The Title Race - 2023/24

[alexmcity]

Arsenal would beat Inter and this 'assessing how good they are', is 28 games not enough? Obviously Arsenal are a good team and a young side that's likely to be City's closest rival for the next few years.

In the CL Arsenal wouldn't want to get City or Madrid, anyone else they'll be favourites against.

The CL is not the PL, though. On paper Arsenal might be favourites against most teams, but they lack experience in such games. Inter are a tough team, as we saw in the final. And the tie with Porto is not a forgone conclusion. They lack the physicality of most English teams but are much better on the ball than, say, Brentford.

In Pep's early seasons, City lost vs Monaco, Spurs, Lyon...After gaining experience, we reached the semis 3 seasons in a row. If we make it 4 seasons in a row, that might be an English record.

 

[domalino]

Are you saying Arsenal getting 69 points ine season and 84 the next is not any sign of an improvement? Or liverpool going from 68 points to 92 the following season, or us from 78 to 100?

We improved by going from 4th one season to 1st the next, not by getting more points.

Were team A who won with 90 points worse than team B who won with 93 points? Maybe but not because they got fewer points. Are you better if you finish 1st on 80 or 2nd on 98?


How strong was the league that year? Were there many title contenders? Or just 2 or 1? Were the promoted teams good or a free 6 points for everyone? What about the middle? Any big investments, new managers, teams pushing up? Or is it full of stale teams who’ve been knocking around 10 years and haven’t gone down yet just because there’s 3 worse than them. Was the team competing for a treble? Had they wrapped up the league in February?

The total number of points in the league is not the same every year even! Sometimes it’s 1100 and sometimes it’s 1000, but in theory it could swing from 760 to 1140 - 380 points difference!!



A points total is a measurement of strength against the other 19 teams in that exact year, not a measurement of strength against any team ever to play a 38 game season.

 

[Coatigan]

We improved by going from 4th one season to 1st the next, not by getting more points.

Were team A who won with 90 points worse than team B who won with 93 points? Maybe but not because they got fewer points. Are you better if you finish 1st on 80 or 2nd on 98?


How strong was the league that year? Were there many title contenders? Or just 2 or 1? Were the promoted teams good or a free 6 points for everyone? What about the middle? Any big investments, new managers, teams pushing up? Or is it full of stale teams who’ve been knocking around 10 years and haven’t gone down yet just because there’s 3 worse than them. Was the team competing for a treble? Had they wrapped up the league in February?

The total number of points in the league is not the same every year even! Sometimes it’s 1100 and sometimes it’s 1000, but in theory it could swing from 760 to 1140 - 380 points difference!!



A points total is a measurement of strength against the other 19 teams in that exact year, not a measurement of strength against any team ever to play a 38 game season.

I get all that, and I mostly agree. But it is not Completely irrelevant either. And swings in points from one season to the next, while not a meaningful metric on their own, do still show, to an extent, a degree of improvement or decline.

 

[jimharri]

I get all that, and I mostly agree. But it is not Completely irrelevant either. And swings in points from one season to the next, while not a meaningful metric on their own, do still show, to an extent, a degree of improvement or decline.

The cultists' points improvement from this stage last season is mental....

 

[Coatigan]

We improved by going from 4th one season to 1st the next, not by getting more points.

Were team A who won with 90 points worse than team B who won with 93 points? Maybe but not because they got fewer points. Are you better if you finish 1st on 80 or 2nd on 98?


How strong was the league that year? Were there many title contenders? Or just 2 or 1? Were the promoted teams good or a free 6 points for everyone? What about the middle? Any big investments, new managers, teams pushing up? Or is it full of stale teams who’ve been knocking around 10 years and haven’t gone down yet just because there’s 3 worse than them. Was the team competing for a treble? Had they wrapped up the league in February?

The total number of points in the league is not the same every year even! Sometimes it’s 1100 and sometimes it’s 1000, but in theory it could swing from 760 to 1140 - 380 points difference!!



A points total is a measurement of strength against the other 19 teams in that exact year, not a measurement of strength against any team ever to play a 38 game season.

We improved, as did our position, Because we got more points. We could have lost out to a team that got 101 points, we still would have improved. The liverpool team that won the league didnt really improve from the season before, the team they were up against just performed much worse.

The points in one season vs another as a reflection in the table, I agree with you entirely there, is not really relevant. As a measure of a team itself though, it does have some merit.

 

[RayCTID]

I’m not denying that just feel we are missing a bit of something this year and missing Ederson for 4 weeks as well as Grealish at this stage of the season is very unfortunate

We aren't any different to last year. With the amount of injuries we had we doing well in keeping up with Liverpool's and Arsenal's full tilt at the title.

 

[Tricky_Trev]

The cultists' points improvement from this stage last season is mental....

View attachment 109969

Chelsea once went from 10th one season to Champions the next. People generally think the status quo is far more fixed than it actually is.

 

[jimharri]

Chelsea once went from 10th one season to Champions the next. People generally think the status quo is far more fixed than it actually is.

Hey; whatever you want.



"TAXI!!!!!"

 

[BerkshireBlue]

We improved, as did our position, Because we got more points. We could have lost out to a team that got 101 points, we still would have improved. The liverpool team that won the league didnt really improve from the season before, the team they were up against just performed much worse.

The points in one season vs another as a reflection in the table, I agree with you entirely there, is not really relevant. As a measure of a team itself though, it does have some merit.

18 wins on the bounce kinda of ruins your statement there. They practically won it in the first half of the season similar to city's 100 point season. It was a huge improvement of form

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I'm an old City fan, so cannot shake off the "City-itus" doubt, that we will feck things up.

If we became shit again for a few seasons would you keep expecting us to go on winning runs extending to over quarter of a season?