Pep's Barcelona vs Zidane's Real Madrid

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Barcelona were the better team, but they simply didn't achieve what this Madrid side has.

3 Champions league titles on the bounce is the greatest modern era achievement. The fact that it's also 4 out of 5 makes it even more unbelievable.

I understand those that value Barcas titles, but those 3 consecutive CL's are other worldly. There's not even a discussion for me.

 

[MVBDX]

I looked like a mug yesterday with the Ronaldo stats but you've outdone me in 24hrs.

La Liga 2015–16 W D L GF GA GD Pts
1 Barcelona (C) 38 29 4 5 112 29 +83 91
2 Real Madrid 38 28 6 4 110 34 +76 90
3 Atlético Madrid 38 28 4 6 63 18 +45 88

It's obvious that you can't read, I said "won the year before as well by 10 pts, if you count it from when he take the helm from freaking Benitez". Not surprising though, as you said you looked like a mug, but twice.

 

[Culero]

It's obvious that you can't read, I said "won the year before as well by 10 pts, if you count it from when he take the helm from freaking Benitez". Not surprising though, as you said you looked like a mug, but twice.

So? It does nothing for his domestic claim in comparison to Pep's team, he lost the title period.

 

[MVBDX]

So? It does nothing for his domestic claim in comparison to Pep's team, he lost the title period.

Well the thread is about Zizou's Madrid not Benitez', and since he took the helm he got 10 pts more than Barca in his 1st season (that was the treble winning MSN side BTW), and won the 2nd title as well, you can talk whatever you want and it doesn't change that Zizou has got more pts in both seasons.

If Pep had started from minus 10 in any of his 4 seasons in Barca (even when bang average Schuster and Juande Ramos were Madrid's manager with the likes of Diarra, Gago etc. in midfield), he'd have ended up with ZERO titles, while Zizou would've won it, although he started from minus 10 against the treble winning MSN side which had an even better win ratio than Pep's.

 

[midnightmare]

Feel the Barca team is overhyped because of nostalgia too. They may have dominated but Madrid were a pale shadow of themselves at the time and there was no Simeone-led Atletico - leading to domestic dominance. They didn’t do as much on the bigger stage though - Europe. In fact, look up Pep’s away record in the CL even then! They weren’t this all-conquering juggernaut that people like to think of them as.

Real now are a different beast and they’ve dominated Europe under Zidane and apart from this season, done well domestically as well under him. If not for Benitez, he could well have had 2 Liga titles as well! Amazingly, this has actually been done without marquee signings and has actually seen players like James and Morata sold! Pepe too left. No replacement purchase there either as Varane came in.

Say what you will. All 11 starters in the final started last year’s too. And 9 of them (Isco and Varane are the exceptions) also started the year previous.

If you’re looking at it that way, this wasn’t even a “club” dominating but a team, in the truest sense of the word. Same players, same staff. Insane. Absolutely monumental, specially in this day and age.

 

[Culero]

Well the thread is about Zizou's Madrid not Benitez', and since he took the helm he got 10 pts more than Barca in his 1st season (that was the treble winning MSN side BTW), and won the 2nd title as well, you can talk whatever you want and it doesn't change that Zizou has got more pts in both seasons.

If Pep had started from minus 10 in any of his 4 seasons in Barca (even when bang average Schuster and Juande Ramos were Madrid's manager with the likes of Diarra, Gago etc. in midfield), he'd have ended up with ZERO titles, while Zizou would've won it, although he started from minus 10 against the treble winning MSN side which had an even better win ratio than Pep's.

What if I then extrapolate that over three seasons? Take into account this season and where does that leave Zidane point's wise? I get where you are coming from but if we start looking at points only over his tenure Zidane still comes short domestically. I can only bow to his European record though.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Pep's Barcelona. Their level of domination was greater within football matches. I find Madrid 'jammier'. Also the former dominated their league as well. Although Madrid have ruled Europe to unprecented levels for the CL era.

I think it's also an interesting comparison from the first 11 vs squad comparison. Barcelona, for me, had the better starting line up. Had they met, they would win IMO. Better midfield, Messi in his pomp. However, Madrid's squad is the best I've ever seen and easily. I mean, which team has Isco/Bale/James/Morata (last year) as bench players. It's absurd how good their depth has been over the years.

 

[RedFish]

3 CL'S in a row, when for so long we wondered if a club side would ever win 2 consecutively. That not just achieving that's taking the piss.

 

[Karel Podolsky]

Real now are a different beast and they’ve dominated Europe under Zidane and apart from this season, done well domestically as well under him. If not for Benitez, he could well have had 2 Liga titles as well!

Had Benitez done well, Zidane would not have been Madrid manager.

 

[MVBDX]

What if I then extrapolate that over three seasons? Take into account this season and where does that leave Zidane point's wise? I get where you are coming from but if we start looking at points only over his tenure Zidane still comes short domestically. I can only bow to his European record though.

He had an off season domestically (which was mostly due to selling two big scorers in Morata and James and adding no replacements in that department), but he dominated the other two league titles point wise, and dominated all three in Europe with an astonishing 89% win ratio in away CL KO matches vs Pep's measly 16% at Barca.

 

[Estel]

He had an off season domestically (which was mostly due to selling two big scorers in Morata and James and adding no replacements in that department), but he dominated the other two league titles point wise, and dominated all three in Europe with an astonishing 89% win ratio in away CL KO matches vs Pep's measly 16% at Barca.

Furthermore, it's not even the entire 2018/19 La Liga season that Real Madrid were off the pace, it was only the first half of the season, as after week 19 they were on 32 points while Barcelona were on 51 points. And this was mostly due to needing to deal with a spate of injuries or suspensions with regards to key players while not having as deep a squad as the earlier season when such aspects could be better managed.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...sundays-week-19-results-and-updated-standings

In the 2nd half of the season, Barcelona picked up 41 points to reach a total of 93, while Real picked up 44 points to reach a total of 76. Thus, across 2.5 La Liga seasons, Zidane's Madrid has had one poor half leading to him winning only one La Liga title. To put it differently, if La Liga followed the Apertura and Clausura system as is followed in some countries, Zidane's Real Madrid would have 3 Clausura and 1 Apertura titles, out of a total of 5 possible Aperturas+Cluasuras during his time with the team. So the lack of League dominance seems to be a bit overstated by looking at very simplistic measures.

 

[Ekeke]

If you're the sort of person who thinks Pep's Barca is better than Zidane's Real Madrid, then you're probably the same sort of person who thinks that the 'invincibles' were better than 2007-2011 United or 1999-2001 United. You can't compare a team that could never go back to back in europe to one that won 3 in a row and 4 in 5 years.

Silly assumption.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

No one will convince me that a team that wins the current incarnation of the UCL thrice in a row has a superior. Pep's Barca for all their mesmerizing game didnt ever come close to doing it. Whilst teams like United 2007-2009 or Juventus 1996-98 and even Ajax 1994-1996 all failed in bids to retain it once. Yet these guys have done it twice. And with intelligent strengthening in the summer could easily do it again.

 

[United Junkie]

No one will convince me that a team that wins the current incarnation of the UCL thrice in a row has a superior. Pep's Barca for all their mesmerizing game didnt ever come close to doing it. Whilst teams like United 2007-2009 or Juventus 1996-98 and even Ajax 2004-2006 all failed in bids to retain it once. Yet these guys have done it twice. And with intelligent strengthening in the summer could easily do it again.

You got Juve and Ajax mixed up.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

If you're the sort of person who thinks Pep's Barca is better than Zidane's Real Madrid, then you're probably the same sort of person who thinks that the 'invincibles' were better than 2007-2011 United or 1999-2001 United. You can't compare a team that could never go back to back in europe to one that won 3 in a row and 4 in 5 years.

That seems like a bit of a stretch. I find it a perfectly valid opinion to hold the Madrid side in a higher regard but to suggest that it's ludicrous to hold the opposite view makes no sense given Pep's Barcelona also achieved things that Zidane's Madrid couldn't, which is to win two trebles and 3 league titles on the bounce. I mean, incredible achievement by Madrid in these 3 years (Ancelotti won the 1st CL) but I find it hard to consider a team 10 points off the pace in their the undisputed best team in Europe that season.

So you can make a case for either team.

 

[ti vu]

That seems like a bit of a stretch. I find it a perfectly valid opinion to hold the Madrid side in a higher regard but to suggest that it's ludicrous to hold the opposite view makes no sense given Pep's Barcelona also achieved things that Zidane's Madrid couldn't, which is to win two trebles and 3 league titles on the bounce. I mean, incredible achievement by Madrid in these 3 years (Ancelotti won the 1st CL) but I find it hard to consider a team 10 points off the pace in their the undisputed best team in Europe that season.

So you can make a case for either team.

The thing is in modern CL, there was no other team who was able to defend the CL title, let alone win it thrice in a row. Treble, few others team did. Defending league title few others did too. Winning CL is tough. To win it in this manner, it's a special achievement among achievements.

Look at it this way. If you don't win the league but to win CL as one off, it can be downplayed. Here Zidane's Madrid did win double last season, so they have shown they know how to win the league too. What is special is with all these CL wins, the message is that even when they're not at their best, in CL they're the favorite to win regardless however other teams try, which is something else.

 

[Peyroteo]

That seems like a bit of a stretch. I find it a perfectly valid opinion to hold the Madrid side in a higher regard but to suggest that it's ludicrous to hold the opposite view makes no sense given Pep's Barcelona also achieved things that Zidane's Madrid couldn't, which is to win two trebles and 3 league titles on the bounce. I mean, incredible achievement by Madrid in these 3 years (Ancelotti won the 1st CL) but I find it hard to consider a team 10 points off the pace in their the undisputed best team in Europe that season.

So you can make a case for either team.

If not Madrid who would you say has been the best team in Europe this season then? I ask because I think it’s pretty much impossible to say and I don’t understand how you can make those comparisons. It’s one thing to argue who’s been more successful but to argue who’s been better is just too subjective.

Pep’s Barca only won 1 treble btw

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

You got Juve and Ajax mixed up.

Corrected

 

[iKnowNothing]

Feel the Barca team is overhyped because of nostalgia too. They may have dominated but Madrid were a pale shadow of themselves at the time and there was no Simeone-led Atletico - leading to domestic dominance. They didn’t do as much on the bigger stage though - Europe. In fact, look up Pep’s away record in the CL even then! They weren’t this all-conquering juggernaut that people like to think of them as.

Real now are a different beast and they’ve dominated Europe under Zidane and apart from this season, done well domestically as well under him. If not for Benitez, he could well have had 2 Liga titles as well! Amazingly, this has actually been done without marquee signings and has actually seen players like James and Morata sold! Pepe too left. No replacement purchase there either as Varane came in.

Say what you will. All 11 starters in the final started last year’s too. And 9 of them (Isco and Varane are the exceptions) also started the year previous.

If you’re looking at it that way, this wasn’t even a “club” dominating but a team, in the truest sense of the word. Same players, same staff. Insane. Absolutely monumental, specially in this day and age.

...and therein lies the answer to the question of Pep's Barca vs Zidane's Real.

Zidane inherited this amazing core group of players - all of them extremely talented. Now many people might not agree with this but in my book Pep took the easy way out and left when he was at the top with Barca. Now eventually (this upcoming season or the next) when Real have to rebuild their squad, if Zidane sticks around and even gets them to the semi finals or finals then I think the answer becomes absolutely clear.

At this point however, I would still side with Zidane. 3 CLs on the trot is something that Pep hasn't achieved yet. I don't care how "jammy" they looked winning the CL each year - the fact that they did is absolutely amazing.

 

[Treble]

Why have Madrid won only 1 La Liga title in the last 5 years if they are better than Barca 09-11 who won 3 La Liga titles in a row and dominated both Europe and Spain? Genuine question. How could the best team in Europe be second best (or third best) in its domestic league? Would Liverpool be better than City if they won the CL?

Real finished 17 pts off Barca last season. 17! How on earth could a team so far behind in the league be the best team in Europe?

You are not the best in Europe if you are not the best in your own country. You are more experienced, lucky, better in big games (lost 0:3 to Barca though) etc. but not the best overall. Real had a worse domestic campaign than fecking Spurs. Let that sink in.

 

[ti vu]

Why have Madrid won only 1 La Liga title in the last 5 years if they are better than Barca 09-11 who won 3 La Liga titles in a row and dominated both Europe and Spain? Genuine question. How could the best team in Europe be second best (or third best) in its domestic league? Would Liverpool be better than City if they won the CL?

Real finished 17 pts off Barca last season. 17! How on earth could a team so far behind in the league be the best team in Europe?

You are not the best in Europe if you are not the best in your own country. You are more experienced, lucky, better in big games (lost 0:3 to Barca though) etc. but not the best overall. Real had a worse domestic campaign than fecking Spurs. Let that sink in.

The key is 3 CL in a row. Not one off.

Barcelona is nippy the only team who successfully defend the title for 3 years while winning CL. No other teams were able to defend CL, let alone winning 3. When no one has similar record the you're set apart.

The whole X points less than A team is much moot point. Reasons? Even 1 point less you still lost the title race (Zidane's first half a season). Madrid had a meh season domestically, it's known early. The energy was put toward aiming to win CL. The line between disaster and historical feat is slim. To pull it off like this is special.

This point also explained what happen with the excuse often used for Pep in regarding Rijkard final season. At one point they realize the gap is too much to close given it's in the league leaders' hands. Gamble was in CL. It's not that the team quality is Y point level worse than B team. B team can't win shite even if they want let alone compare two different league with different dynamism.

 

[Treble]

The key is 3 CL in a row. Not one off.

Barcelona is nippy the only team who successfully defend the title for 3 years while winning CL. No other teams were able to defend CL, let alone winning 3. When no one has similar record the you're set apart.

The whole X points less than A team is much moot point. Reasons? Even 1 point less you still lost the title race (Zidane's first half a season). Madrid had a meh season domestically, it's known early. The energy was put toward aiming to win CL. The line between disaster and historical feat is slim. To pull it off like this is special.

This point also explained what happen with the excuse often used for Pep in regarding Rijkard final season. At one point they realize the gap is too much to close given it's in the league leaders' hands. Gamble was in CL. It's not that the team quality is Y point level worse than B team. B team can't win shite even if they want let alone compare two different league with different dynamism.

Again, why only 1 La Liga title over 5 (!) years if they are the best in Europe? Unsurprisingly, you didn't quite address my point.

Real's achievement is unique. No one argues about that.

But Barca did unique things too.

Real have never won the treble. Barca won the treble twice in 6 years (09-15).

More importanly, Barca 09-11 had a unique style and dominated teams in a unique manner. Because of their class they dominated both in Europe and Spain. This Real team lacks the class to dominate both in Europe and Spain apart from last season which was fantastic.

 

[GhastlyHun]

Number of trebles Zidane's Real has won?

 

[ti vu]

Again, why only 1 La Liga title over 5 (!) years if they are the best in Europe? Unsurprisingly, you didn't quite address my point.

Real's achievement is unique. No one argues about that.

But Barca did unique things too.

Real have never won the treble. Barca won the treble twice in 6 years (09-15).

More importanly, Barca 09-11 had a unique style and dominated teams in a unique manner. Because of their class they dominated both in Europe and Spain. This Real team lacks the class to dominate both in Europe and Spain apart from last season which was fantastic.

Remember when Pep won the Treble, the Chelsea game at the Bridge clearly shows they needed plenty of luck to achieve the final feat. It's not outright flawless campaign as the final feat which stuck in in people's memory. Mourinho's Treble team the following year brought similar tactic against Barcelona and without the same amount luck they couldn't win the CL.

Why they ain't as good in the league? Reason is simple, the team was initially assembled and pushed for winning the 10th CL more than winning the league. It's implied when Perez returned that Messi whole career wouldn't kick Madrid off their perch in term of league titles. CL wise Barcelona had been approaching while at the time Perez returned, Madrid couldn't make it semi final. Look at how Madrid lessen their transfer after the Decima feat. Now in autopilot mode they're a formidable CL team that achieved this feat. Winning 3 CLs in a row is not just unique, it's a monstrous achievement in modern era. Ask Juventus. They would trade their current Serie A streak for this CL feat.

League winning streak, Treble winning both have been replicated by other teams in same era. Defending CL is not by other team.

 

[Gio]

Madrid's contain-and-counter football is custom designed for knockout competition. It's hard to think of many in history who have done it so well for more than a single season, albeit I think Sacchi's Milan were a notch above. Three consecutive Champions League wins puts Madrid into the mixer for European side of all team along with Madrid 55-60, Ajax 71-74, Bayern 74-76, Liverpool 77-84, Milan 87-92 and Barcelona 08-11. But it's not quite as persuasive without that league dominance behind them. Nobody really throws the Madrid of 98-02 into the debate even though they racked up 3 titles in 5 years because their league performances were patchy. But even in the era of the superclub when we have and will see great teams coming to the fore frequently, Barcelona reached heights nobody else has. A lot of people have put Barcelona ahead of those multiple and sustained European Cup/Champions League winners irrespective of them failing to retain the title, so I certainly wouldn't be using that as a sole rationale for sticking this Madrid ahead.

If that's the case why did it take that red card to RVP and Ovrebo's special performance for them to win those two CL, and why was Pep's away record in Europe awful for all his time at Barca?

Surely the best team that played the best football ever should have been doing great at all levels, not just domestically.

EDIT:

I'll tell you why, it's because Man United looked hopeless against them on both ocasions and it hurt's a bit so you think what you want to make yourself feel better, but other remember that both Arsenal and Chelsea had the control in their games against Barca until ref's decided otherwise.

The consensus on Barcelona goes way beyond the United support. And the revisionism over those Arsenal and Chelsea games gets worse as the years go by. Arsenal benefited from refereeing errors much more than Barcelona did during that tie - Messi having a goal wrongfully disallowed 1-0 up in the first leg and then Messi again not getting a penalty for the trip in the second leg. More of a case of fortune in the Chelsea games, but most forget the two major decisions that wrongly went Chelsea's way in the Nou Camp - the Eto'o one-on-one offside call and the Henry penalty, as well as the desperation of a couple of the penalty shouts at Stamford Bridge, as well as Abidal's questionable sending off - in order to fit an agenda.

 

[Treble]

Remember when Pep won the Treble, the Chelsea game at the Bridge clearly shows they needed plenty of luck to achieve the final feat. It's not outright flawless campaign as the final feat which stuck in in people's memory. Mourinho's Treble team the following year brought similar tactic against Barcelona and without the same amount luck they couldn't win the CL.

Why they ain't as good in the league? Reason is simple, the team was initially assembled and pushed for winning the 10th CL more than winning the league. It's implied when Perez returned that Messi whole career wouldn't kick Madrid off their perch in term of league titles. CL wise Barcelona had been approaching while at the time Perez returned, Madrid couldn't make it semi final. Look at how Madrid lessen their transfer after the Decima feat. Now in autopilot mode they're a formidable CL team that achieved this feat. Winning 3 CLs in a row is not just unique, it's a monstrous achievement in modern era. Ask Juventus. They would trade their current Serie A streak for this CL feat.

League winning streak, Treble winning both have been replicated by other teams in same era. Defending CL is not by other team.

So, they've created a team that is great only in the CL. Thanks for confirming my point.

And you are repeating yourself. You think it's enough to point out that Madrid have done something absolutely unique, i.e. something not done by any other team. But Barca 09-11 did absolutely unique things too. They won 13 trophies over 3 seasons! 13! That's absolutely monstrous. And, no less importantly, they did it in unique style which made strong teams look like randomly collected groups of players.

 

[haram]

Pep's Barca imo.

 

[ti vu]

So, they've created a team that is great only in the CL. Thanks for confirming my point.

And you are repeating yourself. You think it's enough to point out that Madrid have done something absolutely unique, i.e. something not done by any other team. But Barca 09-11 did absolutely unique things too. They won 13 trophies over 3 seasons! 13! That's absolutely monstrous. And, no less importantly, they did it in unique style which made strong teams look like randomly collected groups of players.

They won the league too under Zidane. So it's not like they can't do it.

Can they be consistently great in the league too? The room for improvement is there. They're not putting enough investment these past seasons, rather riding on the team that had been assembled for years.

You seem have problem understand defending CL is a big achievement harder than anything else in modern era hence the repeat. Just because you have 13 trophies doesn't mean the feat is better as I explained, some club would trade league winning streak for CL winning streak, let alone super cup, domestic cups.

The unique style coincided with having the star aligned for them. As I pointed out, against Chelsea (also Pep's final season) and Mourinho's Inter, they couldn't always get thing done. This is not pure luck but the adaptability, the ability to overcome obstacle even at direst moment. When people judge team seem like people judge at their peak as I pointed out in my previous the lack of context in when Barcelona got extremely lucky with that Chelsea tie to begin the their record. I don't say Zidane 's Madrid is not using luck. The point as repeatedly repeated is it's no pure luck to win the competitions consecutively 3 times.

Edit: ask yourself why did Pep Barcelona go out their way adding work class talent to their CL winning teams and yet failed to retained CL the following seasons twice?

 

[Rob]

Barca for me. Best football I've ever witnessed.

Winning three CL's in a row is remarkable, though.

 

[Trizy]

1. Real don't care about the league (except when they win it and have open bus parades in 2008 and 2012)

2. Fans think 1 CL > 10 La Ligas

3. No one cares about the league outside of England. It's a glorified ticket to the CL group stage

That's a load of bull. With that logic 2005 Liverpool was better than Chelsea's 2 season of dominance in the same time, regardless of them finishing 5th. And again in 2011/12 when Chelsea won it but finished 6th.

If Madrid claim to not to care about domestic titles and cups it's because they've failed in the past 10 years to win many. ''I don't care about it anyway'' is such a child's mentality.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

If not Madrid who would you say has been the best team in Europe this season then? I ask because I think it’s pretty much impossible to say and I don’t understand how you can make those comparisons. It’s one thing to argue who’s been more successful but to argue who’s been better is just too subjective.

Pep’s Barca only won 1 treble btw

I genuinely can't say this year. City have been the most phenomenal league team. Barcelona the best domestic team overall I guess. And Madrid the best in the CL. A group of really good teams I'd say as opposed to one team that swept everyone away (treble or the big double winners).

Ah, I don't know why I felt they did the treble in both 09 and 11. That must have been 14/15.

 

[Treble]

They won the league too under Zidane. So it's not like they can't do it.

Can they be consistently great in the league too? The room for improvement is there. They're not putting enough investment these past seasons, rather riding on the team that had been assembled for years.

You seem have problem understand defending CL is a big achievement harder than anything else in modern era hence the repeat. Just because you have 13 trophies doesn't mean the feat is better as I explained, some club would trade league winning streak for CL winning streak, let alone super cup, domestic cups.

The unique style coincided with having the star aligned for them. As I pointed out, against Chelsea (also Pep's final season) and Mourinho's Inter, they couldn't always get thing done. This is not pure luck but the adaptability, the ability to overcome obstacle even at direst moment. When people judge team seem like people judge at their peak as I pointed out in my previous the lack of context in when Barcelona got extremely lucky with that Chelsea tie to begin the their record. I don't say Zidane 's Madrid is not using luck. The point as repeatedly repeated is it's no pure luck to win the competitions consecutively 3 times.

Zidane's Madrid had way more luck than Pep's Barca. Let's agree that Barca were lucky vs Chelsea in 2009. (That's debatable because Barca were denied a clear pen in the first leg which changed the dynamics of the tie.) But they were unlucky next year when they had to travel by bus to Milano for the the first leg and weren't fresh enough. And they were unlucky vs Chelsea in 2012.

Last season Madrid were a bit lucky vs Bayern - red card for Bayern in the second leg and 2 offside goals in extra time. But this season was something else. They were lucky in every single tie and the final. Against PSG - offside goal for 1:1 in the first leg, Neymar injured for the second leg; denied pen for Juve in the first leg, given pen for Real in the second leg; denied pen for Bayern in the second leg; Salah injured in the final and 2 incredible mistakes by Karius...The only final that this Madrid team won in style was vs Juve (4:1).

How could one define objectively what is harder: 13 trophies over 3 years with 2 CL titles or less trophies with 3 CL titles in a row, given that both achievements are unseen in the modern era? Even in terms of trophies and completely disregarding the style of their winning, Barca 09-11 are unique too. If you add style and tactical innovation, Barca are on a diffferent level.

Again, Real's success in the CL is absolutely unique but football is not CL football alone. The best is the best both in Europe and domestically. Not only in Europe. The inability of this Madrid team to dominate La Liga takes off the shine of their fantastic achievement. Luck plays a bigger role in the CL than in the domestic leagues because the games from the last 16 to the final are just 7.

 

[Zehner]

I think some in here take the distinction betwen league and cup teams too far. Yes, there is a difference between winning domestic routine matches and prestigious CL ties. But you don't win La Liga without defending your lead in the matches against the two other top dogs with the Clasico arguably being the biggest match in the world. Barcelona absolutely dominated many European top sides. In Mourinho's first season, he got thrashed 5:0 despite coaching the second best team in the world. Madrid is really impressive but Barca 2009-2012 was something else.

You also have to consider the luck factor. Barca loss to Mourinho's Inter side was extremely unlucky. I know many people attribute it to Mourinho's tactical brillance but they were still pretty lucky that Barca didn't score at least one more goal out of their dozens of chances. And besides the infamous red card against Motta there were also some wrong calls in favor of Inter. On the other hand, Madrid wins it's third CL title primarily through three unbelievable goal keeper mistakes and got lucky that Bayern wasn't granted at least one or two penalties in the semis and couldn't score even the easiest goals.
This shows, even if you have a great team you still need luck to win the CL. If some random things played out a little bit different, the CL history of the last ten years could look completely different.

 

[A-man]

Barca seemed impossible to beat, but they never got the cup results Madrid have. Also I have never seen more boring football than Barcelona during this era.

 

[Camilo]

The way Barcelona dominated the ball under Pep was incredible.. But they so very rarely used it...and it was so dull to watch. And then there were the games you thought they should've won, but for whatever reason they didn't. They'd go behind and nothing would change - there'd be no surge or anything of the sort... And while that's almost admirable in a way - they had their way to win and it usually worked - it meant they rarely forced the issue. It was rather inorganic.

Madrid on the other hand and a team of pure winners, from the coach through to every player. It was men vs boys against Liverpool, but it would've been men vs boys against pretty much any other team on the planet. Three Champions Leagues in a row.. Four in five years..

It'll be interesting to see how they're remembered in 20 years. Nothing between them in my book. I'll say Madrid.

 

[Bwuk]

Madrid have won 4 out of the last 5 Champions Leagues.

Before they did it, no-one had won it twice in a row. They've now won it 3 times in a row.

How is this even a debate?

Oh but Barca play pretty football.....

 

[Treble]

The way Barcelona dominated the ball under Pep was incredible.. But they so very rarely used it...and it was so dull to watch. And then there were the games you thought they should've won, but for whatever reason they didn't. They'd go behind and nothing would change - there'd be no surge or anything of the sort... And while that's almost admirable in a way - they had their way to win and it usually worked - it meant they rarely forced the issue. It was rather inorganic.

Madrid on the other hand and a team of pure winners, from the coach through to every player. It was men vs boys against Liverpool, but it would've been men vs boys against pretty much any other team on the planet. Three Champions Leagues in a row.. Four in five years..

It'll be interesting to see how they're remembered in 20 years. Nothing between them in my book. I'll say Madrid.

Bayern won 3 consecutive European cups 74-76. But most people rate Milan 88-89 higher despite the fact that they won it only twice. Why? Because style and tactical innovations matter.

In 20 years, Zidane's Real and Pep's Barca will be seen similarly to Bayern 74-76 and Milan 88-89. The one won more but the other were greater.

 

[Treble]

Madrid have won 4 out of the last 5 Champions Leagues.

Before they did it, no-one had won it twice in a row. They've now won it 3 times in a row.

How is this even a debate?

Oh but Barca play pretty football.....

Your point has been made about 50 times in this thread. And answered as many times too. Thanks for your contribution though.

 

[BluesJr]

Definitely Madrid for me. There really is no arguing with 3 CL's in a row. Barca played better football but their record in Europe, especially away from home, was poor.

Both great teams and I'd love to see them play each other right now, Madrid would sneak it 3-2.

 

[Bwuk]

Your point has been made about 50 times in this thread. And answered as many times too. Thanks for your contribution though.

Contributed my opinion, which is more than your post which I’m quoting did (and likewise mines here).

Thanks for reading it though.