Compared to the fortune spent by City year after year? Yes. We can't just erase everything that have happened before this summer in evaluating this season.
Liverpool 2018/19
- Thread starter Adisa
- Start date
- Status
Nah, the European Cup format was rife for certain teams having periods of dominance, because funnily enough, it as easier to win. The European Cup was retained by eight teams, totalling thirteen retentions. The Champions League has been retained by one team, twice, and that in the last two years.
Liverpool were very good back then, and undoubtedly one of Europe's best in that time, but the fact remains that being one of Europe's best doesn't guarantee a CL win.
I don't know enough (or any) Inter or Barca fans to comment.
It wasn't probably easier to win, it simply was easier to win. United played a team from fecking Malta en route to winning it in 1968.
It's only being discussed here because you've got a Liverpool fan claiming you'd have been just as dominant even if the format was as it is now, which would simply be unprecedented.
No one is saying Liverpool weren't one of the best teams in Europe back then. They undoubtedly were one of the best, if not the best over that period. However, being the best over a period doesn't guarantee that you're going to win an incredibly competitive competition year in, year out.
The point being made that you're failing to grasp is that you could win the European Cup and only have played at most one or two of the other top teams to do so, with the rest of the opposition being objectively poor. The same is not true in the current format, because you're pretty much guaranteed to play at least two very good teams, as well as three or four other decent sides that could all capitalise on you not being at your very best.
Oxlade has a long-term injury. And how is Giroud currently not better than Sturridge? You're giving too much value to a decent preseason and a goal against West Ham at home when you were 3-0 up. As the season progresses, I would rather have World Cup winner Giroud on the bench than unpredictable and injury prone Sturridge. And Barca's midfield is still top quality if Coutinho is shifted wide. They have Rakitic, Busquets, Vidal, Arthur and can put Sergi Roberto in CM too.
No, the expectations of the previously mentioned are subject to a multitude of variables - far too many to mention - but one, and perhaps the most significant is the summer transfer expenditure of the specific club in question. Liverpool were the biggest spenders in England, thus their expectations are clearly higher than the rest.
I have no idea which United team will show up this weekend.
It doesn't mean anythng since the concept of relevance is barely applicable to a discussion on football. Still, it's good for a laugh.
There was still a fair few big sides in Europe in those days. The Champions of Italy, Spain, Germany. Some top sides from Eastern Europe too.
On the other hand the last 8 in 1979 comprised of - Nottm Forest, Grasshoppers, Cologne, Rangers, Austria Vienna, Dynamo Dresden, Wisla Krakow & Malmo.
The old format didn't guarantee a win either. It was easier to win, once you were in it, but harder to qualify for. The current format meant you qualified every season in 20 years under Ferguson.
In the old format you wouldn't have qualified for it in your treble season. We wouldn't have Istanbul, and nobody would hail this Madrid team as anything special, as they would have struggled to qualify. Swings and roundabouts.
I seem to remember your expectations being that if City achieve 100 points you expect Utd to get 101. Despite the fact that your manager stated that Utd could not achieve that total and the fact that no two clubs have ever even achieved 90+ points in the same season, never mind 100+.
My point being that expectations have to be grounded in reality. Only one team can win the league, and history tells us that it usually ends up as a two (sometimes three) horse race. All this means that 3 or possibly 4 sets of fans from the "big" 6 won't see a title challenge.
A level headed expectation regarding the spending over the summer, is that it should see us comfortably secure a top 4 position before the last day of the season, whilst hopefully going on a good European run at the same time.
It has strengthened our squad depth to enable this.
If Man City capitulate, I'd hope we're not too far from them to capitalise, but I dont see it happening.
Realistically, we wont win the league.
I'm not saying it did. I was responding to the notion that Liverpool would have enjoyed just as much European success between 77 and 84 if the format was as it is now, simply because they were one of Europe's best, when the actual evidence we have dictates that it would have been extremely unlikely, and in fact, entirely unprecedented. Even Real Madrid's recent success in Europe has come at the expense of domestic success.
I've acknowledged multiple times that it as harder to qualify for.
What evidence is that ? Not only did we win 4 European Cups in 8 years between 1977 & 1984, we also won 2 UEFA Cups (1973 & 1976). So that's 6 European trophies won in 12 years. We not only showed that we could beat the best teams a country could produce, but we also showed - in winning the 2 UEFA Cups - that we could beat the best of the rest too. So if we had the CL format back then, what so called evidence is there to suggest things would have been any different ? Bottom line is, we won what we won because we were the stand out team in Europe, & not because it was easier to win.
How many times is it you've won 'Old Big Ears' altogether now?
The evidence being that only one team has ever retained the CL? It's not fecking hard lads.
Well that means nothing really does it ? A few years later Big Ron's United side were knocked out of the UEFA Cup by fecking Videoton. A United team that had players like McGrath, McQueen, Olsen, Robson, Strachan, Whiteside, Hughes, & Stapleton in their squad. & a year or so earlier some bloke called Alex Ferguson beat Real Madrid in the final of the European Cup Winners Cup with fecking Aberdeen.
They were my expectations, but based on last weeks shameful performance against Brighton, one of the worst I have ever witnessed from a United team in my 30+ years as a fan, those expectations have diminshed somewhat. A good showing against showing against the spuds this weekend and the situation will very likely change once more. We are incredibly unpredictable right now, much like last season, you simply never know which United will show up.
Well I think 8 fairly reputationally nondescript teams forming the absolute cream of the competition we're actually arguing about is rather better evidence than your 1 shock result in a different competition, tbh.
Last edited:
What relevance does that have to us in the 70's & 80's ? You claimed that it's unlikely we would have been as successful had the format been the same as it is now. Tell me what difference it would have made ? How would playing in a group stage first have hampered our chances ? 6 European trophies in 12 years suggests that we were pretty good at this European footie lark at that time. Bayern Munich, Real Madrid, & Barcelona were still around back then & all 3 were beaten by us at one point. So perhaps you could elucidate a little bit more as to how a different format would have clipped our wings during our dominant period.
Good post.
I get both arguments refarding the old and new format. The thing about the old one was it was a straight knock out and no seedings. In 79 I think it was we got Forest in the first round and got knocked out. I guess thats the modern day equivalent of Real getting Barca in the first round. But like I say I get both sides of the debate there are mkre stronger teams in it now but that doesnt mean the likes of St Etienne , Bayern and Moenchengladbach were shit .
Well...
I'd say having more competition vs. more teams of a higher standard would be making it more difficult, but I could be wrong, obviously.
I'd say having more competition vs. more teams of a higher standard would be making it more difficult, but I could be wrong, obviously.
Ae least it wasn't almost exactly the same every year, there is that.
It is and its shameful. Iam not sticking up for LFC as the gulf even with the fans is huge. But... if we left Anfield and moved elsewhere then Anfield would suffer more as the money the shops , pubs make on matchday is more than they make in a week. There is nothing in Anfield apart from LFC that brings revenue to the local economy.
Barcelona at their peak won 4 in 10 years. The fact that they never won any of those 4 in consecutive years means nothing. Still doesn't take away the fact they were the best around during that period. Just like we were in the 70's & 80's, & just like United should have been under Ferguson before Pep's Barca came along.
Who knows? Maybe you're right, but all evidence points towards that english football was the best in Europe in that era, and we were the best in England. We would have qualified every year from '72 to '85, so for all i know, we could have had more
Possibly a couple more, yeah. Some bad losses in there certainly. Monaco, Dortmund, Leverkusen semis being at the forefront of that category probably.
The expectations of United, Spurs, Chelsea and Liverpool are the same this season to challenge for the title and at minimum get Top 4. We have to spend to get closer to City as do the other top 6 clubs.
I was born & raised just off Breck Rd less than a mile away from Anfield back in the 50's & 60's. It was a rough shithole back then, & it's still a rough shithole. I'm sure if you were to speak to those residents who have been rehoused, the vast majority would probably say they're far happier. Most of the opposition to the compulsory purchase orders came from greedy landlords who wanted more money to compensate them for losing out on their fleecing of desperate people who had no option but to live in a 'rough shithole'.
When you won the treble in 1999 I feared you'd go on & win a lot more. You had a great manager, great young players, & funds to probably blow everyone out of the water when it came to buying power. Maybe luck wasn't kind to you in the years that followed insofar that you encountered some tough opponents, but prior to your win in 1999 I felt there was a void in the CL & United were probably the side best equipped at the time to capitalize on it.
You want the evidence in facts and figures? Alright then. This website has calculated UEFA Coefficients right back through the years (https://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uefa/index.html) so I'll be using that, and Liverpool's first European Cup as an example, comparing it to your run to the final last season.
Before we start, there were 33 UEFA nations in 1976/77 (and right through to 84). In 2017/18 there were 54 UEFA nations (there's now 55 with Kosovo added). To convert a rough equivalent ranking between the two time periods, I've done a bit of simple maths (to convert 1977 rankings to 2018, it's ([rank]/33)*54, and to do from 2018 back to 1977, it's ([rank]/54)*33). Additionally, there were over 200 individual teams with coefficient points, and thus, ranked.
Here's a table of the rough equivalents. 77-84 converted to 2018 on the left, 2018 converted to 77-84 on the right:
1976/77, Liverpool's first European Cup:
First Round vs Crusaders (Northern Ireland) - Northern Ireland were ranked 27th. Crusaders themselves were unranked.
Second Round vs Trabzonspor (Turkey) - Turkey were ranked 23rd. Tabzonspor themselves were unranked.
Quarter-Final vs Saint-Etienne (France) - France were ranked 15th. Saint-Etienne were ranked 52nd.
Semi-Final vs Zurich (Switzerland) - Switzerland were ranked 21st. Zurich were ranked 53rd.
Final vs Monchengladbach (West Germany) - West Germany were ranked 1st. Monchengladbach were ranked 2nd.
Liverpool reached the final without playing a single team inside the UEFA Top 50, never mind Top 10, and only played one team from a top half ranked nation.
If the format were the same, and you came up against teams ranked equivalently, your route to the final last year would have been something like this (or the potential route for Chelsea as title holders):
First Round vs Buducnost Podgorica (Montenegro) - Montenegro ranked 44th. Buducnost Podgorica ranked 329th.
Second Round vs Dundalk (Ireland) - Ireland ranked 38th. Dundalk ranked 237th.
Quarter-Final vs Rosenborg (Norway) - Norway ranked 25th. Rosenborg ranked 138th.
Semi-Final vs Sheriff Tiraspol (Moldova) - Moldova ranked 34th. Sheriff Tiraspol ranked 145th.
Final vs Barcelona (Spain). Spain ranked 1st. Barcelona ranked 3rd.
It's essentially a bunch of fodder, right up until the final. In reality, the furthest any of those teams not Barcelona got was the third knockout round (Rosenborg and Sheriff Tiraspol), which was the round before Liverpool played their qualifier against Hoffenheim.
Alternatively, your route in 76/77 if the format was the CL format and you drew equivalent teams to those that you drew in 2017/18:
Play-Off Round vs FC Twente (Netherlands) - Netherlands ranked 2nd. FC Twente ranked 46th.
Group Stage vs FC Koln (West Germany) - West Germany ranked 1st. FC Koln ranked 13th.
vs Dynamo Kyiv (Soviet Union) - Soviet Union ranked 4th. Dynamo Kyiv ranked 4th.
vs Malmo (Sweden) - Sweden ranked 19th. Malmo ranked 20th.
vs Malmo (Sweden) - Sweden ranked 19th. Malmo ranked 20th.
Second Round vs Juventus (Italy) - Italy ranked 5th. Juventus ranked 10th.
Quarter-Final vs Ajax (Netherlands) - Netherlands ranked 2nd. Ajax ranked 3rd.
Semi-Final vs QPR (England) - England ranked 3rd. QPR unranked (runners up in England 75/76).
Final vs Monchengladbach (West Germany) - West Germany ranked 1st. Monchengladbach ranked 2nd.
You really have too much free time manYou want the evidence in facts and figures? Alright then. This website has calculated UEFA Coefficients right back through the years (https://kassiesa.home.xs4all.nl/bert/uefa/index.html) so I'll be using that, and Liverpool's first European Cup as an example, comparing it to your run to the final last season.
Before we start, there were 33 UEFA nations in 1976/77 (and right through to 84). In 2017/18 there were 54 UEFA nations (there's now 55 with Kosovo added). To convert a rough equivalent ranking between the two time periods, I've done a bit of simple maths (to convert 1977 rankings to 2018, it's ([rank]/33)*54, and to do from 2018 back to 1977, it's ([rank]/54)*33). Additionally, there were over 200 individual teams with coefficient points, and thus, ranked.
Here's a table of the rough equivalents. 77-84 converted to 2018 on the left, 2018 converted to 77-84 on the right:
1976/77, Liverpool's first European Cup:
First Round vs Crusaders (Northern Ireland) - Northern Ireland were ranked 27th. Crusaders themselves were unranked.
Second Round vs Trabzonspor (Turkey) - Turkey were ranked 23rd. Tabzonspor themselves were unranked.
Quarter-Final vs Saint-Etienne (France) - France were ranked 15th. Saint-Etienne were ranked 52nd.
Semi-Final vs Zurich (Switzerland) - Switzerland were ranked 21st. Zurich were ranked 53rd.
Final vs Monchengladbach (West Germany) - West Germany were ranked 1st. Monchengladbach were ranked 2nd.
Liverpool reached the final without playing a single team inside the UEFA Top 50, never mind Top 10, and only played one team from a top half ranked nation.
If the format were the same, and you came up against teams ranked equivalently, your route to the final last year would have been something like this (or the potential route for Chelsea as title holders):
First Round vs Buducnost Podgorica (Montenegro) - Montenegro ranked 44th. Buducnost Podgorica ranked 329th.
Second Round vs Dundalk (Ireland) - Ireland ranked 38th. Dundalk ranked 237th.
Quarter-Final vs Rosenborg (Norway) - Norway ranked 25th. Rosenborg ranked 138th.
Semi-Final vs Sheriff Tiraspol (Moldova) - Moldova ranked 34th. Sheriff Tiraspol ranked 145th.
Final vs Barcelona (Spain). Spain ranked 1st. Barcelona ranked 3rd.
It's essentially a bunch of fodder, right up until the final. In reality, the furthest any of those teams not Barcelona got was the third knockout round (Rosenborg and Sheriff Tiraspol), which was the round before Liverpool played their qualifier against Hoffenheim.
Alternatively, your route in 76/77 if the format was the CL format and you drew equivalent teams to those that you drew in 2017/18:
Play-Off Round vs FC Twente (Netherlands) - Netherlands ranked 2nd. FC Twente ranked 46th.
Group Stage vs FC Koln (West Germany) - West Germany ranked 1st. FC Koln ranked 13th.
vs Dynamo Kyiv (Soviet Union) - Soviet Union ranked 4th. Dynamo Kyiv ranked 4th.
vs Malmo (Sweden) - Sweden ranked 19th. Malmo ranked 20th.
Second Round vs Juventus (Italy) - Italy ranked 5th. Juventus ranked 10th.
Quarter-Final vs Ajax (Netherlands) - Netherlands ranked 2nd. Ajax ranked 3rd.
Semi-Final vs QPR (England) - England ranked 3rd. QPR unranked (runners up in England 75/76).
Final vs Monchengladbach (West Germany) - West Germany ranked 1st. Monchengladbach ranked 2nd.
You really have too much free time man
Another slow day in work!
St Etienne were runners up in 76 so which ever way you want to cut it up, they were a top quality team at that time.
They finished mid-table in the French league in 76/77. A French league considerably weaker than it is today, and considerably weaker than the English league.
Iam a West Derby / Canny Farm lad. As a kid walking from the Belmont down to Anfield I remember it always being a shithole going back to the late 70's.
Liverpool might as well give them back. They’re fecking worthless by the sound of it. We fluked it five times, we fluked it five tiiiiimes... etc.
They finished 5th and won the French Cup, having won the league for the 3 years previous.
They were a very good team at that time.
They were good before, but that was the end of their cycle. They finished 5th in 76/77 and 7th in 77/78. This would be like arguing United were very good in 2013/14 because they won the league the year before. They weren't. They were turd.
Depends if they appointed the French David Moyes at that time or not!
I get your point, I just think that clubs of their ilk are dismissed way too easily when it comes to looking back at that era, given how, for the most part, a lot of the top internationals for the countries they played in remained to play for the club's as well.
Also travelling, scouting and preparation could still lead to clubs travelling into the unknown. Liverpool getting knocked out by CSKA Sofia and Widzew Lodz in 82 and 83 proves his point.
Hahaaaa.
Some Manc on here a few years ago posted a beauty in the How many European Cups would Fergie have won in the old format. I think he researched it meaning they would not have qualified or went out on the away goal rule in the group stages. The thread dropped like a stone.
Yeah sure, playing KO is same as playing weaker teams in group stages. That logic.
- Status