or to join or start a new Discussion

21 Comments
Article Rating 5 Stars

EPL or UCL? Which trophy would you take?

We are obviously in with a shout at both but which trophy would you prefer?. For me it's UCL as we have not won it before and will be a special occasion. We are almost in the quarters (Porto have 0 chance) and with a bit of luck we can get a nice draw in the next couple of rounds.

posted on 7/2/24

100% the CL, also 100% we'll not be winning it. Our cup competition record is terrible under Arteta and the Champions League is the toughest of cups.

City will win the league again, I'll be very surprised if we finish within 5 points of them

posted on 7/2/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 49 minutes ago
Really Chris??
We have just played Forest and had to listen to "Champions of Europe, you'll never sing that". Same with Villa. It is the first thing any Chelsea fan will bring up. Liverpool and United fans put it above any league title. Don't think the appeal ever wears off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Those European cups were so much easier to win, Villa played knockouts against Icelandic giants Valur and 4th tier German side Dynamo Berliner. It was then Dynamo Kiev in the quarters and Anderlecht in the semis before beating Bayern in the final.

It just doesn’t compare to the current CL

posted on 7/2/24

It was much harder just to qualify for. The clubs were heavily restricted back then, there was a larger spread of good teams across the continent.
It doesn't compare, but for the likes of United in 99, Liverpool in this century and Chelsea it was far easier to win than the old one - as they wouldn't even have been in it.

posted on 7/2/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 6 minutes ago
It was much harder just to qualify for. The clubs were heavily restricted back then, there was a larger spread of good teams across the continent.
It doesn't compare, but for the likes of United in 99, Liverpool in this century and Chelsea it was far easier to win than the old one - as they wouldn't even have been in it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Great comment mate

Can't argue with any of that.

posted on 7/2/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
It was much harder just to qualify for. The clubs were heavily restricted back then, there was a larger spread of good teams across the continent.
It doesn't compare, but for the likes of United in 99, Liverpool in this century and Chelsea it was far easier to win than the old one - as they wouldn't even have been in it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed, but illustrates my point, the real achievement back then was winning the league. After that you had 1 top team from Italy/Germany and Spain, the rest were cannon fodder for English sides, with the occasional brilliant Kiev and Anderlecht teams.

posted on 7/2/24

Whereas now everyone is cannon fodder for the Spanish giants?

Not sure why you keep mentioning Anderlecht and Kiev, neither did anything in the European Cup. Anderlecht weren't even in it in that short period of English dominance.

posted on 7/2/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 14 minutes ago
Whereas now everyone is cannon fodder for the Spanish giants?

Not sure why you keep mentioning Anderlecht and Kiev, neither did anything in the European Cup. Anderlecht weren't even in it in that short period of English dominance.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
They often made the Quarters at least in the 70’s and 80’s, also they have won 3 times as many European trophies as Arsenal. They were a very handy Euro side.

posted on 7/2/24

I mean, quarter finals in a 5 round tournament that you have totally devalued is not exactly great. In the 80s and first couple of years of the 90s you had winners from Romania, Yugoslavia, Portugal, France and the Netherlands. The likes of Steaua Bucharest were more of a force than Kiev or Anderlecht, so you are pretty much arguing it was very competitive, and thus difficult to win, in the pre-CL days.

posted on 7/2/24

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 15 minutes ago
I mean, quarter finals in a 5 round tournament that you have totally devalued is not exactly great. In the 80s and first couple of years of the 90s you had winners from Romania, Yugoslavia, Portugal, France and the Netherlands. The likes of Steaua Bucharest were more of a force than Kiev or Anderlecht, so you are pretty much arguing it was very competitive, and thus difficult to win, in the pre-CL days.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not, I’m trying to point out that they were better than they are now so they were one of the teams to beat - but these days you have Inter, Juve, Bayern, Dortmund, Real, Barca, Atletico, Benfica, PSG. It’s much harder now

posted on 7/2/24

EPL 100 pct.

The UCL is a tin pot competition which even the participants are looking to disband and set up a super league.

Only fans of small teams like Forest and Liverpool care about the UCL.

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
1 Vote
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 5 from 1 vote

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available