I dont think there is any argument that the top teams in Germany and Spain are currently superior to that of the Premier League, but once you get beyond the top end of the table you see the quality of the league. Just look at that attack Stoke lined up with against City, where else do you find midtable sides with quality like that?
The quality of the premiership is shocking
- Thread starter C'est Moi Cantona
- Start date
I don't get what's so great about Stoke's attack. It's a collection of players that were hyped up as teenagers but failed to do anything great in the other top leagues over several years and Stoke so far has scored 13 goals in 15 games in the PL. What's so special about them other that they're massively overpayed because of their big name and not paid what their performances are worth?
People make it sound as if they're ripping the PL apart on a regular basis, is that really happening? Because it doesn't look like it.
People make it sound as if they're ripping the PL apart on a regular basis, is that really happening? Because it doesn't look like it.
It is the narrative.
From rightly saying that EPL is the best in the world (when it was), to saying that it still is (when it wasn't anymore), to the 'cycles'-invented stuff. Now, it has nothing that great, so there should either be superflous non-football related glorification (most fans in Asia and America) or best midtable clubs ever, which to me seems a completely invented labelling that has no basis at all.
And I certainly agree about Stoke. Their attack is:
Arnautovic - failed in a strong Inter, not being able to get any game; then was okay but nothing great in a poor Werder Bremen.
Shaqiri - great at Basel before making a too early transfer to Bayern where he barely played, to miserably failing in a poor Inter.
Bojan - numerous failures in Barca, Roma, Milan and Ajax.
Afellay - spectacularily failing at Barca before being poor at Schalke and average at Olympiacos.
I think the PL, over all, is the strongest in Europe. I don't see other countries with teams and squads as strong as Spurs, Chelsea and Liverpool outside their top four. Do the top two or three in these other countries really dread going to their mid table equivalent of Stoke ?
I don't doubt the top one or two in these countries would piss all over our best but surely the benchmark of the strength of a league is the other 17 or 18 sides not just the top one or two ?
I don't doubt the top one or two in these countries would piss all over our best but surely the benchmark of the strength of a league is the other 17 or 18 sides not just the top one or two ?
True. It's not like they've gone from being important players at top clubs to Stoke, all of then were failures at bigger
clubs which got them here. Yesterday might have been the first truly good collective display from Stoke too.
As it has been pointed ouit, how do you compare Watford with Espanyol? There is no benchmark, they don't play each other, there is no competition in which they both participate.
For example I don't think Sevilla, Valencia and Athletic are much worse than Liverpool and Spurs quality wise.
You're not looking hard enough then. La Liga teams have dominated the Europa recently. PL teams have barely featured past the knockouts.
This.
The gap between Barca/Real/Bayern and other teams in their leagues is mostly very big. The 'quality of the league' and the 'quality of the best team(s) in the league' are very different things. We just saw Stoke yesterday demolishing City and playing some incredible football while they were at it. We have Leicester at the top of the league with a striker who has just broken the PL record for scoring in consecutive games (puts the 'quality dropped' argument to bed somewhat).
You have the likes of Crystal Palace flourishing and signing Cabaye, thanks to the TV money, you have Spurs/Everton/Liverpool constantly biting at the heels of the top four. You have so-called best-in-the-world Mourinho practically battling for relegation - even in his worst patches with Real, he could still practically guarantee a top 3 finish.
Meanwhile yesterday in Spain you see a good side like Valencia struggling to draw at home to Barca and when they do manage it (a draw) it is heralded as a great result for them.
As the poster I qouted said - Barca, Real and Bayern are the exceptions.
Doesn't it actually prove that La Liga is also strong beyond top 2? Funny how you mention this as if Barca beat them 7-0 when in fact it's a struggling team in Spain holding Barca to a draw when City played them 4 times recently and were absolutely murdered on every occasion.
And it's amazing that people still maintain that Barca and Madrid are unimaginable distance ahead of the rest when Atletico are 2nd and 2 points behind Barcelona. I remember how everyone thought no one other than Barca and Madrid would win La Liga in 100 years.
Ditto....
Dortmund were lingering around mid-table for much of last season, and still finished in a 7th placed position which you could probably classify as being mid-table, despite the fact that they had a side full of quality that was performing quite well in the CL considering their domestic troubles.
That was just a one off season though. It would be like saying a mid table PL team won the Champions League in 2012.
Not exactly. Schalke reached the CL semis in 2011 despite finishing 14th in the league. You regularly see some major names towards the lower end of the German table.
It is a miracle then how La Liga teams do better than EPL teams in Europa League. And have been doing so since the beginning of time.
The top two don't dread going to the midtable equivalents of Stoke because the top two aren't the equivalents of Man City or Arsenal.
If we want to compare the leagues then you have to realize that the equiavalents of Manchester clubs, Arsenal, Chelsea aren't Barcelona, Madrid clubs and Bayern but Valencia, Sevilla, BVB, Wolfsburg, Monchengladbach.
Each of the teams - no matter if it is Barca, Bayern, Real or the top teams in the EPL has first to be consistent each weekend and take every match serious. If they do not they can loose a lot matches in every league. Then you have the matches where the teams are superior and have a lot of chances - but it is just not that day - top players have their bad days, bad chance conversion, bad refereeing, luck for the opponent etc.
Yes, Barca and Bayern and Real usually are the superior team - but on a bad day everybody is beatable.
The difference between them and the top sides of the EPL is the amount of quality players in the teams, a higher workrate and better teamplay atleast at Bayern and Barca and better tactically schooled players.
In addition to that I think that a lot of the other bigger sides in Europe even if they have less quality in their players than the top teams in England emphasize a lot more on tactics and teamplay, too.
Yes, Barca and Bayern and Real usually are the superior team - but on a bad day everybody is beatable.
The difference between them and the top sides of the EPL is the amount of quality players in the teams, a higher workrate and better teamplay atleast at Bayern and Barca and better tactically schooled players.
In addition to that I think that a lot of the other bigger sides in Europe even if they have less quality in their players than the top teams in England emphasize a lot more on tactics and teamplay, too.
Yeah. It's like the criteria change with every year, aside from spending big on players who made a name for themselves by failing at their previous club(s), which seems to be the only constant measure for league strength.
Athletico winning the La Liga was genuinely one the greatest sporting achievements this century but followed by a season where Barca got 94 points, (+89gd!) Madrid 92 (+80 gd) and Athletico were on 78 - my sense is that'll be the norm (although we can hope that Rafa makes it more competitive)
And they're all ahead of Diouf and Joselu in the pecking order who were massively important players for their German clubs.
Leicester going top isn't the best argument for the lack of quality in the EPL (although it's clearly not what it was). Chievo were promoted to Serie A then sat top at Christmas in the 2001 if I remember rightly. Predictably they then fell away as will Leicester. Serie A back then was still pretty darn good.
So what? Fuchs couldn't get a new contract from a struggling Schalke side with a gaping hole at LB position. Now he seems to be doing well for the first placed PL team..
What does the fate of one or two players tell aobut the league?
I think it actually says a lot about the supposed top teams if between 4-5 big spenders a team like Leicester makes it to the top. Whether or not that's because of a persisting or temporary problem is another question though.
But in this case we can savely say that it isn't a short term lack of form, imo.
It's not just one or two players. The Bundesliga was extremely worried this year because an insane amount of top talent joined the Premier League, with not much going the other way. Players like Schwienstiger, De Bruyne and Firminho being examples of some of the stars tempted by big name moves, but players like Joselu, Son and Ozaki (?) are more worrying because they joined smaller premier league clubs. The Bundesliga's best talent had an exodus this year to the premier league (apart from Bayern)
it would be cool having a 5-0 every now and again twiggs
I've bet 60.00 this year on United winning 4-0 (six times at different home games). I'm not doing it next week so if it happens I probably will kill myself.
Were they? Actually we were even surprised that until de Bruyne nobody of the bigger players went.
Valencia have traditionally been one of the better sides in La Liga as well as the home of numerous good players - lets not forget Silva, Villa, Otamendi, Mata, Mathieu are all fairly recent (last 5 years) departures for significant sums. From 2009 they finished 3rd in La Liga behind the big two for three consecutive seasons (and 4th last season).
The fact that a side such as Valencia - who are equivalent perhaps to Liverpool in the PL - should be happy with a home draw to Barcelona is proof of the gap that exists.
Your comparison to Barca's results against City doesnt really many anything because nobody has been disputing whether Barca/Real/Bayern are better than the top English clubs at present - they are. The point of the argument is the quality of the league, not just the best couple of teams.
Seriously? Bayern wasn't exactly forced to let go of Schweinsteiger. Firmino, De Bruyne and Son were important players for their clubs, but at the same time the fees paid for them were so over the top that their clubs had more than enough to come out of the window with a much stronger squad. Joselu was a rather mediocre player for Hannover they were probably happy to sell him for such a fee. Heidel, the DoF Mainz, iirc said that they were delighted with Leicester's offer, because otherwise they might have lost him for a lot less to a Bundesliga rival, they bought two strikers for €2.5m and basically saved the other €6m for a rainy day - one of those, Muto, already scored 7 and assisted 4, right now they are 7th in the league so I assume they are quite happy with how things went this summer.
The argument for the superior quality of EPL goes roughly like this: (1) The mid- and bottom table teams in EPL have got better players than their counterparts in the other top leagues. (2) To have better players is to have a better team. (3) Hence, the former are better than the latter. (4) Hence the overall quality of EPL is better than that of La Liga, Bundesliga, etc. Every step in this argument is controversial or wrong. Giving more money for transfers does not translate automatically into having better players. Arguably, the players of the bottom La Liga teams are better on the ball than their counterparts in EPL. (2) is dubious, to say the least. Teams are more than mere collections of players and managers play a highly important role in organizing them.
Last edited:
It's like comparing that to United two seasons ago, or Chelsea this season. It's an anomaly, it's silly to use these as examples of the strength in the league.
You do realise you're comparing a top 3 German side to Stoke, right?
For what it's worth the Stoke example wasn't used as undeniable proof that the PL trumps every other league in Europe, it's just a bit of perspective for those who think the top 2/3 is all that matters.
Who are Stoke supposed to sign? They were in a race with Schalke for Shaqiri and got him... That mighty German team.
Instead of judging then off their previous form why don't we judge them from their Stoke form? If this were a foreign team we would be praising them for getting the best out of the players when others couldn't etc etc.
Everybody analyses Envlish football to the smallest degree yet I see German football being quoted as above us. Thats a league that has hidden behind Bayern in Europe over the last 2/3 years. They have struggled badly this year yet not a word is spoken about it.
Instead of judging then off their previous form why don't we judge them from their Stoke form? If this were a foreign team we would be praising them for getting the best out of the players when others couldn't etc etc.
Everybody analyses Envlish football to the smallest degree yet I see German football being quoted as above us. Thats a league that has hidden behind Bayern in Europe over the last 2/3 years. They have struggled badly this year yet not a word is spoken about it.
Where are people drawing the conclusion that the teams 5-20 in the other top leagues would piss the equivalent in the premier league? The quality of players in the midtable sides are staggering right now, you have players like Shaquiri playing for stoke, and Cabaye at Palace.
The teams you would associate as the "top" clubs in the prem, supposed to be challenging in europe are United, city, arsenal and chelsea compared to those in the other big leagues have declined in quality compared to the likes of Barca, Madrid and atletico in spain, and Bayern in germany. Probably even PSG in france right now.
Other than the very top of world football, I would back the english clubs against their european counterparts 90% of the time. outside of the top 4 you have Very good sides like Spurs, liverpool and everton who would beat the likes of villareal and sevilla. or Shalke, leverkusen, gladback etc. Napoli, the milan clubs and roma.(sorry for the spellings)
The quality has been spread amoung the league and the top clubs need to get their act in order to compete in europe, but the league is strong.
The teams you would associate as the "top" clubs in the prem, supposed to be challenging in europe are United, city, arsenal and chelsea compared to those in the other big leagues have declined in quality compared to the likes of Barca, Madrid and atletico in spain, and Bayern in germany. Probably even PSG in france right now.
Other than the very top of world football, I would back the english clubs against their european counterparts 90% of the time. outside of the top 4 you have Very good sides like Spurs, liverpool and everton who would beat the likes of villareal and sevilla. or Shalke, leverkusen, gladback etc. Napoli, the milan clubs and roma.(sorry for the spellings)
The quality has been spread amoung the league and the top clubs need to get their act in order to compete in europe, but the league is strong.
Our 2013/2014 season was an anomaly, but the subject of discussion was the overall quality of the Spanish and German leagues: I'm arguing that you get plenty of cases of sides in the lower echelons of the table who have as much, if not more, quality than PL teams in similar positions.
Lucky for them. Quite a few German fans said that it would have been a typical move by Schalke's stupid director of football. Buy Shaqiri for a lot of money, put him on crazy wages and play him consistently instead of their own young talents like Meyer and Sane, who both are bigger talents and already perform as good in the league, if not better. It would have been bad for Schalke and for German football, if their development would have stalled because of Shaqiri. Schalke has done deals like that way too often and it hurt the club massively over the past 10 years.
The Bundesliga isn't above the PL, it looks like there's not much in at the moment. And obviously there's nothing wrong with judging players on their performances for Stoke, but have they really been consistently on a higher level than before? From what I've read Shaqiri certainly was rather a flop than a success before the game this weekend. Yet for some reason he's used as an example for the strength of the PL, which doesn't make much sense.
But Schalke did want him and thats the point. If he suited the needs of the clubis another question.
The entire Stoke side needed time to adjust to another style of play, it's not just Saqiri. I think they have 21 points out of the last 30 so we should really see them get going from here on in.
It's not just Stoke but Palace, West Ham etc as well. Teams that try to play football. The long ball teams or the get it down the wing as fast as you can sides are slowly fading out
For me, it's the opposite. The 'success' of the Stoke attackers for me highlights the impact that B level attackers can have when they come to England, just by having a bit of touch and technique. For me, it speaks more negatively of the league if anything.
That the likes of Shaquiri and Dmitri Payet can come in and look amongst the best players in the league shows that we still lack.
Which English team do you think would be competing with Barcelona in this league? They have 3 of the best players in the world up front.
I thought we were arguing about the strength of teams and not who was willing to pay what Inter asked and Shaqiri demanded in wages. At the moment it looks as if Schalke made the right decision to stay away from Shaqiri, yet you tried to use it as some kind of failure on their part.
Yeah but surely if Barca are so far ahead of the rest of Europe yet results like yesterday and 4-1 against Celta happen every now and again it goes to prove that there is quality outside of Barca in La Liga.
It's weird how PL fans ignore Serie A when it is way more competitive than PL this season with 7-8 teams realistically capable of winning it.
How does an anomaly (as you rightly admit) show the strength in depth of a league?
Yes it was a failure. It wasn't up top Schalke to stay away from Shaqiri since Stoke took that decision away from them. He was their first choice to replace Draxler and they couldn't get him.
Stoke overpowered a leading German side and that should be a cause for concern imo
England has been failing in both European league's. I don't know where this strength in depth is coming from because there is no evidence to back it up.
Just because the teams can spend bucket loads of cash on average players doesn't mean they are good.
Just because the teams can spend bucket loads of cash on average players doesn't mean they are good.