Neuer
Alves Puyol Abidal Lahm
Messi Touré Xavi Iniesta Villa
Aguero
Alves Puyol Abidal Lahm
Messi Touré Xavi Iniesta Villa
Aguero
Last edited:
How many City players get into Pep Guardiola's Best XI?
- Thread starter Martial
- Start date
He never coached Neymar.
I originally had Villa then I saw someone else had Neymar and I was questioning it.
Busquets gets not enough respect, the man was completely unbothered and nearly unpressable in his prime. One of the greatest DMs of all time
It is hard to replace anyone in that Barca midfield, or Barca team 2009/2012, may be except the LB, CB and GK. For both wings, you can argue about Villa vs Henry vs Eto'o vs Pedro, depends on whether Messi play as right wing or false 9. The strongest front 3 imo is Henry, Lewi, Messi
I would have them both, Alver on the right and Lahm on the left.
Honestly Henry wasn't in his prime either by the time Pep got him (unless we are just doing "who did he manage" and then they get to be the prime version no matter what? Not sure how the exercise works).
It's not
Did you see his Barca teams? Who are you leaving out
Rodri over Busquets. Come on mate he's probably the best in his role that's ever played the game. He literally played the game like he was three or four steps ahead of everyone.
Rodri is a great player but not in his league.
You don't think lahm or Alves are better than Kyle walker?
People say this like Busquets never lost the ball. Yes he gave a bit more control than Rodri, but other than that, Rodri has him beat in every other aspect. More physical presence and way more offensive threat than Busquets.
Come on, mate. The biggest argument for Busquets is that the three in the midfield always played together and it would be unwise to break them up. It's not like they arent't in the same league - if you think that you either don't remember Busquets or haven't seen much of Rodri these past two years.
The funny thing is that the current City team would beat this "dream team" in an uneventful 2-0 win, where City would have 65% possession and only concede 3 shots.
People can't deal with the fact that football evolved. Guardiola also evolved as a coach. The kind of players he liked back then would possibly not suit him anymore compared to the players he coached recently.
I can't see any way for example how Guardiola would not pick Gvardiol as his all-time best left back, considering how Gvardiol represents the newest EVOLUTION of what it means to be a left back.
Ancelotti’s top 11 might even be more insane. Not surprising considering Pep and Ancelotti are the top 2 managers of this century (also SAF but his best combined 11 is nowhere close to this level).
Casillas (Neuer already in Pep’s team)
Lahm-Maldini-Nesta-Cafu
Modric-Zidane-Redondo
Ronaldinho
The 2 Ronaldo
I would back this team against Pep’s team. Better strikers, MUCH better defense. Midfield around the same.
The only thing Pep’s team has over this team is Messi who is the best ever. But then you could make a case that the Brazilian Ronaldo’ s peak is as high as Messi’s peak (or very very close).
Casillas (Neuer already in Pep’s team)
Lahm-Maldini-Nesta-Cafu
Modric-Zidane-Redondo
Ronaldinho
The 2 Ronaldo
I would back this team against Pep’s team. Better strikers, MUCH better defense. Midfield around the same.
The only thing Pep’s team has over this team is Messi who is the best ever. But then you could make a case that the Brazilian Ronaldo’ s peak is as high as Messi’s peak (or very very close).
I don't feel there's much appreciation for what made Busquets so special and vital as a cog in what so many argue is the best club team of all-time and what cements his place in said team.
It's not just beating the press, it's in first time or quick 2-touch releases straight through the lines that completely disorientated opposing midfields. But not only that, it meant Barcelona almost never had to have anyone drop back into deeper midfield to support or aid in the build up to break the lines because Busquets had already done so, by himself, often with just a single 1-touch pass. There doesn't seem to be any acknowledgement of this and its importance and why it made Busquets as equally invaluable for what he did as Xavi for what he did and Iniesta for what he did in turn.
This is, quite literally, the pinnacle of this style of football 1:1; there isn't a better player than any one of them to do what they did. Why? Well partially because this is the first time it's been a specific, wedded system - sure, in the past, we've seen some sublime midfields, capable of great passing sequences (France '84 immediately comes to mind), but Pep's side is the first to make it dogma, on repetitious loop, with no variance. In other words, they were the first that you knew exactly what they were setting out to do from the first kick of a ball at the start of a season, to the last. Your teams task was to try and prevent it from happening, but it was an inevitability what you'd be facing.
So it's not: is X, Y or Z better as an individual all-rounder than these players, it's: can they do what these players did better than them within this framework? And the answer to that is no. Even if you had a Beckenbauer, Falcao, Maradona/Laudrup/Platini line up, it still wouldn't be better because we've never seen any of them do the same thing over and over and over again to the point of ad nauseum nor do we know if they could because it's essentially having their wings clipped - you do as the system demands, not what your abundant talent instinctively desires.
Rodri might be a better all-round player than Busquets, but he will never be better at doing the things the system demands than Busquets, who by way of the system, we can objectively call the best deep one and quick release 2-touch player the game has ever seen because it was his literal bread and butter for an entire career, and because of that, it's a body of work that is unrivalled, given this is the most pass intensive style of play football has ever had.
This whole exercise is basically trying to make what is already considered the best or second best side of all time better with components that are amenable to the system and its best players. That means: catering to Messi; functionality around the locked midfield (for the reasons stated above), particularly at CB and LB, and as much edge as possible - within the framework - to enhance the attacking position Messi isn't in without getting in his way in any shape or form.
GK, CB's (and even then, it's not about individual over how great are they as functional cogs in the system), LB, LW and whichever from RW or STR that Messi isn't playing.
It's not just beating the press, it's in first time or quick 2-touch releases straight through the lines that completely disorientated opposing midfields. But not only that, it meant Barcelona almost never had to have anyone drop back into deeper midfield to support or aid in the build up to break the lines because Busquets had already done so, by himself, often with just a single 1-touch pass. There doesn't seem to be any acknowledgement of this and its importance and why it made Busquets as equally invaluable for what he did as Xavi for what he did and Iniesta for what he did in turn.
This is, quite literally, the pinnacle of this style of football 1:1; there isn't a better player than any one of them to do what they did. Why? Well partially because this is the first time it's been a specific, wedded system - sure, in the past, we've seen some sublime midfields, capable of great passing sequences (France '84 immediately comes to mind), but Pep's side is the first to make it dogma, on repetitious loop, with no variance. In other words, they were the first that you knew exactly what they were setting out to do from the first kick of a ball at the start of a season, to the last. Your teams task was to try and prevent it from happening, but it was an inevitability what you'd be facing.
So it's not: is X, Y or Z better as an individual all-rounder than these players, it's: can they do what these players did better than them within this framework? And the answer to that is no. Even if you had a Beckenbauer, Falcao, Maradona/Laudrup/Platini line up, it still wouldn't be better because we've never seen any of them do the same thing over and over and over again to the point of ad nauseum nor do we know if they could because it's essentially having their wings clipped - you do as the system demands, not what your abundant talent instinctively desires.
Rodri might be a better all-round player than Busquets, but he will never be better at doing the things the system demands than Busquets, who by way of the system, we can objectively call the best deep one and quick release 2-touch player the game has ever seen because it was his literal bread and butter for an entire career, and because of that, it's a body of work that is unrivalled, given this is the most pass intensive style of play football has ever had.
This whole exercise is basically trying to make what is already considered the best or second best side of all time better with components that are amenable to the system and its best players. That means: catering to Messi; functionality around the locked midfield (for the reasons stated above), particularly at CB and LB, and as much edge as possible - within the framework - to enhance the attacking position Messi isn't in without getting in his way in any shape or form.
GK, CB's (and even then, it's not about individual over how great are they as functional cogs in the system), LB, LW and whichever from RW or STR that Messi isn't playing.
Ok so if you want the best team, as in the best combination of players rather than the best players, based on performance levels under Pep, then the correct answer is:
Neuer
Dani Alves-Ruben Dias-Pique-Alaba
Xavi-Busquets-Iniesta
Eto'o-Messi-Sane
Neuer
Dani Alves-Ruben Dias-Pique-Alaba
Xavi-Busquets-Iniesta
Eto'o-Messi-Sane
No way, the dream team would easily win playing the same football. They are just so much better at keeping and moving the ball.
I think I would put Müller in somewhere. He is suffering from being good enough to play just about any attacking position (and doing so). Probably have him over any attacker outside of Messi.
I think currently Rodri is the best player l, but he's not better that Busquets, not far behind, but not better.
Neuer
Alves Puyol Pique Alaba
Xavi Busquets Iniesta
Messi Aguero Robben
It's weird to see the absolute superstar this man has been able to manage. Along with the regular accusations of foul play behind the scenes, it's why I'll never say he's a great manager on the level of the best to ever do it. Could he do what he does with United? Could he do what Alonso has done at Leverkusen?
Alves Puyol Pique Alaba
Xavi Busquets Iniesta
Messi Aguero Robben
It's weird to see the absolute superstar this man has been able to manage. Along with the regular accusations of foul play behind the scenes, it's why I'll never say he's a great manager on the level of the best to ever do it. Could he do what he does with United? Could he do what Alonso has done at Leverkusen?
Come back when Rodri has been top dog for 20 years
That’s the real question. Who wins:
Pep’s Barca vs Pep’s City
Both in their primes.
Im always going that Barca team
Also feck Bayern, they don’t count
The team that has prime Messi, Xavi and Iniesta. But most importantly the team that has Messi.
Agreed. But that’s the thing about last seasons City isn’t it? It wasn’t all about individual genius, it was about the functionality of the team being absolutely optimised
It’s about their only redeeming feature
That's not a distinction with prime Barcelona. They played as a team and also had some of the best individuals ever, they didn't rely on individual genius they just happened to have that on top of the rest.
Absolutely. That Barcelona would have won quite a lot of CLs in recent years, taking them from RM.
Neuer
Alves Puyol Dias Alaba
Rodri
Xavi Iniesta
Messi Haaland Foden
Alves Puyol Dias Alaba
Rodri
Xavi Iniesta
Messi Haaland Foden
Yikes.
Busquets wasn't a top player for 20years, he was for 6/7 years.
There're 2 players that are however being extremely overrated in this thread (very good players mind you, but extremely overrated, especially in the context of this thread), those players are Dias and Kompany (especially the latter who barely played for Pep).
He was a top player for nearly 15 years.
I do agree those 2 have been overrated. City have not been great with their spending on defenders.
Yeah, people love to put an extra big name CM in these type of XIs but it's both disrespectful to Busquets and showing a lack of appreciation for the DM role. Xavi is the best CM the world has ever seen, sure he could do a job deeper but he wouldn't be as good defensively. Busquets is probably the best DM (or #6 if you prefer) ever, especially for a Pep side.
Edit: tbf reading the thread most people have Busquets in
Last edited:
It's....honestly yeah. I think 21-23 version of City wipes the floor with '09-'11 version of Barcelona in terms of territorial control, possession, etc etc. They'd press Barcelona into submission but it wouldn't matter because Messi
But they don't win that much. I mean, they do in the Premier League obviously, but when it comes to the Champions League and the big international tournaments (where you sort the wheat from the chaff IMO), what do they do? I think the City group are individually a notch below players he's had in the past, if you examine them closely. But clearly they are still very good players.
GK - Manuel Neuer
RB - Dani Alves
LB - Phillip Lahm
CB - Gérard Pique
CB - Vincent Kompany
MC - Rodri
MC - Xavi
MC - Andres Iniesta
AMR - Lionel Messi
AML - Kevin de Bruyne
FC - Thierry Henry
Fluid front three. Henry can drift left. KdB can drop into false 9, Messi can do whatever he likes!
RB - Dani Alves
LB - Phillip Lahm
CB - Gérard Pique
CB - Vincent Kompany
MC - Rodri
MC - Xavi
MC - Andres Iniesta
AMR - Lionel Messi
AML - Kevin de Bruyne
FC - Thierry Henry
Fluid front three. Henry can drift left. KdB can drop into false 9, Messi can do whatever he likes!
Part of the reason City win so much, without having the obvious superstar quality of 90s United, 00s Barcelona etc...is that they have been able to reduce variance to near-zero through assembling a team of 23 clones who are all perfectly suited to the way Pep wants to play.
United lost the title in 95 when Cantona was suspended. They lost the title in 98 when Keane did his cruciate. This is how football used to be.
City, with their endless resources and their period of super-cheating have bought three identical players for every position without any real opportunity cost (i.e. they did it all in one go, sometimes buying two players for the same position at the same time)
I'm not sure that's true honestly. They are a notch below Barcelona, yeah, but that's largely because of Messi. Xavi was amazing and probably the second best player he's ever coached, but I'm not sure how that version of Barcelona would do in 2024, facing opponents that evolved to beat them. They were struggling against Mou's Madrid by the end, and that team had nothing on the Madrid sides to come, Heynckes/Guardiola/Flick Bayern, Klopp's Liverpool, or indeed City
I mean the closest comp they faced to a team like Guardiola's City would be Bayern in '13 - and yeah, Xavi had aged, Messi was injured, Tito had cancer. They were far from their best. Still, they got fecking atomized. They didn't look like they could possibly cope with that level of size, pace, strenght and organization
What!?
Can we stop this absolute nonsense that his current man City team are somehow this unstoppable force? They won one trophy this season, they were just taken apart by a b list United team in turmoil in the FA cup final. Yet some people would seriously question if the greatest team of all time would beat them because of the way they play?! - They were the literal blueprint for how Pep plays now. His barca team played the same as his current city team but with the perfect players for it in Busquets/Xavi/Iniesta/Messi - and you think the the rest would somehow struggle because of a press?
Jesus wept, you couldn't get the ball of of those 4 alone.