dominating the Bundesliga just because they don't have to struggle to do it. The fact of the matter is that City have a long way to go before they can claim to have ruled over English football as much as United and Liverpool have in the half-century preceding City's artificial insertion into the top level. And if you then take the circumstances of their success into account, there'll be half a page of asterisks to it.
 
Last edited:
Cloud7 said:
What is exciting/interesting about fragility?
Click to expand...

What makes a better movie:

1) Underdog overcomes odds and succeeds in the end.

2) Protagonist is the likely winner from the start, and indeed wins in the end because he's the richest.

Of all the clubs that have had eras of prominence in England, City's is surely the least interesting. There's just nothing admirable about it whatsoever. It's a soulless footballing machine with nothing to it beyond the trophies they purchase. No charm or spirit, no obstacles to overcome, just cold corporate success.

Arsenal in their heyday under Wenger succeeded without financial might. They had a young squad that fought fiercely for it and an intriguing managerial rivalry between Wenger and Ferguson. They had their immortal season, which nobody else has ever accomplished. Their successes were legitimately impressive, even if it was short-lived.

Liverpool have risen from the ashes under a manager who has turned the team into something far greater than the sum of its parts, catapulting them back into the top level after a decades-long stint in the wilderness. The club's history and legacy speaks for itself, and they're competing with City despite the lack of unlimited funds. They play exciting attacking football with a style that has gained its own name, credit of their current manager. Supported by fiercely loyal fans who have loved the club for generations.

United dominated for an entire generation under the incredible management of Alex Ferguson, winning the treble, and two dramatic CL wins, one of which is still amongst the most memorable CL finals even for non-fans. The club built itself up from the onset of the PL era and fought to secure its hold on English football. Long-standing rivalries with several clubs, numerous legendary players who spent their entire careers at the club, known for attacking football (at the time, anyway) and late dramas.

Even Chelsea, despite a similarly unflattering nature to their success, were the first to really do it in this way. The Abramovich takeover was an interesting spectacle, and while their success does ring hollow to an extent, they did have to largely invent the wheel when it comes to billionaire takeovers of this magnitude. Still, they started winning the league very quickly after the takeover, with a young firebrand manager who put himself on the map while there. It was an exciting period of football, even if it was unhealthy for the sport.

But there's just nothing to this City era beyond winning a lot of games and, consequently, titles. No personality at all. A boring, dour manager known for refusing to work with anything less than the best squad in the land at any point in his career. A stadium they can't fill despite being the best team in England. Making a mockery of the sport by breaking the rules and then out-spending the governing body in lawyers to escape any consequences. Spending completely bizarre amounts of money both on players and on new facilities, to the point where it's practically a whole new football club every five years, just with the same name. Used as a sportswashing vehicle by a tyrannical regime. It's a soulless, boring blemish on football. Personally, I don't even find their style of play interesting. Like everything else about City, it's just this mechanical, blandly efficient approach calculated to bring the best results.

No Giggs, Scholes, Neville. No Lampard or John Terry. No Gerrard or Carragher. No historical stadium with a reputation. No patriarch managers. No young firebrand managers making their bones at the club. No Gegenpressen. No rags to riches story, no underdog wins, no blazing the trail of billionaire takeovers to prove it can work, nothing at all that makes any aspect of the club worth paying attention to except for the sole fact that they usually win on the pitch. It's such a dreary, uninteresting route to success. Even setting aside the whole issue of their spending, it's a club that has no charisma whatsoever. All those little things that make up a club's personality, City has none of that. Listen to commentators when they play. It's all about stats and results. They never talk about any of what comprises the heart and soul of football when it concerns City, because there is none. The club is wholly bereft of spirit.
 
They need a villain, a bad guy to root against. It’s something City lack. Someone like our Andy Robertson to give them some spark. Or maybe someone with some eccentric traits. Who knows but for all their success and real control over 18 of the 19 other teams they are a little sterile.. A machine but sterile. The only excitement is when Pep has a meltdown.
 
fck said:
They are an exceptional team but they are missing the "it factor" a bit because they don't have a superstar offensive player.
Click to expand...
Fully agreed. To be honest, I loved that Barça team, but if it wasn't for Messi I wouldn't have watched as often as I did. I feel the exact same way with City.
As a neutral, and in order of enjoyment I have watching league games this season outside of Arsenal :
1- Bayern. They are fascinating to watch, all-out attack with plenty of room for creativity
2- Barça. This Xavi rebuild is fun, when they lose, I can enjoy the meltdown, when they win, they usually produce some good football
3- PSG. Mbappe
4- Man United. Schadenfreude is a hell of a drug
5- City/Liverpool : only watch them if they play one of the top 6
 
adexkola said:
That this can be mouthed, and that people can actually nod and agree with it, is mind-blowing. I can't say it's wrong because it's a matter of opinion but still... wow.

I can't think of any other team sport where that pinnacle of excellence is something to be dismissed as less enjoyable or boring.

I've never heard anyone dismiss the '96 Chicago Bulls as boring because they were so dominant. Or the '07 Patriots. Is this uniquely a football thing or an English football fan thing?
Click to expand...
They aren't boring because they're dominant
 
Last edited:
njred said:
They need a villain, a bad guy to root against. It’s something City lack. Someone like our Andy Robertson to give them some spark. Or maybe someone with some eccentric traits. Who knows but for all their success and real control over 18 of the 19 other teams they are a little sterile.. A machine but sterile. The only excitement is when Pep has a meltdown.
Click to expand...

There’s no spark or character whatsoever. It’s like watching a bunch of robots.
 
They are completely and utterly soulless. Football is a game of passion, it’s not all about technique. I don’t even think Man City fans enjoy their success if they are being honest.

Its almost impossible to enjoy any success when you haven’t been on a journey to earn it. This is a bad comparison but a job promotion means a million times more to someone who worked hard and deserved it than someone getting a job because their dad is CEO.
 
ManchesterManchester said:
They are completely and utterly soulless. Football is a game of passion, it’s not all about technique. I don’t even think Man City fans enjoy their success if they are being honest.

Its almost impossible to enjoy any success when you haven’t been on a journey to earn it. This is a bad comparison but a job promotion means a million times more to someone who worked hard and deserved it than someone getting a job because their dad is CEO.
Click to expand...

Agree and disagree, I think City fans do enjoy success but I think that feeling will become less and less special the more they win. The first premier league win will probably be the highest high they ever have due to the circumstances.

As has been said, they leave people cold because there are few genuine characters in the team, they all seem like they were created on a factory line of robots to build the most perfect football team.

I think that'll change somewhat when Pep leaves and another manager brings a new dynamic to the team.
 
njred said:
They need a villain, a bad guy to root against. It’s something City lack. Someone like our Andy Robertson to give them some spark. Or maybe someone with some eccentric traits. Who knows but for all their success and real control over 18 of the 19 other teams they are a little sterile.. A machine but sterile. The only excitement is when Pep has a meltdown.
Click to expand...

Yeah at least when Tevez and Toure were throwing tantrums you could funnel the frustration into pantomine villainy, the way football is meant to be. With the bland machine you're just left to contemplate the more depressing, overwhelming, all-encompassing evil of what City represent.
 
horsechoker said:
Agree and disagree, I think City fans do enjoy success but I think that feeling will become less and less special the more they win. The first premier league win will probably be the highest high they ever have due to the circumstances.

As has been said, they leave people cold because there are few genuine characters in the team, they all seem like they were created on a factory line of robots to build the most perfect football team.

I think that'll change somewhat when Pep leaves and another manager brings a new dynamic to the team.
Click to expand...

Yeah fair enough, I agree, they obviously do enjoy winning but as you say, when it is completely expected every year, there is no thrill or surprise element with it.

I don’t think we will see any difference when Pep moves on though, think they will hire the next great manager and there will be no drop in their robotic performance or change in characters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.