Will we win the league this season?

[Stoned Rose]

Well obviously. But the league doesnt end here. Consistency is judged after the 38th game. So City could very well go on to be the most consistent from this point onwards and win it.

Never said we couldn’t.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Or maybe it’s a reaction to letting Leeds back into the game, Fulham back in, Brighton back in
Somehow getting beat by spurs at home again
Getting beat by Newcastle
Conceding an injury time equaliser at arsenal

Maybe for all our improvement we are still a bit shit at managing games and too easy to score against
Maybe in my opinion that means we’re likely to drop loads more points

We have absolutely improved from last season but that doesn’t really say much because by our usual standards we were terrible.

Our game management when ahead this season is my main concern.

The cornerstone of a title winning team is not dropping points from winning positions and winning games where you have to grind it out when not playing well and/or find ourselves behind in games. I’m not seeing much evidence we’ve got either aspect sorted so far.

 

[Paladin]

Nowhere do I suggest anybody needs to have “full season consistency”.

I’ve said the most consistent team wins the league. Are you suggesting that’s not true?

Yes. Derby County were the most consistent team last time they were in the PL. They were relegated.

 

[Marvin.]

Agree.

From my perspective, Pep has had a change in philosophy. No longer does he always value ball control as a primary means of defense. This is reflected, for example, in the signing of Donnarumma - fantastic shot stopper but average plus on the ball for a keeper.

Our press, too, has changed. We're no longer super aggressive, but instead, most games, seem to still press high albeit with a bit less intensity. Perhaps some of this is by design, for example against Arsenal, where we were content to sit back defensively.

And yet, against most sides, we're still way up the pitch with a high line on offense, pretty much like we've always been under Pep. Except now, our press isn't nearly as effective. And our ability to retain the ball under pressure isn't nearly as good. And these defects don't apply to just one or two players - multiple players on our side aren't extremely press resistant nor are they able/willing to press aggressively when we lose the ball.

As a result, we're often high up the pitch with a very high line and when the ball turns over we can't get it back quickly and the opposition plays through us. Too, when on offense and need to build from the back, often we have problems because we're not press resistant and are prone to giving the ball away. We now are more willing to try long balls to play over the press - sometimes this works out extremely well, but often it leads to a 50-50 or worse long ball leading to loss of possession.

So the short of it is, IMO, we're nowhere near good enough to make a solid run at the title, barring some sort of additional changes to our system when facing sides where we play high up the field (which is most sides).

How do you claim "we're nowhere near good enough to make a solid run at the title", when we are 2nd?

 

[Gray]

Any team that ships goals like we do is certainly not winning anything.

 

[Marvin.]

Nowhere do I suggest anybody needs to have “full season consistency”.

I’ve said the most consistent team wins the league. Are you suggesting that’s not true?

Arsenal could stay on trend, and hit their projected points total, and we could overtake them. They would be more consistent but we would have won the title. Wolves could be consistent and go down.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Yes. Derby County were the most consistent team last time they were in the PL. They were relegated.

What you actually mean is they were the least consistent team. Which is why they finished with 11 points.

It’s very clearly the case that the most consistent team wins the league. Because they end up with the most points.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Arsenal could stay on trend, and hit their projected points total, and we could overtake them. They would be more consistent but we would have won the title. Wolves could be consistent and go down.

FFS.

If we end up with more points than Arsenal then we’ve clearly been more consistent than them results wise.

I can’t get my head round those of you who appear to the arguing otherwise.

 

[johnnytapia]

Agreed mate but “growing the most” still doesn’t win you the league. Being the most consistent over 38 games does.

Not true. Wolves have been the most consistent team this season and I’m fairly sure they’re not bothering the engravers in May.

 

[johnnytapia]

FFS.

If we end up with more points than Arsenal then we’ve clearly been more consistent than them results wise.

I can’t get my head round those of you who appear to the arguing otherwise.

You’re (incorrectly ) conflating consistency with success. Teams can, and are incredibly consistent but very unsuccessful: Wolves being a prime example. As were Derby previously.

 

[johnnytapia]

FFS.

If we end up with more points than Arsenal then we’ve clearly been more consistent than them results wise.

I can’t get my head round those of you who appear to the arguing otherwise.

Let’s take the following example:
Arsenal draw all 38 games 1-1. 38 points.
City win 10 games, draw 9 and lose 19. 39 points.
Arsenal, in this example couldn’t have been more consistent. They consistently drew every game. 1-1.
City were far less consistent, win a game, win another, draw a game, lose a game, draw a game, win 3 games etc. they were incredibly inconsistent.
Yet City have more points but are far more inconsistent.

 

[johnnytapia]

What you actually mean is they were the least consistent team. Which is why they finished with 11 points.

It’s very clearly the case that the most consistent team wins the league. Because they end up with the most points.

The team with the most points (or better GD if points level) wins the league. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Paladin]

What you actually mean is they were the least consistent team. Which is why they finished with 11 points.

It’s very clearly the case that the most consistent team wins the league. Because they end up with the most points.

No, they were the most consistent. Just consistently bad.

Consistency means performing at a similar level most of the time. It could mean beating all the teams below you, whilst losing to every team above you. That would probably gain around 76 points in the season. Very consistent, but not winning anything.

If Arsenal continue on the same trajectory, and we go unbeaten for the rest of the season, we will have had an inconsistent season overall, but likely finish ahead of a more consistent team.

 

[SCEtoAUX]

Yes. By a point from Chelsea and four points from Arsenal.

 

[Stoned Rose]

No, they were the most consistent. Just consistently bad.

Consistency means performing at a similar level most of the time. It could mean beating all the teams below you, whilst losing to every team above you. That would probably gain around 76 points in the season. Very consistent, but not winning anything.

If Arsenal continue on the same trajectory, and we go unbeaten for the rest of the season, we will have had an inconsistent season overall, but likely finish ahead of a more consistent team.

The whole idea is to win games. To gain the most points. That’s what a league is.

Being shit every week (Derby) is not conducive to the aim. Therefore, in this context, your version of consistent is utterly pointless.

If Arsenal continue as they are and we go unbeaten for the rest of the season, but we draw every game, we wouldn’t finish above them, we’d finish in mid table.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Let’s take the following example:
Arsenal draw all 38 games 1-1. 38 points.
City win 10 games, draw 9 and lose 19. 39 points.
Arsenal, in this example couldn’t have been more consistent. They consistently drew every game. 1-1.
City were far less consistent, win a game, win another, draw a game, lose a game, draw a game, win 3 games etc. they were incredibly inconsistent.
Yet City have more points but are far more inconsistent.

FFS.

City would have more points.

The whole point is to get the most points you can. That’s how you finish above everyone else.

City would’ve have been more consistent at doing what the whole point is - getting more points.

 

[hilts]

Maybe arsenal actually aren’t this all conquering invincible team that some of the posters on this forum talk them up to be.

They dont have to be we are averaging 2 points a game. It's a league full of inconsistent teams, arsenal are the best and most consistent team at this time. The rodri and Kova injuries have severely hampered us.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

How do you claim "we're nowhere near good enough to make a solid run at the title", when we are 2nd?

For the very same reason I thought that Liverpool were nowhere good enough to win the league after match week 5.

 

[Stoned Rose]

They dont have to be we are averaging 2 points a game. It's a league full of inconsistent teams, arsenal are the best and most consistent team at this time. The rodri and Kova injuries have severely hampered us.

Fuck me. Don’t let @johnnytapia or @Paladin see this :)

 

[Millennium]

How do you claim "we're nowhere near good enough to make a solid run at the title", when we are 2nd?

We have a clear problem with the lack of technical quality in our defense. Our defense is easily penetrated and manipulated. Fulham scored four goals and Leeds two; we barely won against two average teams because of our weak defense and the midfield's inability to provide defensive support. This is usually a major weakness that prevents a team from competing for the title.