To go down as an all time great team?
They are clearly one of the best ever PL sides and god knows what records they’ll break this season and beyond as well as what they’ve already done but imo they need to win the CL to be mentioned alongside our great United sides of days gone by and other sides who dominated both home and the continent in the seasons past.
For all of Peps genius, he’s underachieved in the competition since the days of Barca.
Anyone else think the CL is the key to this City side going down in history or is the PL enough? Their fans seem to have the opposite of a love affair with the CL so no doubt the 4 of them on here will try to argue it’s not that important. For me, it is huge. I feel if Pep leaves City without giving them the CL - especially this season where Real are weakened and City seem to have everything they need - he will feel he did brilliantly well but not quite as well as he could have.
Do City need to win the CL
posted on 5/11/18
The subs are far from the most important.
posted on 5/11/18
I don't mean in it's literal term hence why i said in a lot of ways.
However a fair portion of points these days are won and lost by how well you use the bench.
posted on 5/11/18
That depends on the team. Lots of sides have points wrapped up before they need to even think about their bench. I’d say it’s a small portion of points that are won and lost by how you use the bench, especially at the top clubs.
posted on 5/11/18
The secrets coming out about City mean they'll never be regarded as a great club
posted on 5/11/18
What secrets?
All I know is Khaldoon took on Platini.
One of them is still the Chairman of a top club, the other is out of work with the threat of legal action hanging over him.
Liverpool are still regarded as a great club despite the actions of their fans in the past,. I'm sure City will be just fine.
posted on 5/11/18
posted on 6/11/18
Pep failed a Bayern regarding winning the CL as they had one of the best sides in Europe and all the players were at a good age.
But I don't think it would be the same here. Unlike there, his team, when he took over, wasn't years ahead of the others. He invested well in areas and got the team playing at a higher level than they have done before.
City were tailor made for him.
posted on 6/11/18
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/11/18
They still had to invest that money well.
Now the moral of how they made that money isn't the topic here. If it were, I doubt any Man City fan can be pleased about it. Just as us United fans aren't pleased with some of our sponsorship deals.
posted on 6/11/18
"Juve have won the league seven years in a row, breaking records on a regular basis. You can’t tell me they aren’t a great side."
They have made 2x CL finals and a semi final in that time though.
Are they "great" to the extent of the 88-91 Milan, treble winning Utd, 08-11 Barca etc etc?
No.
This debate first of all requires a definition of "great". If that means one of the best sides in footballing history, City haven't done enough to call themselves that.