Comparative squad strength

I wouldn't nessecarily agree with that Jose, were Chelsea only the 6th best squad when they finished. 6th?

Yes Jose it's far from simple as that. The whole point of the article was about the squad underachieving. Squads do underachieve and your comment suggests otherwise. Right now, I don't think our squad is better than Arsenals tbh but it's not really the point the op is making anyway.

The OP's point of Man Utds squad under achieving is a valid point, but when he suggest that Uniteds squad is superior to Arsenal when its blatantly obvious its not, then the article loses its authenticity.

Its strange that a lof Unted fans just refuse to accept that Arsenals defence is superior, Last season with SAF in charge Arsenal conceded less goals and thus far this season, have the best defence.

Its like an Arsenal fan claiming we have a better strike force than City, its just wrong

Hunting

Agree. Arsenal do have a better squad. But the op akso has a valid point, as you stated.

i think you vastly overrate your squad.

I think some of our fans need to see that their is a difference between having a big squad, and having a good/great squad. If we bought another 8 midfielders of the same quality we have now, it wouldn't improve the squad.

there*

take the likes of nani and anderson. expensive squad fillers, but nowhere near good enough

Another valid example might be Tottenham just before Arry took over...

Yeah, but honestly, you can't be buying what this guy is selling, that your squads the third best in the league?

I'm not saying that position teams are in is comparative to the strength of their squad. I'm just saying the stronger your squad is, the more likely you are to finish higher. Sounds like I'm double speaking there but I'm sure there's a point here somewhere.

You certainly have a good first XI (good, not great) but you have an awful lot of deadwood that needs shifting before the OP can claim you have the third best squad in the league.