Topic: Best team in Premier League history?

[TepidT2O]

That Manchester United team in 93-94...

They were terrifying with their quick wingers...

There were teams with better players, but as a team? The best I’ve seen

[Caligula?]

You do know there’s a team in the poll who literally were unbeatable, right?

I get that, but it's not what I meant. I still think the Chelsea from 04-05 and City of last season were better sides than Arsenal's invincibles, as the point totals show. League table doesn't lie after 38 games. They might not have lost a league game but still drew a shit load of them and had a few close calls. If they had lost even 1 game I don't think it'd even be an argument.

[jillcwhomever]

I get that, but it's not what I meant. I still think the Chelsea from 04-05 and City of last season were better sides than Arsenal's invincibles, as the point totals show. League table doesn't lie after 38 games. They might not have lost a league game but still drew a shit load of them and had a few close calls. If they had lost even 1 game I don't think it'd even be an argument.

Why does it matter that they had a few "close calls" the only thing that counts was they went through the season unbeaten. No side has done that since, or is likely too, including teams that have spent a lot more money.

[Caligula?]

Why does it matter that they had a few "close calls" the only thing that counts was they went through the season unbeaten. No side has done that since, or is likely too, including teams that have spent a lot more money.

Are points irrelevant then? What's the league table for then? It's like when Evertonians say that it doesn't matter until 10 or 15 games in or whatever. 100 points, 32 wins, 106 goals scored, +79 goal difference. At a time when teams even near the bottom of the table are spending more money on players than ever before because of the ridiculous tv money. We're unlikely to ever see that again.

Yes, I get people's automatic hatred for Abramovich's Chelsea and as of late Manchester City because of the vast amount of funds and resources they've had at their disposal from incredibly shady backing, but you can't deny the facts or statistics. I have a lot more respect for Wenger's Arsenal when they went unbeaten, but I just don't think they were the best team of the Premier League era. Just an opinion like.

[jillcwhomever]

Of course we all have our own opinions don't have a problem with that, just didn't get your point about Arsenal having a few close calls. City also had some close calls last season, I voted for the unbeaten Arsenal side as much for their achievement of ending up unbeaten as anything else. From memory a lot of the draws came after they had won the title. It was a unique achievment especially considering it was in the years Ferguson was so competitive. Always thought it must have annoyed him, that it was something none of his own teams managed.

[El Lobo]

I get that, but it's not what I meant. I still think the Chelsea from 04-05 and City of last season were better sides than Arsenal's invincibles, as the point totals show. League table doesn't lie after 38 games. They might not have lost a league game but still drew a shit load of them and had a few close calls. If they had lost even 1 game I don't think it'd even be an argument.

But they didn’t

And Man City had plenty of close calls last season, not least that run where Sterling seemed to be scoring an injury time winner every week

[The North Bank]

Of course we all have our own opinions don't have a problem with that, just didn't get your point about Arsenal having a few close calls. City also had some close calls last season, I voted for the unbeaten Arsenal side as much for their achievement of ending up unbeaten as anything else. From memory a lot of the draws came after they had won the title. It was a unique achievment especially considering it was in the years Ferguson was so competitive. Always thought it must have annoyed him, that it was something none of his own teams managed.

Eventually, on another slow international week, we ll get a poll on the greatest poster in rawk history, I know who im voting for.

[Crosby Nick]

Eventually, on another slow international week, we ll get a poll on the greatest poster in rawk history, I know who im voting for.

Good man.

[Eeyore]

For me arguably the best Premier League team isn't even in the list. Personally though I can't stand the fella I think Mourinho changed the face of English Football when he arrived. The leap from 03-04 when Arsenal went unbeaten to the next 5 years was marked. We had a period when the only time English teams got knocked out of the Champions League was by a truly incredible Barca team or by each other.

Personally I think the best team I have seen was the 08-09 United team. For sheer firepower I think they are pretty unmatched with the likes of Ronaldo, Rooney, Berbatov, Tevez and Giggs they had truly frightening attacking players. Combine that with a team that set a record with 14 consecutive clean sheets and I think they could of gone up against anyone.

[Achilles Heel]

People forget that we drew 4 of our last 5 games, at times playing Keown upfront to get him a medal, that team could have got near 100 points if it didnt take its foot off the pedal , we drew 0-0 with birmingham and newcastle, 2-2 at spurs and 1-1 at pompey, teams wed regularly smash if we needed to. Looking at the points doesnt tell the full story, played great football too, and spent 3.6m the previous summer, we were 3rd favourites at the bookies , which i found  offensive at the time, given the talent we had ,but no one really fancied us,and we walked it.

I get it that you think Arsenal were the best. The majority in the vote on here agree with you.


Arsenal dropped 14 points in the 1st 20 games. City dropped 14 points all season.
You would have had to win your last 18 games on the bounce to get 100 points. So, no where near 100 points whether you took your foot off the pedal  or not.

People will forget you drew 4 of your last 5 games because you didn't. You won 3 out of the last 6.

Keown didn't really have a bearing on anything. He came on as a sub in the last 4 games and the earliest he was introduced was in the 87th minute.

Net spend might not have been much in the summer but you did have a record signing in the January. £15million or was it £20 million?

[theredguy03]

Derby County 2007-08, what a team that was. Lowest points total in Premier League history. Relegated in March. Thumped 5-0 at Arsenal, 6-1 at Chelsea, 6-0 at Anfield. Took 4 points off Newcastle!

In all seriousness, I voted for Arsenal's 'invincibles'. Henry in his prime was unstoppable, Vieira a midfield general. The likes of Bergkamp, Pires, Campbell, Cole. Going 38 games without losing is amazing.

[jillcwhomever]

I get it that you think Arsenal were the best. The majority in the vote on here agree with you.


Arsenal dropped 14 points in the 1st 20 games. City dropped 14 points all season.
You would have had to win your last 18 games on the bounce to get 100 points. So, no where near 100 points whether you took your foot off the pedal  or not.

People will forget you drew 4 of your last 5 games because you didn't. You won 3 out of the last 6.

Keown didn't really have a bearing on anything. He came on as a sub in the last 4 games and the earliest he was introduced was in the 87th minute.

Net spend might not have been much in the summer but you did have a record signing in the January. £15million or was it £20 million?

Why have you bought net spend into it when the likes of City and Chelsea have redefined the money aspect of football spending completely? It's an irrelevent argument to be honest. Did City, Chelsea or any of the United teams go through the entire season unbeaten, considering the money they've all spent maybe we should ask why didn't they manage it? 

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Why have you bought net spend into it when the likes of City and Chelsea have redefined the money aspect of football spending completely? It's an irrelevent argument to be honest. Did City, Chelsea or any of the United teams go through the entire season unbeaten, considering the money they've all spent maybe we should ask why didn't they manage it? 

What do you expect from a toploader fan.

I heard he squeals at their gigs.

[Achilles Heel]

Why have you bought net spend into it when the likes of City and Chelsea have redefined the money aspect of football spending completely? It's an irrelevent argument to be honest. Did City, Chelsea or any of the United teams go through the entire season unbeaten, considering the money they've all spent maybe we should ask why didn't they manage it? 

Eh? I was responding to only 1 of a series of false facts presented by North Bank.

Arsenal were the 2nd team in top flight history to have an unbeaten season.  A fantastic achievement.

But I rate City's performance higher last year as I do with Chelsea 04/05 and United 07/08 or 08/09 despite all the money spent

[Ratboy3G]

I'm surprised that there aren't more votes for the 97/98 Arsenal side, they were brilliant

[Crosby Nick]

I'm surprised that there aren't more votes for the 97/98 Arsenal side, they were brilliant

They were great to watch and finished the season like a train but won the league with 78 points. We came 3rd with just 65!

Seems like less extremes back then, I’m sure the crap sides were still crap but wasn’t such a gulf between the top four or five and the rest like there seems to be now.

[The North Bank]

I get it that you think Arsenal were the best. The majority in the vote on here agree with you.


Arsenal dropped 14 points in the 1st 20 games. City dropped 14 points all season.
You would have had to win your last 18 games on the bounce to get 100 points. So, no where near 100 points whether you took your foot off the pedal  or not.

People will forget you drew 4 of your last 5 games because you didn't. You won 3 out of the last 6.

Keown didn't really have a bearing on anything. He came on as a sub in the last 4 games and the earliest he was introduced was in the 87th minute.

Net spend might not have been much in the summer but you did have a record signing in the January. £15million or was it £20 million?

Last seasons man city proved that going the whole season unbeaten is the far bigger achievement and a much harder task than getting 100 points. Also we had the better team, in terms of players, De Bruyne and Sane are good , but a very poor mans bergkamp and henry. We also had to compete with far better teams, including United under fergie, City last season only got challenged by Liverpool, who slapped them silly 3 out of 4 times they met. I wouldnt put last seasons city in the top 5 best premier league teams ever, because I watched the pemier league since the start and there have been some fearsome teams in it, city just seemed to sweep aside a high number of awful opposition.

[idontknow]

For me arguably the best Premier League team isn't even in the list. Personally though I can't stand the fella I think Mourinho changed the face of English Football when he arrived. The leap from 03-04 when Arsenal went unbeaten to the next 5 years was marked. We had a period when the only time English teams got knocked out of the Champions League was by a truly incredible Barca team or by each other.

Personally I think the best team I have seen was the 08-09 United team. For sheer firepower I think they are pretty unmatched with the likes of Ronaldo, Rooney, Berbatov, Tevez and Giggs they had truly frightening attacking players. Combine that with a team that set a record with 14 consecutive clean sheets and I think they could of gone up against anyone.

1-4 consecutive clean sheets, you say. Well, you can't touch that, certainly not with Dossena and Aurelio.
You've missed Ralph Machado and Howie W. out their big strike force too.

Cheers Al,
as a veggie I'm always being asked, But you eat fish?
I couldn't resist that little nibble though 

[Achilles Heel]

For me arguably the best Premier League team isn't even in the list. Personally though I can't stand the fella I think Mourinho changed the face of English Football when he arrived. The leap from 03-04 when Arsenal went unbeaten to the next 5 years was marked. We had a period when the only time English teams got knocked out of the Champions League was by a truly incredible Barca team or by each other.

Personally I think the best team I have seen was the 08-09 United team. For sheer firepower I think they are pretty unmatched with the likes of Ronaldo, Rooney, Berbatov, Tevez and Giggs they had truly frightening attacking players. Combine that with a team that set a record with 14 consecutive clean sheets and I think they could of gone up against anyone.

I'm with you in the main with that. Peak United. Winning the league, club world cup, league cup, semi of Fa Cup and CL Final.

Only criticism was despite the fire power they only managed 68 goals in the league. Lost more league games than Liverpool as well of course. Scored less. Worse goal difference.

1-4. I loved that game.

[harleydanger]

Invincible’s for me, I think they’re pretty equal with the City team from last year until you add Viera. Also, the movement of that team was astounding, everyone in that team seemed 5 yards quicker than the opponent, every game.

[Miltonred]

I hate United but winning the title, and winning the FA Cup and the Champions League, was an incredible achievement. Also done in an era when nobody played their b team in the FA Cup, you showed up or you got knocked out.
City did there great season last year without a cup run, or dealing with the semis and the Final of a CL. Ditto Arsenal. 

[Xabi Gerrard]

Arsenal 04 might have been the best at not losing games (apart from the time that season they lost to Chelsea in their most important game, got tonked by Inter, lost to Dynamo Kiev, lost to Man Utd and lost TWICE to Middlesborough), but they weren't particularly outstanding at winning. They failed to win a third of their league games.

And as if they would have been unbeaten if they had to face teams as good as Jurgen's Reds like City did last year

That Manchester United team in 93-94...

They were terrifying with their quick wingers...

There were teams with better players, but as a team? The best I’ve seen

Thing is with them is that the league was truly appalling back then. Many of the best English players were plying their trade abroad at the time and there were barely any foreign players in the league, let alone good ones (the 3 at Man Utd were about the only good ones around that year). That Man U team were the best of a bad bunch in the PL. They showed their true level in Europe - getting beaten by Galatasary and humiliated by Barca in that period.

[deFacto please, you bastards]

I'm with you in the main with that. Peak United. Winning the league, club world cup, league cup, semi of Fa Cup and CL Final.

Only criticism was despite the fire power they only managed 68 goals in the league. Lost more league games than Liverpool as well of course. Scored less. Worse goal difference.

1-4. I loved that game.

Our 12 bloody draws that year and bloody Spurs and Macheda.

[The North Bank]

Arsenal 04 might have been the best at not losing games (apart from the time that season they lost to Chelsea in their most important game, got tonked by Inter, lost to Dynamo Kiev, lost to Man Utd and lost TWICE to Middlesborough), but they weren't particularly outstanding at winning. They failed to win a third of their league games.

And as if they would have been unbeaten if they had to face teams as good as Jurgen's Reds like City did last year

Thing is with them is that the league was truly appalling back then. Many of the best English players were plying their trade abroad at the time and there were barely any foreign players in the league, let alone good ones (the 3 at Man Utd were about the only good ones around that year). That Man U team were the best of a bad bunch in the PL. They showed their true level in Europe - getting beaten by Galatasary and humiliated by Barca in that period.

On Arsenal, the two defeats to boro were without a single first team player, league cup was for the reserves and kids , we topped the group with Dynamo and inter by destroying inter 5-1 at the san siro, knocking inter out in the process. The united defeat was with henry rested, and the chelsea game was an illustration of how tough it is to go 49 unbeaten because we beat them home and away in the league, and knocked them out of the cup, completely battered them that day in CL but didnt finish them off and they got their goal, city got knocked out of CL by you 7-1 on aggregate I think. Even then, the question was which was the best premier league team, we were unbeatable in the premier league, other competitions are not included.
On Man utd in 93-94, that was an excellent team they had, they did badly in europe because of the 3 foreigner rule, I remember when they had to drop Schmeichel to play Roy Keane in barca in 94, they replaced him with a keeper called Walsh, he had a nightmare as barca smashed them. Sure they would not have beaten the Milan of that era, but Milan of that era would have dominated any time.

[El Lobo]

I get it that you think Arsenal were the best. The majority in the vote on here agree with you.


Arsenal dropped 14 points in the 1st 20 games. City dropped 14 points all season.
You would have had to win your last 18 games on the bounce to get 100 points. So, no where near 100 points whether you took your foot off the pedal  or not.

People will forget you drew 4 of your last 5 games because you didn't. You won 3 out of the last 6.

Keown didn't really have a bearing on anything. He came on as a sub in the last 4 games and the earliest he was introduced was in the 87th minute.

Net spend might not have been much in the summer but you did have a record signing in the January. £15million or was it £20 million?

First the coach and now this 

[Bullet500]

1) Leicester City, 2015-16

2) Arsenal, 2003-04

[TepidT2O]

Arsenal 04 might have been the best at not losing games (apart from the time that season they lost to Chelsea in their most important game, got tonked by Inter, lost to Dynamo Kiev, lost to Man Utd and lost TWICE to Middlesborough), but they weren't particularly outstanding at winning. They failed to win a third of their league games.

And as if they would have been unbeaten if they had to face teams as good as Jurgen's Reds like City did last year

Thing is with them is that the league was truly appalling back then. Many of the best English players were plying their trade abroad at the time and there were barely any foreign players in the league, let alone good ones (the 3 at Man Utd were about the only good ones around that year). That Man U team were the best of a bad bunch in the PL. They showed their true level in Europe - getting beaten by Galatasary and humiliated by Barca in that period.

I watched the Galatasary match in a bar... I laughed so much I nearly got beaten up by some united fans.. what a night.

[rob1966]

They were great to watch and finished the season like a train but won the league with 78 points. We came 3rd with just 65!

Seems like less extremes back then, I’m sure the crap sides were still crap but wasn’t such a gulf between the top four or five and the rest like there seems to be now.

I went for the 97/98 team. I'm trying to think back to whether the league was more even in those days or not. Looking at the table, only Palace failed to get enough points to have stayed up last season, they would have finished 2nd bottom on GD, all the relegated teams in 98 scored more than those who went in 2018, the shite stayed up on GD when their pts total of 40 would have got 15th last season.

While the Mancs 99 team has to be admired for fighting to the end of matches, Bayern, Arsenal and us were all guilty of letting them off the hook.

[Achilles Heel]

Last seasons man city proved that going the whole season unbeaten is the far bigger achievement and a much harder task than getting 100 points. Also we had the better team, in terms of players, De Bruyne and Sane are good , but a very poor mans bergkamp and henry. We also had to compete with far better teams, including United under fergie, City last season only got challenged by Liverpool, who slapped them silly 3 out of 4 times they met. I wouldnt put last seasons city in the top 5 best premier league teams ever, because I watched the pemier league since the start and there have been some fearsome teams in it, city just seemed to sweep aside a high number of awful opposition.

Kudos to Pep then achieving the most dominant league performance in English top-flight history and without the best players? 

[The North Bank]

Kudos to Pep then achieving the most dominant league performance in English top-flight history and without the best players? 

Got beat twice.

[So… Howard Philips]

That United 99 team was good by English standards but the likes of Berg and Blomqvist were hardly stellar cover. Didn’t get close to winning the European Cup before or after, was definitely a slightly lucky win that has given them a reputation that isn’t completely deserved.

I realise I sound full Everton there so I will grudgingly admit that the 07-09 vintage was top class.

Yes a bit of Everton creeping in I think.

Bayern should have buried them, as AC Milan should have buried us. Neither didn't and we both won.

And was Berg better than Djimi?

[Achilles Heel]

Got beat twice.

True.
But better at winning.

[The North Bank]

True.
But better at winning.

Not invincible im afraid.

[El Lobo]

Not invincible im afraid.

They weren't, but then he's right as well that your net spend that season was £16 million. Which, allowing for inflation, works out as £250 million. Last season Man Citys net spend was only around £200 million, so they were working on a relative shoestring compared to your 'invincibles'.

[jillcwhomever]

True.
But better at winning.

They won't be remembered for being better at winning though, who remembers things like that? The Invincible tag will live with that Arsenal team forever. 

[Achilles Heel]

They weren't, but then he's right as well that your net spend that season was £16 million. Which, allowing for inflation, works out as £250 million. Last season Man Citys net spend was only around £200 million, so they were working on a relative shoestring compared to your 'invincibles'.

Eh, as I've already said, spend was only introduced to correct one of North Bank's false facts.

And don't mention the coach

[rob1966]

They won't be remembered for being better at winning though, who remembers things like that? The Invincible tag will live with that Arsenal team forever. 

Preston still call themselves the Invincibles.

[El Lobo]

Preston still call themselves the Invincibles.

As they should.

That was before football was invented though (and I'll still have that argument with anyone who blurts out 'you've never won the Premier League' as if its suddenly a completely different competition to the one we've won 18 times as opposed to a name change).

[Crosby Nick]

I went for the 97/98 team. I'm trying to think back to whether the league was more even in those days or not. Looking at the table, only Palace failed to get enough points to have stayed up last season, they would have finished 2nd bottom on GD, all the relegated teams in 98 scored more than those who went in 2018, the shite stayed up on GD when their pts total of 40 would have got 15th last season.

While the Mancs 99 team has to be admired for fighting to the end of matches, Bayern, Arsenal and us were all guilty of letting them off the hook.

And Juventus.

[Crosby Nick]

Yes a bit of Everton creeping in I think.

Bayern should have buried them, as AC Milan should have buried us. Neither didn't and we both won.

And was Berg better than Djimi?

I never claimed our 2005 was their equal, that would be stretching it!