funny thing is they have not really underperformed.they are a defensive team who set out to get the odd goal and defend it and they do it well.
sure for spending 400 m odd you would want a attacking free flowing team but for city fans owners and the manager the first priority was playing in europe.job done.
I am going to respectfully disagree here. City did MASSIVELY UNDERPERFORM this season.
I am not talking about the Italian or Mourinho-style-of-play that some are criticizing.
Rather I am talking very specifically about the very direct correlation between Player Wages Spent and Final League Position. The correlation over the past 20 years in England is something like 0.93 or 0.94.
So essentially if you are #1 in Player Wages you should finish #1 in the League Table. If you are #7 in Player Wages you should finish #7 in the League Table.
City are most certainly #1 in Player Wages. We won't find out for a few months, but City could be #1 in Player Wages by £40-50M difference to the next closest team!
Anything not #1 or #2 in the League this season represents massive underperformance by City's Club/Team/Manager. I'll let the people who follow City more closely than me comment on where the underperformance came from, but make no mistake about it.... this team should have finished much higher than they did.
Kudos to them for having CL football next season, but anyone who looks @ and considers performance will tell you that this team should have performed much much better this season than they did.
(Aside: And for what it's worth LFC @ 5th currently is more or less inline with expectations from a wage perspective even with lugging around expensive wet carpets like Joe-£20M-Cole)