How would we have done, if...

[mancityscot]

out of interest, we had the same schedule that chelsea had, barring the world club cup? so take away 3 games ( i think) of the 69 game total they had, makes that 66 games, 14 more than we had (51). they won the europa league, got to the semi's of the fa cup, played the group stage of the champions league like us and got to the semi final of the carling cup. they still managed to finish 3rd, 3 points behind us and that was with the changing of manager mid season.do you think our squad would have coped with the challenges they faced and still managed to come 2nd or 3rd? i understand if folk think this is a silly question but it puts into perspective, imo, the quality and depth of our squad as well as the focus and determination to finish a relatively poor season on a high. i personally think we would have struggled to finish in the top 3 and may have had to make do with 4th/5th, because even though we had no midweek games from january, our performances were still relatively poor. dont think this is just a thread to compare us to chelsea but i just wondered how people think we would have fared with having to play almost half a season worth more of games. thoughts?

 

[supercity88]

I have another question;

How well would we have done if we had won the league, cup and champions league? What would have happened if Nasri had have blocked Van Persie's free kick. Season's done. Let it go. It doesn't matter.

 

[Marvin]

out of interest, we had the same schedule that chelsea had, barring the world club cup? so take away 3 games ( i think) of the 69 game total they had, makes that 66 games, 14 more than we had (51). they won the europa league, got to the semi's of the fa cup, played the group stage of the champions league like us and got to the semi final of the carling cup. they still managed to finish 3rd, 3 points behind us and that was with the changing of manager mid season.do you think our squad would have coped with the challenges they faced and still managed to come 2nd or 3rd? i understand if folk think this is a silly question but it puts into perspective, imo, the quality and depth of our squad as well as the focus and determination to finish a relatively poor season on a high. i personally think we would have struggled to finish in the top 3 and may have had to make do with 4th/5th, because even though we had no midweek games from january, our performances were still relatively poor. dont think this is just a thread to compare us to chelsea but i just wondered how people think we would have fared with having to play almost half a season worth more of games. thoughts?

Players like John Terry get a lot of criticism but they have a togetherness and resilience which we lack. I have a lot of respect for what CFC did this season and last.