The relative strength of the Premier League

Now you're also exaggerating. The PL isn't "embarrassing" at all. Sure the top teams are a bit shit, no doubt about that, but if anything, the rest of the league is in a very good condition. Leicester have definitely upped their performance levels massively. IMO you're doing their achievement a disservice.

No, I'm not really serious mate. Just finding it funny that Twigg thinks that Chelsea are so low not because they've underperformed but because the rest of the league has got amazing. Let's see how he likes this argument when it's the opposite way. :)

I think Leicester have improved massively, perhaps the biggest improvement in football that I've seen. On the other hand Chelsea might the biggest decline in performance level over the course of year that I've seen too (barring United 2013-14).

Premier League is my favourite league and I watch it far more than any other league, not just for quality (which I think is good but used to be better) but for entertainment, atmosphere and to some extent nostalgy.
 
Weakest Premier League since 1996/97. Shades of Blackburn and Newcastle being bossed in the Champions League.
 
Since the 04/05 season:

Number of different Bundesliga winners: 4
Number of different La Liga winners: 3
Number of different Premier League winners: 3

I could easily argue the Premier League was a two horse year between 2004 and 2011 until City won the lottery.

La Liga vs PL in Europa League knockout phases since the 04/05 season:
11/12: Valencia knocks out Stoke, Bilbao knocks out United (3 La Liga sides in the semis by the way)
09/10: Atletico Madrid knocks out Liverpool
07/08: Bolton knocks out Atletico Madrid
06/07: Sevilla knocks out Tottenham (3 La Liga sides in the semis btw)

H2H, this reads 4-1 in favor of La Liga sides.

In this time, there has been one English victory (Chelsea) and one other final appearance (Fulham). However, there have been SIX Spanish victories (4x Sevilla, 2x Atletico) and EIGHT La Liga sides in the final (the aforementioned six + Bilbao and Espanyol who lost all-Spanish finals). So, even if you want to continue arguing that La Liga is a two-horse race (which is wrong), you can't deny that there has been quality throughout the league in all those different seasons. Spanish sides have consistently performed very well in the Europa League/UEFA Cup while English sides didn't for most of the time. You can argue all you want it's because English teams prioritize the Premier League and don't rate the Europa League, even if that would be true, those Spanish sides who did well in Europa were very good sides, all of them.

La Liga vs PL in Champions League knockout phases since the 04/05 season:

14/15: Barcelona knocks out City
13/14: Barcelona knocks out City and Atletico Madrid knocks out Chelsea (all-Spanish final)
12/13: Real Madrid knocks out United
11/12: Chelsea knocks out Barcelona
10/11: Barcelona knocks out Arsenal and United, Real knocks out Tottenham
09/10: Barcelona knocks out Arsenal
08/09: Liverpool knocks out Real, Arsenal knocks out Villareal and Barcelona knocks out Arsenal and United
07/08: United knocks out Barcelona (all-English final)
06/07: Liverpool knocks out Barcelona, Chelsea knocks out Valencia
05/06: Barcelona knocks out Chelsea and Arsenal, Arsenal knocks out Real and Villareal
04/05: Chelsea knocks out Barcelona

H2H, this reads 12-9 in favor of La Liga sides, but which trend can we see develop? Since the 09/10 season, the standings are 8-1 in favor of the La Liga sides with the only exception Chelsea beating Barcelona and we all know how that went down. You have to admit, English sides did very well for themselves in Europa from 04/05 until United went to the final twice in three years and Chelsea won in Munich. The demise of English teams in Europa is clearly visible after that, though.

In this time, there have been three English victories (Chelsea, United and Liverpool) and eight final appearances. On the other side, there are five Spanish victories (4x Barcelona and Real) and six final appearances. So, it's quite even in the Champions League, but yet again you can't deny English teams have done very poorly in this competition of late. Don't try to give some bullshit arguments about the competitiveness of the Premier League and English clubs not having a winter break because it surely didn't matter from 04/05 until 11/12 when the English top clubs were all a lot better. Surely that must mean the Premier League was even harder therefore they shouldn't have done as well as they have in Europe? It just doesn't make any sense.

If the teams around you are getting stronger and better, you raise the bar and try to become better yourself. That's what Mourinho did to United when he first came to England, SAF reacted and built one of the best United sides of all time. Right now, there's zero incentive for the top clubs because there is no genuine world class side in England anymore, there is not one club who sets the bar high for others to follow their example. If anything, the standard of play from our supposedly top sides is bang average and any decent, consistently performing team should be running away with the league right now.

Barcelona would piss all over the Premier League at the moment, probably likewise for Real and even Atletico. Sure, give me your TV deal distribution graphics again which you like to throw around from time to time but I like to judge teams from what I see from them, and it's plain simple really - not one English team right now is even close to the three powerhouses of La Liga. They're so strong that it might look like a three horse race (or two horse race like you oh so wrongly argued), but there are other excellent teams in that league as well: Villareal is having an amazing season, Sevilla might still struggle away from home but play some nice stuff as well, probably also others who I haven't even watched. Yes, a club like Valencia is underperforming this season but then again, isn't Chelsea? Isn't United? The fact that they sit in 10th and 6th place is absolutely not because the Premier League is so amazingly competitive and great, it's because they're underperforming like crazy and play mostly shite football right now.
Tldr
 
Patrice Evra, former United player and obvious crack-addict, yesterday:

'Compared to the Premier League, Serie A really teaches you to defend'.

“Every day I think about our objective, which is the fifth consecutive Scudetto. When I came to Italy [former Juve striker Carlos] Tevez told me that it took a hundred chances to score one goal [in Serie A].

“This is different by comparison to England, where it's a show in which the first team to get exhausted falls, like a boxer. In Serie A, you win with your head.

“I'm learning so much here. I must thank Italy, a country that taught me so much from early on in my career. Now let's win against Bayern Munich. I do believe it's possible.
Catenaccio is their ideology so what's new here, the Italians are good at defending, well I never.
 
@RobinLFC thanks for taking the time to do that. There is no doubt that Barce and Real are better than the prem teams in Europe at the moment. I don't think there's been enough English teams playing Spanish teams (or taking the competition seriously) to compare the Europa league games. Can't believe there hasn't been a knock out tie in three years
However I really struggle to see the logic at the end, you seem to conclude the reason Chelsea and United are low is because they are playing shite football and are underperforming. I'd argue that they are just playing a higher level of team and thus look shite compared to others.

Using the Europa league as a barometer, West Ham aren't as good at the Maltese (?) champions and Southampton aren't as good as Mitjyland or whatever. The English teams struggle in Europa no doubt, I wonder if there's a reason for that?

I think Chelsea have a world class squad and reinforced well (players like Pedro and Baba are some of the other leagues best players) but didn't realise that the league has dramatically improved in quality over the last two seasons.

Jesus tittyfecking Christ.
 
Guess it's more competitive than even I realised!
Let's ignore Pep for now (and the possibility that you're on a wum because it could be a truely interesting debate), if we discuss the Premier League today and we should do the same with Klopp, because clearly he couldn't have had a big impact on the league yet.

I've touched on the manager problem in the Premier League before in a different thread and I actually think it's huge. If you look at the age of the managers at what should be the big four English clubs, you have United with van Gaal (64 years old), Chelsea with Hiddink (he's 69), City with Pellegrini (he's 62) and Arsenal with Wenger (he's 66). Compare that to the top performing teams in Europe right now. Barca with Enrique (he's 45), Atletico with Simeone (he's 45), Real with Zidane (he's 43), PSG with Blanc (he's 50), Bayern with Guardiola (again 45), Dortmund with Tuchel (he's 42), Juve with Allegri (he's 48).

Do you see a difference there? If we go back over the decades and look at what age managers usually did their best work, at what age managers created the truely great and era defining teams:

The Dutch managers and their big influence:
Rinus Michels was 37 when he took over at Ajax, won the European Cup at 43.
Johan Cruyff was 38 when he took over at Ajax, 41 when he took over at Barca. At age 45 he had won 2 Cup winner's Cup and one European Cup.
Van Gaal was 39 when he took over at Ajax, won the UEFA Cup when he was 40, then Champions League when he was 43

The Italian managers:
Trapattoni built his great Juve side in his late 30's/early 40's.
Sacchi built his great Milan side in his early 40's
Capello took over and did his best work at Milan in his first job in his late 40's.
Ancelotti followed soon, also in his early 40's.
Lippi did his best work at Juve in his late 40's.

We can go to different nations as well, Germany for example:
Udo Lattek was 35 when he took over at Bayern and built that 70's team that won 3 European Cups
Hitzfeld was 42 when he took over at Dortmund and build the team that dominated the Bundesliga and won the Champions League over the next 5 years

All these names have in common that they did their best work in their 30's and 40's, some were still good or great in their 50's, but in general they never reached their previous peak again.

Many people on the Caf love to belittle Barca for giving young managers a chance and talk like everyone could manage them, but that's shortsighted and false. What Barca is trying to do, what Milan and Juve did for decades during their successful era, what brought success to Dutch and German clubs is something entirely different. They tried to stay ahead of the game, constantly bring in forward thinking young managers with new ideas. The Premier League over the last years has done the exact opposite, just reacted, always one step behind but celebrating the big name managers who might already be past their peak.

Don't let Ferguson's legacy fool you, he's a one off. When the Premier League rose to the top in the 00's, they had forward thinking young managers in Wenger, Mourinho pushing Ferguson to adapt and he did. No one is pushing Wenger right now, no one is adapting. We'll see how Klopp and Guardiola can influence the league. But it wouldn't be surprising if they had already done their best work in the past. I don't think it's the case with them, they look driven and willing to learn and adapt to me, but we'll have to wait if that's really the case.

Sadly, Bayern has often done the same in the past and I've been fairly critical about that. We had some success with it, Hitzfeld was still young-ish at 50 when he took over in 1998. Heynckes was a rather unique case. But Trapattoni in the mid 90's was already past his peak and I've been critical about the appointment of Ancelotti as well, because we missed the chance to bring in a new forward thinking young mind. I hate it that Tuchel is at Dortmund and that the timing was off, so that we didn't get him.

To come back to your original post:
I'd argue that the Premier Lssgus has the best collection of managers around. With Pep coming next year it'll be more true than ever.
Undoubtly the Premier League has the biggest collection of managers with an impressive CV. But no one really cares about the old names anymore. There's nothing impressive about Wenger or Pellegrini. What's exciting for the league is the new guys coming in, Conte, Pep and Klopp. Pochettino stepping up. United should be careful that they don't end up with a manager who might not be as great anymore as he once was.
 
Valencia also broke the mould, you will sideways get the odds anomaly over multiple seasons I'm competitive sports, it's basic maths and hardly laughable.

Well this will be the first season in 12 years in Premier League when anyone other than United, Chelsea and City will win it (unless City somehow come back into it). Since 1996 only 4 clubs have won PL and two of them are sugar daddy clubs.
 
@RobinLFC thanks for taking the time to do that. There is no doubt that Barce and Real are better than the prem teams in Europe at the moment. I don't think there's been enough English teams playing Spanish teams (or taking the competition seriously) to compare the Europa league games. Can't believe there hasn't been a knock out tie in three years
However I really struggle to see the logic at the end, you seem to conclude the reason Chelsea and United are low is because they are playing shite football and are underperforming. I'd argue that they are just playing a higher level of team and thus look shite compared to others.

Using the Europa league as a barometer, West Ham aren't as good at the Maltese (?) champions and Southampton aren't as good as Mitjyland or whatever. The English teams struggle in Europa no doubt, I wonder if there's a reason for that?

Wow, that's some next level shit of delusion. How can anyone say that? We have been shit all season in every competition. It's not the awesome PL which makes us look shit, when we were top of the table we got kicked out in the group stages by an average Wolfsburg side and fecking Eindhoven. We lost to Midget Land in the EL. But yeah I guess those games don't count because it doesn't suit your agenda. Us beeing still around the CL places with the season we are playing rather shows me how poor this season's PL is and not how awesome.

I think Chelsea have a world class squad and reinforced well (players like Pedro and Baba are some of the other leagues best players) but didn't realise that the league has dramatically improved in quality over the last two seasons.

And you still haven't realized that football isn't played on paper? You judging teams from how they look on paper, how well known their names are and how much money they spend, but football doesn't work like that. You can have 11 top class players and still a bad team, because they don't play together as a unit or have a shit manager/shit tactics and on the other side you can have a great little team with a bunch of unknown youngsters. I don't think Chelsea has a world class squad at all, but they have a good squad and should do much better, but without a doubt they haven't been a good team this season and it has nothing to do with the brilliant PL.
 
Or Van Gaal's Barcelona being bossed by Newcastle.



Touché. Not a great barometer though. Van Gaal's Barca were a nothing in the European Cup.
 
Touché. Not a great barometer though. Van Gaal's Barca were a nothing in the European Cup.

Back then it was really only Italy who were good in Europe on a regular basis. Barcelona went out in the group stage that season, not least because they lost 3-0 away and 4-0 at home to Dynamo Kiev, yet they still won the double in Spain, while Real Madrid won the CL, but only finished 4th in La Liga. Chelsea won the CWC that season though.
 
Looking at 20 years ago there is no point comparing at all. It was a different (better) world where money did not rule as much as it does now.
 
Back then it was really only Italy who were good in Europe on a regular basis. Barcelona went out in the group stage that season, not least because they lost 3-0 away and 4-0 at home to Dynamo Kiev, yet they still won the double in Spain, while Real Madrid won the CL, but only finished 4th in La Liga. Chelsea won the CWC that season though.

I don't entirely agree. European competition was more elite back then. It had to be with only the top two in any league qualifying for the Champions League. The standard across the board was tougher. The Kiev of Shevchenko was a really fierce side.

Also, I disagree that Italian teams were the only strong performers. Its true they tended to do well across the board. However, United were strong in the European Cup every year from 96/97 (lets forget Monaco for a second. A Monaco of Henry and Trezeguet no less..) Juventus just tended to be stronger. Dortmund were also very strong around that time though, coinciding with the German victory at Euro 96 with players like Moller and Sammer. Bayern were starting to wake from their slumber too, culminating in their finals in 1999 and 2001. Also, if you bring the UEFA Cup and Cup winners cup into it the picture looks a little different.
 
If Bayern, Dortmund, Real, Barca, Atletico, PSG or Juve were in the PL this season I'd bet my house they would be top, by some margin.

Should be enough to close the argument.
 
I don't entirely agree. European competition was more elite back then. It had to be with only the top two in any league qualifying for the Champions League. The standard across the board was tougher. The Kiev of Shevchenko was a really fierce side.

Also, I disagree that Italian teams were the only strong performers. Its true they tended to do well across the board. However, United were strong in the European Cup every year from 96/97 (lets forget Monaco for a second. A Monaco of Henry and Trezeguet no less..) Juventus just tended to be stronger. Dortmund were also very strong around that time though, coinciding with the German victory at Euro 96 with players like Moller and Sammer. Bayern were starting to wake from their slumber too, culminating in their finals in 1999 and 2001. Also, if you bring the UEFA Cup and Cup winners cup into it the picture looks a little different.

Germany was starting to catch up with Dortmund and Schalke's wins against Juventus and Inter in the finals of the CL and the UEFA Cup in '97, and generally Italy started to decline massively around 1999, after dominating Europe in the 90's like Spain does nowadays.
 
Nah, Barca and Madrid would still regularly destroy teams. They wouldn't do it every week, but then they don't in La Liga, either. They've had plenty of wins which would be classified as routine without being spectacular, and some tough ones too. I do think that a team like Barca would regularly annihilate the likes of Aston Villa, Sunderland, Newcastle and Norwich, for example.

It's worth noting that Barca didn't win a league game by four or more goals until November...and even that was against Real Madrid! Granted, they've won a fair few since, and they'd already won a few by three, but it highlights that despite what we say, and despite how incredible they are, they don't destroy every team they play against. And that would be the same over here. I really think a lot of the relegation contending teams would struggle to get anything off Barca at all except on a complete freak of an occasion, because they're so much better than anyone on display in this league right now. The likes of Stoke/Everton/West Ham would perhaps take the occasional point/win from them on a very good day, but Barca would still win most of the time, as they would against all sides in the league. Same sort of applies to Real Madrid, although to a lesser extent right now.
Just ask yourself, how did these teams above cope with Ronaldo when he played? He regularly won games on his own. How did they cope with Suarez? The same. Therefore I find it incredulous that these defences could cope with the collective power of MSN. The right and LB's will be getting humiliated over and over by MN and Suarez movement will be too much for either CB. Like lambs to the slaughter.
 
Like I said the PL and La Liga are fairly close in term of competitivity and there is something that kind of "prove" that point, it's the percentage of wins in the league, so I used Statto they have an all time table.

So since 1998:

PL: United 0.741; Chelsea 0.708; Arsenal 0.702; Liverpool 0.628; City 0.565: Leeds 0.550; Tottenham 0.549; Everton 0.525; Ipswich 0.481; Newcastle .479.

Liga: Barcelona 0.741; Real Madrid 0.733; Valencia 0.604; Atletico 0.568; Sevilla 0.553; Villarreal 0.542; Deportivo 0.531; Celta 0.503; Athletic Bilbao 0.499, Mallorca 0.490.

You can clearly see that the density is comparable, they have the same amount of strong and regular teams. The difference is that in Spain there is a gap between the third and the second team but you can also notice that the gap between the first and the second is bigger in England, for the rest it's fairly equal, the spanish teams are just a little bit more stable.
 
Like I said the PL and La Liga are fairly close in term of competitivity and there is something that kind of "prove" that point, it's the percentage of wins in the league, so I used Statto they have an all time table.

So since 1998:

PL: United 0.741; Chelsea 0.708; Arsenal 0.702; Liverpool 0.628; City 0.565: Leeds 0.550; Tottenham 0.549; Everton 0.525; Ipswich 0.481; Newcastle .479.

Liga: Barcelona 0.741; Real Madrid 0.733; Valencia 0.604; Atletico 0.568; Sevilla 0.553; Villarreal 0.542; Deportivo 0.531; Celta 0.503; Athletic Bilbao 0.499, Mallorca 0.490.

You can clearly see that the density is comparable, they have the same amount of strong and regular teams. The difference is that in Spain there is a gap between the third and the second team but you can also notice that the gap between the first and the second is bigger in England, for the rest it's fairly equal, the spanish teams are just a little bit more stable.


IMO the changes that have effected this the most have been in the last 2/3 years.
 
The Premier League is a sham. La Liga is a disgrace. If you ask me, there hasn't been a decent player since Pelé. There. I've said my piece.
 
IMO the changes that have effected this the most have been in the last 2/3 years.

It's temporary and the changes are that the top dogs, United, aren't in good shape.
 
It all starting to go wrong when mediocre players started getting signed by the biggest prem clubs for reasons that don't really make sense. We did the whole sell Ronaldo and Tevez, and sign Owen and Valencia thingy. Instead of the others taking advantage of our buffoonery, they followed suit. Hughes wasted good money at city before they actually started getting some great players when mancini was there. Instead of him adding more quality, he then get a string of mediocre players. Pellegrini hasn't been any better. Arsenal sold the likes of Cesc and RVP and ended up with the Girouds of this world. Then he decided he's going with some English core and flooded his team with more mediocrity. Chelsea didn't invest until they realized that the golden oldies were well and truly on their last legs. However the mismanagement at Pool really takes the cake, king kenny and Rodgers should never be allowed inside a football office ever again. Scottish pirlo's and welsh xavi's? How did they think that's going to get them anywhere?

None of these clubs showed a clear pattern of what they were doing or trying to build. Sir Alex is the only one that seemed to embrace a transition period but even the players he signed to be part of our future greatness(Anderson and Nani) totally let him down. While Im sure Sir Alex would've fixed the mess and built another great side, the blokes that have walked in to try and improve our squad have clearly compounded our problems and not made them less.

All these pathetic excuses about why prem teams aren't good in europe are ridiculous. Fact is, these teams are simply not good enough especially from a player personnel standpoint. Ramsey and Coquelin in midfield vs Barca is how bad things have gotten.

The tolerance for mediocrity in the prem is very high atm. Fans seem to have fooled themselves that these players are great when we all know very well that they aren't. How many truly great players play at the top clubs nowadays? 2 or 3 per club if you lucky? well, the other European giants regularly have 6 to 8 out there in any given CL night.
 
I do think that the mid level teams are stronger then before, considerably so. West ham, southampton, spurs, stoke, leicester, watford and others are all stronger then the teams their size of prior years. The main difference though is the best teams are so far behind the top teams in europe.

Sure, overall most of the league might be stronger and more competitive but there isnt a premier league team who is one of the top probably 7 teams in the world. Barca, bayern, atletico, real, PSG, juventus, dortmund are all way ahead of any premier league team and would win the title at a canter this season imo. Which says it all about the top teams. It cant be the best league when there are 7 teams from other leagues that are better then anything the prem has.
 
I do think that the mid level teams are stronger then before, considerably so. West ham, southampton, spurs, stoke, leicester, watford and others are all stronger then the teams their size of prior years. The main difference though is the best teams are so far behind the top teams in europe.

Sure, overall most of the league might be stronger and more competitive but there isnt a premier league team who is one of the top probably 7 teams in the world. Barca, bayern, atletico, real, PSG, juventus, dortmund are all way ahead of any premier league team and would win the title at a canter this season imo. Which says it all about the top teams. It cant be the best league when there are 7 teams from other leagues that are better then anything the prem has.
Good job those 7 sides aren't in the same league then so..
 
The rest of the pack in the PL is better now but not by that big an amount to offset the undeniable lack of quality at the top. Even then you had Aston Villa who were very good at the time as were Blackburn not to mention Everton who were much better than today.
 
It all starting to go wrong when mediocre players started getting signed by the biggest prem clubs for reasons that don't really make sense. We did the whole sell Ronaldo and Tevez, and sign Owen and Valencia thingy. Instead of the others taking advantage of our buffoonery, they followed suit. Hughes wasted good money at city before they actually started getting some great players when mancini was there. Instead of him adding more quality, he then get a string of mediocre players. Pellegrini hasn't been any better. Arsenal sold the likes of Cesc and RVP and ended up with the Girouds of this world. Then he decided he's going with some English core and flooded his team with more mediocrity. Chelsea didn't invest until they realized that the golden oldies were well and truly on their last legs. However the mismanagement at Pool really takes the cake, king kenny and Rodgers should never be allowed inside a football office ever again. Scottish pirlo's and welsh xavi's? How did they think that's going to get them anywhere?

None of these clubs showed a clear pattern of what they were doing or trying to build. Sir Alex is the only one that seemed to embrace a transition period but even the players he signed to be part of our future greatness(Anderson and Nani) totally let him down. While Im sure Sir Alex would've fixed the mess and built another great side, the blokes that have walked in to try and improve our squad have clearly compounded our problems and not made them less.

All these pathetic excuses about why prem teams aren't good in europe are ridiculous. Fact is, these teams are simply not good enough especially from a player personnel standpoint. Ramsey and Coquelin in midfield vs Barca is how bad things have gotten.

The tolerance for mediocrity in the prem is very high atm. Fans seem to have fooled themselves that these players are great when we all know very well that they aren't. How many truly great players play at the top clubs nowadays? 2 or 3 per club if you lucky? well, the other European giants regularly have 6 to 8 out there in any given CL night.

Good post. Spot on.
 
So Dortmund are smashing Spurs with relative ease...
Cue @Twigginater with A) Spurs 2nd team B) German teams play less games C) German league easier D) German league less competitive E) Anything can happen in a knockout game

Obviously Spurs are the better team when you factor all these things into account. Results mean nothing.