The latest friendly game between Leicester vs. PSG marked their "first" tough challenge outside of England against a top flight team. A heavy defeat was what they experienced (4 - 0).

I dont know how many of us here watched or at least followed the game, but I can say PSG was rampant, superior in all departments. We all saw this coming, didn't we? This loss would do more good to Leicester I think, they should know who they are keep their feet down and set their priority straight!

I would love to see them doing well in CL, but I think CL should be their least goal. Top 10 in EPL would be realistic, and for that they might surprise us again.

My prediction would be:

• Top 10 in EPL
• Out of CL soon and go down to Europa league
• Win a couple of games in Europa league

@lodatz

Good argument , didn't look at it this way because probably still can't get over the fact we failed our season measurably .

I agree , wind blew in the right direction for them and everything played well into their hands . Therefore , we shouldn't discredit or downsize the victory of Leicester but look into how top clubs completely disrespected Leicester thinking that they can bulldoze them .

I also agree Competition in EPL has been so stiff that even top teams can be outplayed by mid table or even bottom team .. It is going to get tougher and just like you , I don't Leicester will handle it this year . It will be bigger achievement for them to win league second time in row or even reach top 4 ... Without disrespect to them but top clubs have learned their lessons and armed to the teeth and it will be epic fight for top 4 and title .

I just don't know if this is good news that team like Leicester will go back to where they came from and we won't see similar thing happen again . I hope I am wrong . Even though I support Chelsea , i still think fair chances should be given to every club in the league . That means not being suffocated financially by bigger clubs.

Lodatz, we have the same point, we're just looking at it a slightly different way.

Even if one team has a baseline better team than their opponent, they can get outplayed. On an individual, and what amounted to league-wide scale, that is what happened with Leicester. Just because Aston Villa can outplay a team like Arsenal on a given day does not mean that they're a better team, just that they overperformed and Arsenal underperformed, and on that day Aston Villa was better. The on that day point for teams like City and Chelsea happened far too often.

Look, I get that City had a great team last year, and I'm glad we both agree on that. Knocking out PSG and getting within a goal of Real Madrid is quite an accomplishment. But very rarely throughout the year did we see that team in the league. It's the same way Chelsea can finish top of their group on the CL, yet be in 15th place. The baseline team is better than, say, a Leicester, but if they fail to play to their level, they can be beaten.

Leicester played above their level all season. City and Chelsea played below theirs on far to many occasions, and therefore, Leicester won the league.

I'm not trying to take away from Leicester. I am trying to take away from the bigger clubs, because they're the ones who allowed Leicester to happen. Don't get me wrong, I think that a team like Leicester winning the league is great for the league and the sport in general. But failing to acknowledge the colossal failures present in the other usual contenders is simply illogical.

Here are my two cents: You'll have to go to 94-95 season to see someone other than the big 6 lift the EPL trophy. Like everyone above me said, Leicester didn't win the title by beating the big 6. Instead, they stayed consistent against other 11 teams. They have the same group of players except Kante and a highly underrated Raineri. I agree that their squad does not have the quality to go through in UCL, but they will definitely challenge for the top 4. Anyone who has watched Raineri definitely knows that he is not a bad manager, and can compete with the big dogs with a limited budget. He will ensure that his team won't drop the points against the other teams. In my opinion, they will finish 5th.

Chelsea didnt flop last year, nor City They were beaten by better sides because we talk about 38 games not one. So fact those teams were outplayed often means that the level of all the clubs has became very high on the point that They dominate historical big 4 on a 38 game basis. All of this happened in one season change because of money, is that the résumé of your point ? Laughable. Unless I didnt exactly understand what you are trying to say.
From everyteam perspective, the most consistent team were the foxes over 38 weeks, other big guns turned average, got some good runs but never stayed consistent. From the i dont want to see reality perspective, the level has became suddenly high that even the teams trashed by Chelsea And City a season ago got superpowers In 2015 summer, came back And deservedly deserved their ranks except for Spurs/Leicester ( wich on a serious note I admire the progression ).

Could anyone conclude that if the level rise is what pushed Leicester to win the league And not the obvious underachieving then Leicester is a big CL contender, since They dominated a mighty league whole year winning it with a +8 pts margin ?
One dimensional view here because ignoring the fact Arsenal needed a finisher And just had a normal march injuries by their standards, Chelsea exploded internally And fired coach, Reds fired coach, United fans shaking heads whole year because it was a boring year, City players clearly choosing games They had like 80% defeat each time They were going to play a CL game 3 days earlier.
Ignore all these, ignore United knocked out of CL by PSV, VFL And I cant even remember the third team, ignore the no fight given by Chelsea VS PSG while knocking Chelsea has never been that easy even for a far better teams than PSG, ignore Olympiakos or Zagreb wins at the Emirates.

No, big guns were incredible, relegated teams turned into powerhorses And just BEAT them fairly. Im starting to Hear you guys...

"From the i dont want to see reality perspective, the level has became
suddenly high that even the teams trashed by Chelsea And City a season
ago got superpowers In 2015 summer, came back And deservedly deserved
their ranks except for Spurs/Leicester ( wich on a serious not I
admire the progression )."

Seems you got a hard time understanding this. I can understand why that is, since this is not the case in La Liga, where the top teams are much more superior and miles ahead of the other teams. This is evident of the transfer thread I posted yesterday. It's just an example of the ambitions that EPL middle and lower teams have. You'll see that even the newly promoted teams splash the cash to sign good players. With money growing exponentially, competition will indeed increase in the league. No, they didn't all of a sudden become "powerhorses". No one said they did. Fact remains though, that for a few years now all teams in the EPL can basically beat eachother. Last year every single team on the bottom side of the table took points from the top 6. Every single team. 14/15 season was not much different that either.. Just for my information, which teams are you referring to that Chelsea and City trashed last season that got super powers all of a sudden?

I can agree that top teams underachieved though, as many of the teams were rebuilding etc. However, the reason to Leicesters success were their consistency. In difference to what has been mentioned in this thread they did have a good solid record against top teams, and an even better record against the other teams for obvious reasons. I believe their success is sue to a combination of many different factors, and cannot be explained by one or the other. It's not black or white. The argument that Leicester in that case would be a CL contender is flawed. No they won't be. Because the other EPL teams that they beat, wouldn't probably be neither.

Unless I didnt exactly understand what you are trying to say.

Which is funny, because I literally have no idea what this first paragraph of yours is trying to say.

From the i dont want to see reality perspective, the level has became suddenly high that even the teams trashed by Chelsea And City a season ago got superpowers

Well, no. They just got better. As they have kept on getting better. Every single year more money is flooding into these clubs. They are picking up gems from all over Europe, like Payet, Kante, Mahrez, Wijnaldum, Firmino etc. All these clubs are able to afford it. All these squads are getting harder and harder to break down.

That means more points get dropped by the teams who used to be so very much better than them. Once the air of invincibility was blown away, the super-clubs found themselves having to fight tooth and nail for every single game, wearing themselves out. That's not 'superpower'. That's just football.

One dimensional view here because ignoring the fact Arsenal needed a finisher

What?

Chelsea exploded internally And fired coach

And?

Reds fired coach,

So?

United fans shaking heads whole year because it was a boring year,

Boring how? Nothing you are saying is relevant in any way. Every team has issues every season, and part of the reason for that is because of the high level of competition meaning they can never relax.

City players clearly choosing games

Yes, because they couldn't simply stroll through the games the way they would normally expect to. Not when everyone has seen Tottenham and Liverpool beat them 4-1 each, and are circling for blood. Don't you get it? This is precisely what we are talking about when we say increased competition.

Ignore all these, ignore United knocked out of CL by PSV,"

Who is ignoring it? United being slightly inferior last year was part of my point, in fact. That didn't stop them from winning a respectable FA Cup, mind you. They just didn't get to maintain such cup form in the league, because of how hard that has become to sustain.

ignore the no fight given by Chelsea VS PSG"

Once again, this is part of MY point. Chelsea were also inferior last season, which is why they to had to face every single team believing that they could get points from the Blues. You act like the team PSG beat didn't come 10th in the league.

No, big guns were incredible, relegated teams turned into powerhorses And just BEAT them fairly.

They DID beat them fairly. As everyone has agreed, the most consistent teams came out on top. Leicester, Arsenal and Spurs, who all were the ones who came out on top of the huge scrap taking place. By being the best at being consistent in this fierce battle, they outplayed the bigger clubs, over the course of the season.

Why are we even arguing about this?

@KTBFFHSWE: Exactly. Thanks for putting it more compactly.

Results again you disapear for month And come pre season with the same view of 3 years ago, English clubs got hammered in CL And EL Fairly !!! And you ignore this !!! Did Zagreb, Olympoakos, PSV, Monaco part of mighty PL ? Because They could BEAT them too...( the big guns ) How is Liverpool miles ahead of Sevilla. And dont bring la Liga argument, we arent talking about la Liga. Results talk of themselves.

And lodatz I didnt read your BS, I prefer someone who gives arguments rather than trying hard to destroy things he doesnt want to see.

Big 4 dropped level drastically, no one could contend anything in Europe for years now, it might change soon but i wont really waste my Time results were there.

Firminho : midtable Bundesliga player
Mahrez And Kante : breakthrough season never played a game in ligue 1
Payet : 10 million price tag, in fact all the teams are able to afford that, but wise signing. His success is surely due to progression with Marseille and Lille he never had a season like that.

And no PL clubs arent sharper in transfers than other teams in Europe, Éric Bailly you probably had no idea of his potential before performing at United, talented youngsters like him are everywhere not just in one league. PL is more compact the only thing I could share here And big 4 four played a big role in this not the opposite what you clearly do not want to see.

@KTBFFH actually thats what I think, How is lodatz agreeing with you and disagreeing with me.

What happened was that Ranieri made sure his team kept their discipline, and early on in the season they were underdogs. Every week. Everyone they played thought: "oh, we're going to smash these guys". Which played right into Ranieri's hands, as he set the team up in more or less classic catenaccio. Don't forget how many games, even against smaller opposition were won by 1-0, or draws gained at 1-1, with low possession. They had very few games where they were high scorers; they just didn't LOSE.

I actually agree with Lodatz statements. Its not that City or Chelsea underperformed, but its the fact the leicester fought.

Most BPL teams wont go all out unless they have a reason, whether its relegation battle or UCL/Europa league spot. Same goes for any other league, the mid-table teams who are far from both, relegation and top spots wont go all out and just try not to lose heavily when they face the big guns.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's just how I see it.

Oh and, welcome back Lodatz!

But thats exactly what Atletico are doing for years now with better players And load of experience, could they dominate the league miles ahead of other teams ? No. Because They had big guns In the league who can be just as consistent if not better. I think we all turn arround something, im taking about big PL guns underachieving as a valid part of The explanation, And I got money as a counter argument just like if Arsenal couldnt win this year, it was up to other midtable teams. Thats so wrong And i've said why. They wasted so many easy points by being ineffective in front of goal And with some defensive mistakes, it could have been their year since City players were not that motivated and Chelsea got internal issues wich was seen on the pitch, Hazard 0 goal could it be explained by league level argument ?
No one denied How Leicester won the league And the tactic They used, They didnt have depth or WC bench, Uloa or Okazaki wouldnt have been enough if Arsenal got consistent striker And a good defence.

We agree in everything that was a clear season, everything was clear im just pointing the limits of money arguments poorly defended here And pointed that big guns were underachieving And not just in PL, some results in CL were shoking. Burnley or Zagreb a big gun must take 3 pts, thats it. See ya guys.

This whole thread is a mess. I'm not even sure who stands where anymore.

I'll start with you tiki, I both agree and disagree with a lot of what you said.

Chelsea didnt flop last year, nor City They were beaten by better sides because we talk about 38 games not one.

Uh-huh. Chelsea finishing 10th one year after winning the league was not a flop. Is that a joke? What would Chelsea have to have done last season to make it a flop year, get relegated?

Manchester City hadn't finished outside of the top four since 2009. They ended last season getting in on goal difference over a United side that was maybe the worst in living memory. They were the odds on favorite before the season to win the title, and bookies don't mess around with money.

Those two seasons from those two clubs are both their worst in a long time, City 7 years, and Chelsea had their worst league finish since 1995. Saying that the usual contenders were not weak is simply incorrect. And yes, we talk about 38 games and not 1. But it's all those individual games that add up to 38. And far too often throughout the season, Chelsea/City/United dropped points against teams that were inferior to them.

And pointed that big guns were underachieving And not just in PL, some results in CL were shoking. Burnley or Zagreb a big gun must take 3 pts, thats it.

So we agree, the top sides in the PL underperformed? At least have the decency to show some consistency in your arguments, please.

Big 4 dropped level drastically, no one could contend anything in Europe for years now, it might change soon but i wont really waste my Time results were there.

Yeah, no one is going to deny that England has had a rough time in Europe. Chelsea won it 2012, and no English teams made it to the quarter-finals the in 2013, thanks to Bayern and Real Madrid. The following season, Chelsea made it to the semi-finals, and United and Arsenal both got knocked out by Bayern, while Barca took care of City. The only year that was really shocking was 2015, as no English teams made it to the quarters, and even in the shocker that was last season, City came within a goal of the final.

There are your results, and as you can see, the big 3 of the world (Bayern, Barca, Real Madrid) are responsible for more than 75% of the English teams exiting the CL. It's not that the English teams have fallen off a skill cliff, they just cannot beat those three teams more than 15% of the time, which is terrible, but almost no one else can in the CL either, those three teams have all either knocked out each other or fallen victim to Atletico or Juventus (once, Real Madrid two seasons ago), and Dortmund (once, Real Madrid four seasons ago). This is less about the level of the English teams (which is part of it obviously) and much more about the dominance of the other three teams. Even going back a decade or so to when "English teams were in the CL more" they really weren't, AC Milan, Barca, Real Madrid, and Manchester United were the dominant force. Of those teams, the lack of United power is clearly showing up in Europe.

And lodatz I didnt read your BS, I prefer someone who gives arguments rather than trying hard to destroy things he doesnt want to see.

How do you expect to argue his points if you don't even read them? Childish.

Firminho : midtable Bundesliga player
Mahrez And Kante : breakthrough season never played a game in ligue 1
Payet : 10 million price tag, in fact all the teams are able to afford that, but wise signing. His success is surely due to progression with Marseille and Lille he never had a season like that.

None of those players play for the "underperforming BPL contenders" we're discussing. Payet and Fimino play for teams that won't be in the CL, and probably won't be challenging for the title. Mahrez was a great find, but I would argue that Leicester being lucky, since they didn't even start him for large portions of their 2014-15 season, even they didn't rate him that highly before he burst onto the scene. I don't understand the point you're trying to make.

@Lodatz

You didn't address my previous post at all, because you were dealing with tiki, which is fine. If you want to have a go at it though, be my guest, I haven't had a good discussion here in awhile.

That was sarcasm sun.

@Sunflash:

You didn't address my previous post at all, because you were dealing with tiki, which is fine. If you want to have a go at it though, be my guest, I haven't had a good discussion here in awhile.

If you've had to deal with tiki still being the same old tiki, then I completely understand why.

I did agree with much of your post, and am happy to say so, though I still hold that it's not 'illogical' to notice those failures and see why they keep happening. I mean, just to isolate United (and not to pick at them because they're your team), in the last three seasons they've finished 7th, 4th and 5th, which I'm sure you'll agree is nowhere near the level of Ferguson's last year. You can only lay so much of the blame on David Moyes, and only so much upon van Gaal, also. At what point do we consider that they haven't suddenly started to underperform for 3 years, but instead it was that Fergie had them OVERperforming, because he was simply that good? (which he was).

It's easier to pick on United in that regard than City or Chelsea, because yes both were flying high for the last few years until this past season. In Chelsea's case, I think it's not outrageous to say that most of that credit can go to Mourinho himself, since it wasn't until his return that Chelsea became true title contenders again. Then the squad stopped playing for him, he got fired, and yet with him gone they didn't do an awful lot better. That's something Conte will certainly clear up, but it could take some time (and subsequent pressure from Abramovic), and it doesn't change the fact that last year Chelsea were exposed as a squad, and many teams in the league took points from the wounded animal.

And as for City, well, to be perfectly honest with you, I think they were a little exposed as a squad also. Some of those legs are starting to get very old out there, and of the strikers who have been drafted in through the gates of the Etihad over the years (Tevez, Adebayor, Balotelli, Dzeko, Jovetic, Bony), Aguero is the only one who has really stuck, and been an undisputed star. I do expect de Bruyne to be one going forward, though. Toure, Zabaleta, Kompany and Silva are the other main stand-outs of this period, and everyone aside from Silva is either passing their prime, or about to.

Jesus Navas is good, but is he THAT good? Fernando and Fernaninho may be good players, but are they world-beaters? Or is it that Silva and Toure were bloody fantastic, and carried them for the most part as the true stars? Is that why they never made it work in Europe? And every year they've been beaten by a fair amount of their direct rivals; it just so happens that this last year they got beaten by practically all of them. Boo hoo. Tough luck. That's what happens when you play in the Premier League, where the Top 6 is the most competitive in the world, and where even the smaller teams have a bigger budget than Sevilla.

Do you see what I am saying?

It's not illogical to point to this and say that yes, City took their foot off the gas this season, and got punished for it by teams that were not. That wouldn't happen to Bayern, or Juventus for instance, in their leagues, because not only are their direct rivals not on their level, but the rest of the league can largely be handled by their reserves.

In the PL? Any top team has about 12-14 crucial matches against other Top 7 teams, as well as tough visits to stubborn opposition further down the table. Even in Spain, where Atletico have truly risen to rival the Big 2 (and it's oh-so-ironic that tiki prattles on about how they've been doing it for years, supposedly inspiring English football, when they copied it from the PL in the first place), the bottom half of the league is basically a training match for the Top 3.

There are reasons for the way the season played out, and yes, a level of complacency or poor performance among the 'top clubs' is a factor in that. But a large part of WHY that proved to be a factor is because the level of competition in the league didn't let them get away with it.

Do you see what I'm driving at?

Even going back a decade or so to when "English teams were in the CL more" they really weren't, AC Milan, Barca, Real Madrid, and Manchester United were the dominant force."

I have to disagree there. From 2005-2012 there were 8 English finalists in the CL, and 3 victories. Madrid spent the whole period from 2004-2011 as effectively absent from the competition, and MIlan have been nobody since 2007.

Liverpool got to 2 finals, winning one.
Chelsea got to 2 finals, winning one.
United got to 3 finals, winning one.
Arsenal got to 1, and won zero.

The only competition they got was from Barcelona, and Milan until 2007. I did a thread ont his a long time ago, actually, which you might find interesting:

http://footyroom.com/forum/discussions/case-study-barcelonas-dominance-and-competition-43944

Sadly, as you can see, tiki was still ruining threads back then, too.

Results again you disapear for month

Why is it that you always try and make an issue of the fact that I don't choose to spend my time here enduring your idiocy? And why are you always the same moronic little troll whenever I do come back?

English clubs got hammered in CL And EL Fairly !!!

Hammered by whom? Arsenal got knocked out by Barcelona, and beat Bayern Munich along the way. City got knocked out by Madrid, 1-0 over two legs, beat Sevilla twice, and knocked out PSG. United didn't do so well, it's true, but then again, maybe they... 'underperformed?' ;) And as for Chelsea, who came 10th in the league, they went out to PSG on goal difference, with an interim manager (just like Di Matteo was when he beat Barcelona in 2012).

Where do you get this idea from that just because Sevilla managed to get a hard-fought victory against Liverpool (who came 7th, remember) in the EL final, that English teams have been getting 'hammered' in Europe?

Like Sunflash noted: English teams keep getting knocked by Barca, Madrid, Atletico and Bayern, often in very hard-fought matches. Oh, and PSG, to be fair to them.

And lodatz I didnt read your BS

Yes you did. You just know you don't have any counter-points, and so we're treated to your usual antics and nonsense to distract away from the point.

And no PL clubs arent sharper in transfers than other teams in Europe,

It depends on how you define 'sharp'. If you mean: scour the continent for players who are doing well in lower leagues (like France, Holland, Russia etc) and have the money to offer them good contracts to pry them away from their clubs, then yes, yes they are indeed extremely sharp.

It may be that the money is the important part here, but it still counts. Why not simply wait until Lyons, or Zenit, or Ajax develop a player into excellent form, and then offer them lots of money for him? Makes perfect sense, and is the way that practically ALL players get spotted, as they begin from their humble roots.

The PL just has the most number of clubs with the cash to do it well.

Now, if you want to talk like an adult, try responding to what I just wrote. Or, just do your usual sidestep, talk about how I've been gone, then tell me that Arsenal will thrash Spurs this season, and refuse to admit that you're wrong, just like you always do.

I have my money on the latter. :)

Thanks rayrex. :)

Lord save us.

The return of debate on the footyroom forum, it has been a while. ;)