Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik
If Chelsea were the best club in the world in 04-05, why didn't they win the CL? Or the FA Cup? So they got to the semis in the CL, and they made it to the fifth round of the FA Cup. They still lost, and let's face it, greatness is determined by how much silverware you have in your trophy case at the end of the day. Just ask the Atlanta Braves about that.
|
Because in a cup competition, one below par performance can see you out. The best guide to a team's true ability is league form: over 34-38 games (depending on league size) the best side over a year will win. Winning a cup is an indication that you are a good team, but it does not make you the best.
I would include the CL in the 'makes you good but not the best' category for the exact same reasons: any side can beat another on the day, but in a long league season, over the long term, blips and anomalies will be just that, and the cream will rise, instead of potentially being knocked out from one bad game. Continued cup success (as opposed to one season's good form) would however show form in the long term
That is why when arguing best team in Europe, I, and I think most football fans, would argue look at domestic league domination (in a country where the league is recognised as strong: i.e. Italy, Spain, England, Germany in particular) as the first rule, and then cup record as an enhancement to that.
Given what has happened in Italy this summer, Juve have to be discounted, which leaves Barca, Chelsea and Bayern as the main teams to look at, plus (on the basis of league form and consistent European performance) Milan, Lyon and Porto to be considered as well. Of these I think again most would say Barca are #1 and Chelsea #2 over the past two years in particular.
Just because a team is #1 or #2 doesn;t mean they win every game, you have to look beyond 'Did they or didn't they win a
knockout tournament'.
Edit: mixed tenses. Only noticed when cthomer quoted me. I'm tired.