Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Royals Rendezvous Statement
Royals Rendezvous has moved to a new location, please go to royalsrendezvous.co.uk to continue the discussion.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
PSG - Just how good are they?
Topic Started: 14 Jan 2016, 12:54 AM (908 Views)
Clyde1998
Member Avatar

Turning into a one team league in France...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wolfy
Member Avatar

Clyde1998
24 Jan 2016, 10:44 PM
Turning into a one team league in France...
And no sides look capable of competing with them, even in the near future. They can cut costs at the club, sign a high profile player every window or two and stay well within FFP restrictions and I still honestly believe no one in France is ready to compete with them.

Even with the current squad in their prime, a period of moving these players on and bringing in fresh faces to replace them in a couple of seasons will probably still bring consistent league titles!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ste_Macca
Member Avatar
TalkTheReds.com
P.S.G remind me of Man City, all that money, can pretty much buy any player they want. But when it comes to Europe something just lacks? I actually like the fact clubs like this who have heaps of cash (what i call oil clubs) can win it all domestically but when it comes to European success they fail miserably. Ok for most people getting to the latter stages of the Champions League is not failing but when you are bankrolled like some of these clubs are then you expect nothing but the best domestically and on the European stage.

The exception for this is Chelsea. They've been bankrolled with oil money but have proven themselves on all stages.
LFC FORUM FOR REDS WORLD WIDE
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wolfy
Member Avatar

ut the spine of their team wasn't bought with big money over the years. Can Man City or PSG say the same?

They had the likes of Terry and Lampard and other players who had been there for years and had grown as part of the spine of the team without being considered big money buys. In fact, most big money buys for Chelsea flopped.

To think the season they won the Champions League they had Drogba, Torres, Kalou, Sturridge and Lukaku.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Number 13
Member Avatar

With regard to Chelsea and Manchester City, the numbers are below:

Chelsea

Premier League: 4
League Cup: 3
FA Cup: 4
Europa League: 1
Champions League: 1




Manchester City

Premier League: 2
League Cup: 1
FA Cup: 1
Europa League: 0
Champions League: 0




Both owners of each clubs have specified that their main aim is success in Europe while in the league, and both have failed to achieve this (Chelsea's major European win came almost accidentally under Di Matteo). Chelsea found a more stable manager in Jose Mourinho, and have been able to recruit genuine talent into their side. City initially bankrolled large signings, then sacked Mark Hughes and went through a few managers who weren't able to handle such a prolific team. They have now got to a point that, without Aguero and/or Kompany in the team, they have trouble keeping up with the big boys, which this season includes Leicester City.

To bring this back to the main point, Ste_Macca is right in saying that PSG and City are in a similar position, recruiting top players for their sides initially but finding success limited in Europe. I feel that domestic success has maybe gone to their heads and they cannot up their performance level for the European stage. I believe they can see off Chelsea, particularly as the London side have more pressing issues at home to deal with this season. But they are some way off being able to challenge teams like Barcelona, Real Madrid or Bayern Munich for the overall trophy.
Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose!

Twitter username: @MrBenBrenton
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wolfy
Member Avatar

It's in situations like this, however, that Chelsea seem to be at their strongest in Europe.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Number 13
Member Avatar

But Chelsea have never struggled in the league like this under the Abramovich reign. I imagine Hiddink's brief when arriving said something about shooting up the table and trying to secure European football for next season. Of course, winning either the FA Cup or the Champions League would do this anyway!
Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose!

Twitter username: @MrBenBrenton
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wolfy
Member Avatar

I think their major aim will be the Champions League this season, I'm sure 15th place would be forgotten if they win the Champions League :D

If P.S.G. don't get to the latter knockout stages, could their spending be classed as a failure considering that was the ultimate aim? To compete alongside the top teams in Europe, despite their domestic success.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darlington
Member Avatar

Number 13
15 Jan 2016, 06:25 PM
If I had a penny for every time a player said....you get the picture!

Everton's approach to signing Sam Byram from Leeds United suggests they may be expecting Stones to leave sooner rather than later. Money can do strange things to a footballer, and Real Madrid are not short of it.
Not sure how you figure a right back is affecting Stones going or not but he would not have been cover for Stones.

Everton went for Byram as they needed cover for Coleman (shown in Hibbert being to old and last games Oviedo who is a left back/left mid being played there out of position). They saw him as both cover and a long term replacement but he realised behind Coleman he wouldn't get as much first team footy as at West Ham so signed for them.
Everton going for Byram is nothing to do with expecting Stones to go or not and if Stones were to leave Everton would be buying a central defender whether they had signed Byram or not.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darlington
Member Avatar

Number 13
25 Jan 2016, 04:51 PM
With regard to Chelsea and Manchester City, the numbers are below:

Chelsea

Premier League: 4
League Cup: 3
FA Cup: 4
Europa League: 1
Champions League: 1




Manchester City

Premier League: 2
League Cup: 1
FA Cup: 1
Europa League: 0
Champions League: 0




Both owners of each clubs have specified that their main aim is success in Europe while in the league, and both have failed to achieve this (Chelsea's major European win came almost accidentally under Di Matteo). Chelsea found a more stable manager in Jose Mourinho, and have been able to recruit genuine talent into their side. City initially bankrolled large signings, then sacked Mark Hughes and went through a few managers who weren't able to handle such a prolific team. They have now got to a point that, without Aguero and/or Kompany in the team, they have trouble keeping up with the big boys, which this season includes Leicester City.

To bring this back to the main point, Ste_Macca is right in saying that PSG and City are in a similar position, recruiting top players for their sides initially but finding success limited in Europe. I feel that domestic success has maybe gone to their heads and they cannot up their performance level for the European stage. I believe they can see off Chelsea, particularly as the London side have more pressing issues at home to deal with this season. But they are some way off being able to challenge teams like Barcelona, Real Madrid or Bayern Munich for the overall trophy.
Where are you getting your figures???? I am old maybe but even in my life time City have won the FA Cup twice and since it's inception 5 times not once and they have won the League Cup three times in my life time.
Furthermore Chelsea have only won the cup whilst I have been alive but they have done it 7 times not 4 starting in 1970 when they beat Leeds. They have also won the League Cup 5 times, all in my life time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Football Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Royals Rendezvous - 2013-16