Really?
Here are the champions around the PL launch:
1990 Liverpool
1991 Arsenal
1992 Leeds
1993 United
1994 United
1995 Blackburn
Yes, thank goodness City came and broke up the duopoly.
I think we’ve made it more competitive in that more teams can win and also raised the bar making the PL stronger, other teams had to raise their games in response.
Both have also invested money in transfers within the league, West Ham may well have had problems had it not been for Chelsea t the time of the takeover. The other side to that of course if the inflation of fees and salaries, whether that trickles down through the league or whether there is the top and then the rest I’m not sure, I would say somewhere between the two.
I do worry about the teams in the lower divisions and I think the F.A need to be mindful that the riches can trickle and benefit all of football.
Overall I think it has been positive in terms of keeping the PL competitive in Europe, whether it is good for the game as a whole in terms of stability I’m not sure.
He said before Abramovich.
Lol. Funny you stop at 1995.
Abramovich bought Chelsea in 2003. Filling in the gap between 1995 and 2003:
1996 United
1997 United
1998 Arsenal
1999 United
2000 United
2001 United
2002 Arsenal
2003 United
2004. Arsenal
Before Abramovic, it was United/Arsenal. Abramovic turned that in to United/Chelsea.
Sheikh turned it in to United/City, while Fergie was there.
Until this year, there has virtually always been a duopoly where various clubs challenged United in periods.
And here's the list that is actually relevant:
95-6 MU
96-7 MU
97-8 Ars
98-9 MU
99-0 MU
00-01 MU
01-02 Ars
02-03 MU
03-04 Ars
If this is a response to a previous article, I agree, and it was mentioned in that article. Without City/Chelsea, United could well have run away with 9 or 10 titles in a row.
However, looking back even a decade (hence my previous post), that would probably never happen. Never has any team won it more than three times in a row, no matter how successful.
Would Arsenal and United be fighting it out this season, for example?
It was in response to your post and I accept your argument. I just don't think it is that simple.
comment by Guv (U12850)
posted 5 minutes ago
Lol. Funny you stop at 1995.
---------------------------------------
comment by PenaltySpot (U19494)
posted 4 minutes ago
If this is a response to a previous article, I agree, and it was mentioned in that article. Without City/Chelsea, United could well have run away with 9 or 10 titles in a row.
However, looking back even a decade (hence my previous post), that would probably never happen. Never has any team won it more than three times in a row, no matter how successful.
Would Arsenal and United be fighting it out this season, for example?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who knows, the fact is they aren't and yet they were so therefore a change has occurred and that change is good, 2 others so far have won it, possibly a third this year and more importantly the top 4 has also changed with clubs like Everton and Spurs also getting a sniff at CL.
I think the point is, it's a two line article that just rips the pi$s out of the monstrosities fraught with incorrect information that you posted mate.
comment by Jay. (U16498)
posted 20 minutes ago
Before Abramovic, it was United/Arsenal. Abramovic turned that in to United/Chelsea.
Sheikh turned it in to United/City, while Fergie was there.
Until this year, there has virtually always been a duopoly where various clubs challenged United in periods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again wrong seeing as chelsea won the league and champions league after the sheik took over? whats up with people
Yes I imagine Spurs and Everton may be sniffing from a distance for a while, savouring that aroma of "potential" CL football!!
"comment by It's linesMan not linesWoman, and that's a scientific FACT! (U19068)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think the point is, it's a two line article that just rips the pi$s out of the monstrosities fraught with incorrect information that you posted mate."
There are definitely a thousand angles to see things from, but I don't see which bit of it was actually incorrect.
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 14 minutes ago
Who knows, the fact is they aren't and yet they were so therefore a change has occurred and that change is good, 2 others so far have won it, possibly a third this year and more importantly the top 4 has also changed with clubs like Everton and Spurs also getting a sniff at CL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree they've added to the mix, and I even think La Liga would only benefit from a couple of sugar daddies coming in to some of the second tier clubs (though that's very unlikely to happen before the revenues are shared differently), but I fail to see -if that is indeed what you were hinting at- how the sugar ddadies have helped Everton and Spurs gain CL football.
comment by itsonlyagame - red cards are unfair (U6426)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 14 minutes ago
Who knows, the fact is they aren't and yet they were so therefore a change has occurred and that change is good, 2 others so far have won it, possibly a third this year and more importantly the top 4 has also changed with clubs like Everton and Spurs also getting a sniff at CL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree they've added to the mix, and I even think La Liga would only benefit from a couple of sugar daddies coming in to some of the second tier clubs (though that's very unlikely to happen before the revenues are shared differently), but I fail to see -if that is indeed what you were hinting at- how the sugar ddadies have helped Everton and Spurs gain CL football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't I said they were getting a sniff, they are doing it off their own backs, the point is before they weren't. Not for a long time.
Of course Spurs and Everton have both benefitted in the past from being cash rich enough to outspend others, they are exactly small clubs and other different circumstances they may have been picked to benefit from a wealthy investor recently but they haven't..
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Have Chelsea and City saved football?
Page 1 of 1
posted on 25/4/14
Really?
Here are the champions around the PL launch:
1990 Liverpool
1991 Arsenal
1992 Leeds
1993 United
1994 United
1995 Blackburn
Yes, thank goodness City came and broke up the duopoly.
posted on 25/4/14
I think we’ve made it more competitive in that more teams can win and also raised the bar making the PL stronger, other teams had to raise their games in response.
Both have also invested money in transfers within the league, West Ham may well have had problems had it not been for Chelsea t the time of the takeover. The other side to that of course if the inflation of fees and salaries, whether that trickles down through the league or whether there is the top and then the rest I’m not sure, I would say somewhere between the two.
I do worry about the teams in the lower divisions and I think the F.A need to be mindful that the riches can trickle and benefit all of football.
Overall I think it has been positive in terms of keeping the PL competitive in Europe, whether it is good for the game as a whole in terms of stability I’m not sure.
posted on 25/4/14
He said before Abramovich.
posted on 25/4/14
Lol. Funny you stop at 1995.
Abramovich bought Chelsea in 2003. Filling in the gap between 1995 and 2003:
1996 United
1997 United
1998 Arsenal
1999 United
2000 United
2001 United
2002 Arsenal
2003 United
2004. Arsenal
posted on 25/4/14
Before Abramovic, it was United/Arsenal. Abramovic turned that in to United/Chelsea.
Sheikh turned it in to United/City, while Fergie was there.
Until this year, there has virtually always been a duopoly where various clubs challenged United in periods.
posted on 25/4/14
And here's the list that is actually relevant:
95-6 MU
96-7 MU
97-8 Ars
98-9 MU
99-0 MU
00-01 MU
01-02 Ars
02-03 MU
03-04 Ars
posted on 25/4/14
If this is a response to a previous article, I agree, and it was mentioned in that article. Without City/Chelsea, United could well have run away with 9 or 10 titles in a row.
However, looking back even a decade (hence my previous post), that would probably never happen. Never has any team won it more than three times in a row, no matter how successful.
Would Arsenal and United be fighting it out this season, for example?
posted on 25/4/14
It was in response to your post and I accept your argument. I just don't think it is that simple.
posted on 25/4/14
comment by Guv (U12850)
posted 5 minutes ago
Lol. Funny you stop at 1995.
---------------------------------------
posted on 25/4/14
comment by PenaltySpot (U19494)
posted 4 minutes ago
If this is a response to a previous article, I agree, and it was mentioned in that article. Without City/Chelsea, United could well have run away with 9 or 10 titles in a row.
However, looking back even a decade (hence my previous post), that would probably never happen. Never has any team won it more than three times in a row, no matter how successful.
Would Arsenal and United be fighting it out this season, for example?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who knows, the fact is they aren't and yet they were so therefore a change has occurred and that change is good, 2 others so far have won it, possibly a third this year and more importantly the top 4 has also changed with clubs like Everton and Spurs also getting a sniff at CL.
posted on 25/4/14
I think the point is, it's a two line article that just rips the pi$s out of the monstrosities fraught with incorrect information that you posted mate.
posted on 25/4/14
comment by Jay. (U16498)
posted 20 minutes ago
Before Abramovic, it was United/Arsenal. Abramovic turned that in to United/Chelsea.
Sheikh turned it in to United/City, while Fergie was there.
Until this year, there has virtually always been a duopoly where various clubs challenged United in periods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again wrong seeing as chelsea won the league and champions league after the sheik took over? whats up with people
posted on 25/4/14
Yes I imagine Spurs and Everton may be sniffing from a distance for a while, savouring that aroma of "potential" CL football!!
posted on 25/4/14
"comment by It's linesMan not linesWoman, and that's a scientific FACT! (U19068)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think the point is, it's a two line article that just rips the pi$s out of the monstrosities fraught with incorrect information that you posted mate."
There are definitely a thousand angles to see things from, but I don't see which bit of it was actually incorrect.
posted on 25/4/14
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 14 minutes ago
Who knows, the fact is they aren't and yet they were so therefore a change has occurred and that change is good, 2 others so far have won it, possibly a third this year and more importantly the top 4 has also changed with clubs like Everton and Spurs also getting a sniff at CL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree they've added to the mix, and I even think La Liga would only benefit from a couple of sugar daddies coming in to some of the second tier clubs (though that's very unlikely to happen before the revenues are shared differently), but I fail to see -if that is indeed what you were hinting at- how the sugar ddadies have helped Everton and Spurs gain CL football.
posted on 25/4/14
comment by itsonlyagame - red cards are unfair (U6426)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 14 minutes ago
Who knows, the fact is they aren't and yet they were so therefore a change has occurred and that change is good, 2 others so far have won it, possibly a third this year and more importantly the top 4 has also changed with clubs like Everton and Spurs also getting a sniff at CL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree they've added to the mix, and I even think La Liga would only benefit from a couple of sugar daddies coming in to some of the second tier clubs (though that's very unlikely to happen before the revenues are shared differently), but I fail to see -if that is indeed what you were hinting at- how the sugar ddadies have helped Everton and Spurs gain CL football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't I said they were getting a sniff, they are doing it off their own backs, the point is before they weren't. Not for a long time.
Of course Spurs and Everton have both benefitted in the past from being cash rich enough to outspend others, they are exactly small clubs and other different circumstances they may have been picked to benefit from a wealthy investor recently but they haven't..
Page 1 of 1