• Major upgrades completed! Please report any issues you spot in here

English football quality - Remember this thread?

Stan said:
And still Mauras is right....English teams are underachieving considering the fact that teams like Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal are amonst the richest sports clubs in the world...English teams should win the CL every year...i've said this countless times...most people who have revived this thread are not objective...
Click to expand...
Thats a different issue. I thought this was about the people thinking the Portugese teams are better than the English.
 
Last edited:
RuneEdge said:
Thats a different issue. I thought this was about the people thinking the Portugese teams are better than the English.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be...get over it...Portugal have won against England in the Orld Cup, Porto won against Man Utd in the Cl a couple of years ago, Porto won against celtic the year before that...now get on with your lives...

Oh and for the Portugese in this thread: Greece anyone????
 
We're not the ones who usually think are the best in the world time and time again. Best national side, best league in the world, etc.

So "Greece" doesn't hit me that much honestly. :)
 
Stan said:
And still Mauras is right....English teams are underachieving considering the fact that teams like Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal are amonst the richest sports clubs in the world...English teams should win the CL every year...i've said this countless times...most people who have revived this thread are not objective...
Click to expand...
stan you have before stated you would like to see football clubs follow the american sports with salary caps, and free agency like the NBA. What i dont think you realize is that money does not equal winning. The new york knicks were by far the worst team in the league last year, they also had the highest team salary. And just because the english teams are rich does not mean they have the best players in the world. By your logic only teams from england, spain, and italy should win the CL, because they are the richest.
You still have to go out and play the game, at the end of the day, anything can happen in any game, especially with a knock out competiton. If the CL was a league table system, then you can bet your belgium ass, the enlgish teams would finish in the top half, along with the madrids, milans, and munichs of the world(because of depth).... i think your putting too much credit too the english teams and not enough to the lower league teams... money does not always equal success. Do you think john oshea or darren fletcher would even make the 18 man roster for benfica? or for Lyon? Bordeux?
PSV? liverpool? i doubt it, they suck. There are far better players on teams that aren't the richest in the world, makoun from Lille comes to mind over those two. There is alot to be said for team chemistry, management, love for your club, and coaching. Money cant buy chemistry, money cant buy love for a club, and money certainly has been proven, cannot buy you a champions league title, see chelsea
 
csaunders said:
stan you have before stated you would like to see football clubs follow the american sports with salary caps, and free agency like the NBA. What i dont think you realize is that money does not equal winning. The new york knicks were by far the worst team in the league last year, they also had the highest team salary. And just because the english teams are rich does not mean they have the best players in the world. By your logic only teams from england, spain, and italy should win the CL, because they are the richest.
You still have to go out and play the game, at the end of the day, anything can happen in any game, especially with a knock out competiton. If the CL was a league table system, then you can bet your belgium ass, the enlgish teams would finish in the top half, along with the madrids, milans, and munichs of the world(because of depth).... i think your putting too much credit too the english teams and not enough to the lower league teams... money does not always equal success. Do you think john oshea or darren fletcher would even make the 18 man roster for benfica? or for Lyon? Bordeux?
PSV? liverpool? i doubt it, they suck. There are far better players on teams that aren't the richest in the world, makoun from Lille comes to mind over those two. There is alot to be said for team chemistry, management, love for your club, and coaching. Money cant buy chemistry, money cant buy love for a club, and money certainly has been proven, cannot buy you a champions league title, see chelsea
Click to expand...


Nice post mate :applause:
 
Always nice to discuus with you Csaunders it's a challenge...of course the richest club does not always win. Look at the UEFA Cup this week, allow me to be chauvinistic and talkabout Locomotiv moscou - Zulte Waregem. Locomotiv's budget is almost 100 times higher than that of Zulte Waregem...Zulte Waregem went through but i bet my Belgian ass that this team without a single professional player will end last in the league phase of the UEFA CUP. Why, just because of money...
In a cup there is always a chance that by some "coïncidence" (in my example the fact that Locomotiv Moscou underestimated Zulte Waregem and the Belgian team surpassed themselves) that the poorer team will win...in a league between comparable teams all is decided by money...because consistency plays a much bigger role and you need a big squad for that reason.
Look at virtually all big leagues: the league is always a race between the richest teams or otherwise their simply is no because one team is the richest:

EPL: Man Utd, Arsenal and Chelsea (and since Abramovitch only Chelsea)
La Liga: Barcelona, Real Madrid and sometimes overachievers Valencia
France: Lyon and only Lyon
Italy: Juventus and Ac Milan
Holland: Ajax and PSV (with AZ the odd one out who in the end will always lose the race)
Portugal: Benfica and Porto...

Csaunders: in football money always buys a league silverware, that's why cups are fun, because teams like Ajax or Porto (rich teams in their league but minnows in Europe) can win the CL, because Zulte Waregem can eliminate Locomotiv Moscou with a bunch of non-professional players...
 
Stan said:
Always nice to discuus with you Csaunders it's a challenge...of course the richest club does not always win. Look at the UEFA Cup this week, allow me to be chauvinistic and talkabout Locomotiv moscou - Zulte Waregem. Locomotiv's budget is almost 100 times higher than that of Zulte Waregem...Zulte Waregem went through but i bet my Belgian ass that this team without a single professional player will end last in the league phase of the UEFA CUP. Why, just because of money...
In a cup there is always a chance that by some "coïncidence" (in my example the fact that Locomotiv Moscou underestimated Zulte Waregem and the Belgian team surpassed themselves) that the poorer team will win...in a league between comparable teams all is decided by money...because consistency plays a much bigger role and you need a big squad for that reason.
Look at virtually all big leagues: the league is always a race between the richest teams or otherwise their simply is no because one team is the richest:

EPL: Man Utd, Arsenal and Chelsea (and since Abramovitch only Chelsea)
La Liga: Barcelona, Real Madrid and sometimes overachievers Valencia
France: Lyon and only Lyon
Italy: Juventus and Ac Milan
Holland: Ajax and PSV (with AZ the odd one out who in the end will always lose the race)
Portugal: Benfica and Porto...

Csaunders: in football money always buys a league silverware, that's why cups are fun, because teams like Ajax or Porto (rich teams in their league but minnows in Europe) can win the CL, because Zulte Waregem can eliminate Locomotiv Moscou with a bunch of non-professional players...
Click to expand...
of course the way the tables are structured the deepest and subsequently richest teams will win, in a knockout struture(like all american sports), they will not... so i guess we agree on that... so maybe the problem is not how rich certain teams are, but maybe its the table structure that allows the rich teams to always win... how about them apples?
 
Stan said:
Always nice to discuus with you Csaunders it's a challenge...of course the richest club does not always win. Look at the UEFA Cup this week, allow me to be chauvinistic and talkabout Locomotiv moscou - Zulte Waregem. Locomotiv's budget is almost 100 times higher than that of Zulte Waregem...Zulte Waregem went through but i bet my Belgian ass that this team without a single professional player will end last in the league phase of the UEFA CUP. Why, just because of money...
In a cup there is always a chance that by some "coïncidence" (in my example the fact that Locomotiv Moscou underestimated Zulte Waregem and the Belgian team surpassed themselves) that the poorer team will win...in a league between comparable teams all is decided by money...because consistency plays a much bigger role and you need a big squad for that reason.
Look at virtually all big leagues: the league is always a race between the richest teams or otherwise their simply is no because one team is the richest:

EPL: Man Utd, Arsenal and Chelsea (and since Abramovitch only Chelsea)
La Liga: Barcelona, Real Madrid and sometimes overachievers Valencia
France: Lyon and only Lyon
Italy: Juventus and Ac Milan
Holland: Ajax and PSV (with AZ the odd one out who in the end will always lose the race)
Portugal: Benfica and Porto...

Csaunders: in football money always buys a league silverware, that's why cups are fun, because teams like Ajax or Porto (rich teams in their league but minnows in Europe) can win the CL, because Zulte Waregem can eliminate Locomotiv Moscou with a bunch of non-professional players...
Click to expand...
lyon has been for the past five or so years, but not always... i think the french league is very very competetive from year to year, lyon just happen to be fucking awesome.... i somehow think they are not the richest, i could be wrong...
 
I love this kind of supporters, they don't even know that Arsenal have to come to Portugal for play with Porto and Benfica will went to Manchester, I hope our current manager gets saked because with the job he's doing, he'll probably put us on the 2nd League.
 
csaunders said:
lyon has been for the past five or so years, but not always... i think the french league is very very competetive from year to year, lyon just happen to be fucking awesome.... i somehow think they are not the richest, i could be wrong...
Click to expand...
Oh yes they are. There's a huge gap with the other teams.
 
Last edited:
Csaunders: in football money always buys a league silverware
Click to expand...

dont agree with this one, Inter Milan is the prime example. U do need money to win the league, but u also need a good organization and mentality, so its not a given that with lots of money, u will naturally win.

But offcourse its true that the one of the clubs with the biggest budget will always win the league, theres no way around that.
 
If you are succesful for a long period of time you'll become the richest in your league (except Chelsea). Man Utd's 10 years of success is what made them so rich. The way the competitions (CL) are structured now though ensures that these teams will stay the richest. The top 3 or 4 will always qualify even if they have a bad season (Arsenal).
 
marukomu said:
If you are succesful for a long period of time you'll become the richest in your league (except Chelsea). Man Utd's 10 years of success is what made them so rich. The way the competitions (CL) are structured now though ensures that these teams will stay the richest. The top 3 or 4 will always qualify even if they have a bad season (Arsenal).
Click to expand...

Correction: if you are successfull in the right period (i.e. wit much television money) and for a reasonable long period then you'll become richest...otherwise Liverpool would be the richest team in England...

A team like Burnley (who???) is amongst the 10 most successfull clubs in the English championship, where are they now???

Where is Leeds??? The most successfull English team between roughly 1965 and 1976????

If there was as much television money in the 70's Man Utd would not be rich at all (Man Utd got relegated in the first half of the seventies by a famous goal from their ex star Dennis Law who was playing for Manchester City at the time, i'm sure apart from me Vann is the only Man Utd "fan" who does know this). Oh and this is only an example...

Of course United (Peter Kenyon!!!) has enormous merits in becoming the richest club in the world, but there is always a litle luck or no bad luck needed...
 
I know about that Law goal and it didn't relegate us. We were already down. It was just the icing on the shit cake.

Fair point about those teams from the past but it's a different game these days and as for the present my argument is valid.
 
To be fair, the macedonian defender completely took out Rooney's legs from behind right before that photo, which was missed by the ref. But I'm not complaining, thought Macedonia did well, and England's manager is an idiot.
 
Poor England, alwyas an idiot coach...they really have bad luck...if it's not the ref or the diving of other teams it's one of their moronic coaches...should have stuck with Graham Taylor...that was a fine coach...
 
marukomu said:
Do we still have any African colonies that we can get some better players from and make them English?
Click to expand...

Canada...?

On that note, how many of the French 'national' side were actually born in France?
 
beachryan said:
Canada...?

On that note, how many of the French 'national' side were actually born in France?
Click to expand...


Im guessing more than the Irish.

We could give a few Aussie's a pardon if they were to come and play for us, well if they are good enough.
 
Well...

Zidane - Algeria
Robert Pires - Portugal
Patrick Vieira - Cape Verde/Senegal (At last on his Cape Verdian roots, he speaks a little but good Portuguese)

and so and so... :mrgreen:

In the end, Portugal has only one foreign player, a Brazilian named Anderson Luiz de Souza aka Deco, but count as a Portuguese because the official language in Brazil is the Portuguese. :mrgreen:
 
Paddy =senegal

Makelele =congo

1st team not many at all don`t be confused by the color of there skin like Thurman said ( Germany has 1 African and if more come some will say the same)I`m waiting for China to have 1 or 2 then maybe the world might change :roll: don`t take me too serious...I`m bored
 
SPiTFiRE said:
In the end, Portugal has only one foreign player, a Brazilian named Anderson Luiz de Souza aka Deco, but count as a Portuguese because the official language in Brazil is the Portuguese. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
I guess theres nothing wrong with us having an American in our team then. ;)
 
Look how many Spanish speaking countries they are does that fit the description even the USA is bilingual(no one speaks English in Miami:D )
 
beboquintero said:
Look how many Spanish speaking countries they are does that fit the description even the USA is bilingual(no one speaks English in Miami:D )
Click to expand...

Just Miami? Do any Americans speak decent English? :lol:
 
SPiTFiRE said:
Well...

Zidane - Algeria
Robert Pires - Portugal
Patrick Vieira - Cape Verde/Senegal (At last on his Cape Verdian roots, he speaks a little but good Portuguese)
Click to expand...
Nope, Zidane was born in Marseille and Pires in Reims. Family origin may be different but they're 100% french.
 
100% French?

They even haven't French blood. Pires is 100% Portuguese, Zinade is 100% Argelian, Vieira is 100% Cape Verdian only changes the birthplace and the costumes/culture. :)
 
Last edited:
SPiTFiRE said:
100% french?

They even haveen't french blood. Pires is 100% portuguese, Zinade is 100% Argelian, Vieira is 120% Cape Verdian only changes the birthplace and the costumes/culture.
Click to expand...

The same thing for d.cissé born in Arles but his parents came from Ivoary Coast
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom