1. Man city
2. Chelsea
3. Real Madrid
4. Barcelona
5. Man utd
6. Arsenal
Would it be a suprise if Man city didn't at least go out to a team like Barcelona or Real Madrid. If this is the first K/O round or the final Man City would have failed. Chelsea likewise should go to semi's at least likewise Real Madrid.
Man utd have been the most consistent team in europe in the last five years but lost the 2 key games against Barcelona. Man utd got more points on the uefa coefficients last year despite losing to Barcelona due to winning nearly every game and only losing to Barcelona. Its amazing to think that since the 2007 semi final defeat to ac milan we have lost 4 times 2 of them in a final 1 in the last minute against Bayern and 1 against besiktas.
If Man utd had won those 2 games against Barcelona Man utd would have been getting the same praise as Barcelona. Barcelona have not been as good but just done enough in previous rounds before playing there best in the final.
Arsenal have been a team that generally gets knocked out in the K/O rounds reaching 1 final in 2006. I believe the same will happen again.
My conclusion: Barcelona are the team to beat in crucial games.
Man utd have gone to 3 champions league finals unbeaten in past 4 seasons + 1 CL semi and 1 QF. Man utd remain the most consistent in europe as shown in the UEFA coefficients.
I reckon if Man utd play Barcelona in the final but this time with the younger players so no giggs etc we will have a far better chance.
When we beat Barcelona in 2008 and 2011 pre season they were very vibrant young attacking teams that played compared to the virtually same 2009 and 2011 teams that played.
SAF got the selection wrong both times which I was suprised considering he said he knew what went wrong and picked virtually the same team that lost the final in 09. Hopefully SAF picks nani anderson instead of giggs and park next time.
In terms of expenditure for CL + Contenders
posted on 13/9/11
comment by Bluegumption (U8813) posted 2 minutes ago
Fairness would be based on current form and not on being part of "the established elite".
-------------
To be honest, I actually agree with you Blue
City are 5th favourites I think according to the bookies and the seedings should really reflect current form. That would be fairer
Trouble is. Who decides who the best teams are?
The only real factor they could use is league positions from last season. City were third so really couldn't expect to be in pot one could they.unless someone decides that the PL 3rd position is better than say Sierra A Champions
Previous pedigree in a competition is not ideal possibly, but it isn't terrible either. And in no way does it keep 'The established elite" in place,
If you are good enough to get in pot one, you will do
And come on, you have a very priveleged situation at your club that is going to make it far easier to get there than other teams that are currently in pot 3 or pot 4
surely you can see that
posted on 13/9/11
I'm quite happy to take our chances as it is and we've got some attractive matches in prospect but the seeding system means we have to be at our best while the favoured clubs will probably be in a position to field their youth teams for the last 2 fixtures.
I'm sure that's fair though.
posted on 13/9/11
comment by Boris 'Inky' Gibson (U5901) posted 1 minute ago
I'm quite happy to take our chances as it is and we've got some attractive matches in prospect but the seeding system means we have to be at our best while the favoured clubs will probably be in a position to field their youth teams for the last 2 fixtures.
------------------------------
Like I say Boris
teams have earned that right
i don't see why City should be treated any differently just because you think you're somehow more special that all the other teams in Europe that have to follow the same rules.
posted on 13/9/11
Boris, we don't have a tough group because we were in pot 3, we got a tough group because we were unfortunate. We could just as easily have had Basel and Otelul. Luck of the draw, mate.
posted on 13/9/11
There was no problem in deciding who the best teams were when it just involved the various league champions. But then the powers that be decided to turn it into a bigger money-spinner. That is why I feel it is hypocritical to start talking about City's money and "privileged position". The resentment towards City comes from the "established elite" because they see a threat to the source of wealth that has benefitted them over the years. The Pot system gives a huge advantage to Pot 1 clubs and Clubs which do not have the same financial resources need a major miracle to destroy such advantage.
posted on 13/9/11
comment by Bluegumption (U8813) posted 4 minutes ago
There was no problem in deciding who the best teams were when it just involved the various league champions. But then the powers that be decided to turn it into a bigger money-spinner. That is why I feel it is hypocritical to start talking about City's money and "privileged position". The resentment towards City comes from the "established elite" because they see a threat to the source of wealth that has benefitted them over the years
---------------------------
huh?
If there were 20 teams in City's position then I may agree there may be some resentment for the elite but City are just one team who will be playing at the top table for years.
I don't see how one team is massively going to change the dynamic. Chelsea did something similar and they play at the top table now. I don't see how that has affected teams like Barca RM BM and United.
City will be a brilliant addition in my opinion and can only be good for our City and England as a whole
This is not resentment on my part whatsever.
I have made no secret of the fact that I think it's brilliant what is going on at City, from a City fans' perspective. I have tons of City mates, family member and such and considering what they have put up with for the last couple of decades, no red can really begrudge you something to cheer. (Well many wouldn't admit to that)
I just simply said I see no reason why you should bypass the rules other clubs have to adhere too which is something Boris seems to think they should just because you have been in a position to build a squad very quickly that perhaps pot three doesn't truly represent
posted on 13/9/11
Why have teams 'earned' it? City and United could both go through and get the same number of coifficent points despite playing vastly different levels of opposition but the status quo will remain.
posted on 13/9/11
comment by Boris 'Inky' Gibson (U5901) posted 11 minutes ago
Why have teams 'earned' it?
-------------------
Because other teams have followed the same rules that City are now going to follow
posted on 13/9/11
I see, so Chelsea started in pot 4 and worked their way up?
posted on 13/9/11
comment by Boris 'Inky' Gibson (U5901) posted 3 minutes ago
I see, so Chelsea started in pot 4 and worked their way up?
----------------------
To be honest Inky I do not know but if they started in pot one, I'm presuming they did because somehow, that was within the rules at the time.
If it wasn't, I'm pretty sure there would have been an outcry from other teams in the competition.
I still don't get why you think the rules should now change just because City are in the competition
What pot do you think you should have been in and for what reason?