How strong is this seasons Champions League?

Which season had the strongest quarter-finalists?

Season 2006 - 2007
Bayern, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man Utd, Milan, PSV, Roma, Valencia.

Season 2005 - 2006
Arsenal, Barcelona, Benfica, Inter Milan, Juventus, Lyon, Milan, Villarreal.

Season 2004 - 2005
Bayern, Chelsea, Inter Milan, Juventus, Liverpool, Lyon, Milan, PSV.

Season 2003 - 2004
Arsenal, Chelsea, Deportivo, Lyon, Milan, Monaco, Porto, Real Madrid.

Season 2002 - 2003*
Ajax, Barcelona, Inter Milan, Juventus, Man Utd, Milan, Real Madrid, Valenica.

* Two group stages.

You just neeed to read the names of the 2002-2003 1/4 finalists and its clear.

'04-'05.

No room for the shirt-sellers.

I personally don't feel there's much to complain about this seasons CL (yes there could have been better matches, less injuries etc, but that's nitpicking).
That's because with exception of Ajax and Juventus, this year's group stages involved ALL the big clubs opposed to many years before. Normally there are always about four-five big names missing, this season only two.

If it can't be considered good than nothing really will. Don't blame the results.

The possibility to see someone else win the cup instead of the institutions will also be a refreshing change compared with leagues were the usual suspects take the title.

PSV, Roma and Valencia will all be loveable underdogs. (*sarcasm*)

2002-2003 was by far the strongest.

Real Madrid had the best team of the last 10 years, Milan, United and Valencia were better then they are now, Juve were one of the best teams in europe and Barcelona/Inter/AJax were also very strong.

I think that season was the last great CL season, the united v Real and Juve v Real matches were phenomenal (arguably two of the best ties in CL I have seen), although the all Italian final, unsurprisingly tainted the tournament.

The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

blue

Rez wrote:The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

Lame and poor. And by your own standards, Man U would also be culled from this campaign.

Not merely the second round, but any team that reaches the quarter finals deserves to be there.

DD wrote:

Rez wrote:The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

Lame and poor. And by your own standards, Man U would also be culled from this campaign.

Not merely the second round, but any team that reaches the quarter finals deserves to be there.

I wrote a long response and the server crashed and it didnt go through, cant be bothered to write it again.

I think the CL is fantastic every season, I love watching it and it's my favorite competition, I'd give up playing in the FA and carling cups every season if we could have a run like this in the CL instead, it's just a great competition full of talking points and excitement, this season has been no different

Luis wrote:I think the CL is fantastic every season, I love watching it and it's my favorite competition, I'd give up playing in the FA and carling cups every season if we could have a run like this in the CL instead, it's just a great competition full of talking points and excitement, this season has been no different

It helps that Inter start a riot most years.

Rez wrote:The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

tottaly agree. the thing is that when you have remove a second group stage good teams less likey to go through because they dont really have to be good but just get a result.with the second group stage you knew that the team that had gone through deserved it and has performed over a long time instead of maybe 45 min or in some situations less.

now awdays teams are so afraid of going out that they try to copy each other style but with small differences. and currently the style that everybody plays is a defensive and tactical one. a good example is psv which played great football with a average squad in 2004 and should have played the CL final. now they played very defensive and resort more on physics then movement. i dont really enjoy cl football at all and yet all you hear is how its the greates tournament in the world and stuff.

supermadrid(zizou legend) wrote:

Rez wrote:The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

tottaly agree. the thing is that when you have remove a second group stage good teams less likey to go through because they dont really have to be good but just get a result.with the second group stage you knew that the team that had gone through deserved it and has performed over a long time instead of maybe 45 min or in some situations less.

now awdays teams are so afraid of going out that they try to copy each other style but with small differences. and currently the style that everybody plays is a defensive and tactical one. a good example is psv which played great football with a average squad in 2004 and should have played the CL final. now they played very defensive and resort more on physics then movement. i dont really enjoy cl football at all and yet all you hear is how its the greates tournament in the world and stuff.

is this because Real played badly and are out? would you feel differently if they were in the next round, especially after playing well?

in which case you are blaming the CL for your team being bad

I think that this year the matches have been more interesting than in some years, although I think it could get more boring from now on without country protection. Worst matches are nearly always due to familiarity with the opposition.

supermadrid(zizou legend) wrote:

Rez wrote:The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

tottaly agree. the thing is that when you have remove a second group stage good teams less likey to go through because they dont really have to be good but just get a result.with the second group stage you knew that the team that had gone through deserved it and has performed over a long time instead of maybe 45 min or in some situations less.

now awdays teams are so afraid of going out that they try to copy each other style but with small differences. and currently the style that everybody plays is a defensive and tactical one. a good example is psv which played great football with a average squad in 2004 and should have played the CL final. now they played very defensive and resort more on physics then movement. i dont really enjoy cl football at all and yet all you hear is how its the greates tournament in the world and stuff.

The second group stages definately favours the bigger teams, but generally the bigger teams play better football, due to having better players, thus more entertaining for the neutral. The second group stages provided some great attacking games as there was less to lose and the negative/poorer teams couldnt rely on one lucky performance or set piece to get them through.

I dont think its been that great since 2002- 2003, not just because my team hasnt done so well recently, just its too negative. The golden period 98 - 2003 were the best years, the spanish teams and united played attacking football, that others copied and there were some wonderful games.

Real losing to Juve in 2003 (although they deserved to win as Nedved played the game of his life) was the turning point, after that the CL went very negative. I thought Barca winning it last season playing attacking football (but not totally as attacking as that Real team) would change it, but it hasnt been the case. When was the last time we saw a CL game were two attacking teams totally went for it against each other?

Rez wrote:

supermadrid(zizou legend) wrote:

Rez wrote:The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

tottaly agree. the thing is that when you have remove a second group stage good teams less likey to go through because they dont really have to be good but just get a result.with the second group stage you knew that the team that had gone through deserved it and has performed over a long time instead of maybe 45 min or in some situations less.

now awdays teams are so afraid of going out that they try to copy each other style but with small differences. and currently the style that everybody plays is a defensive and tactical one. a good example is psv which played great football with a average squad in 2004 and should have played the CL final. now they played very defensive and resort more on physics then movement. i dont really enjoy cl football at all and yet all you hear is how its the greates tournament in the world and stuff.

The second group stages definately favours the bigger teams, but generally the bigger teams play better football, due to having better players, thus more entertaining for the neutral. The second group stages provided some great attacking games as there was less to lose and the negative/poorer teams couldnt rely on one lucky performance or set piece to get them through.



I dont think its been that great since 2002- 2003, not just because my team hasnt done so well recently, just its too negative. The golden period 98 - 2003 were the best years, the spanish teams and united played attacking football, that others copied and there were some wonderful games.



Real losing to Juve in 2003 (although they deserved to win as Nedved played the game of his life) was the turning point, after that the CL went very negative. I thought Barca winning it last season playing attacking football (but not totally as attacking as that Real team) would change it, but it hasnt been the case. When was the last time we saw a CL game were two attacking teams totally went for it against each other?

to be honest barca won last season not becuase of the offensive but because they were good on the ball and finally got it right tacticallty. i mean they played with edmilson-motta at times and defending fullbacks. but they were more attacking still then most teams. i never thought that them wining would change anything as too many teams has succed in using a defensive style.i think the turning point in football was when greece and porto won the CL and the change from group stage to knock outs. also when a small team made it through the group stage you knew they deserved it and that they had quality. i remember a panatinaikos(sp) made it through and was very close to beating barca in the quarters in of the best games i have seen in CL.

Luis wrote:I think the CL is fantastic every season, I love watching it and it's my favorite competition, I'd give up playing in the FA and carling cups every season if we could have a run like this in the CL instead, it's just a great competition full of talking points and excitement, this season has been no different

I.e it's a smokescreen for Liverpool to avoid talking how they've underachieved domestically again.

110% wrote:

supermadrid(zizou legend) wrote:

Rez wrote:The 2002-2003 QF had the best teams (3 Italian, 3 Spanish, 1 English, 1 dutch) they were all exciting to watch. It could be argued that the 2 group stages made the competition much stronger, also getting rid of the poorer teams, that have since contested the QF.

tottaly agree. the thing is that when you have remove a second group stage good teams less likey to go through because they dont really have to be good but just get a result.with the second group stage you knew that the team that had gone through deserved it and has performed over a long time instead of maybe 45 min or in some situations less.

now awdays teams are so afraid of going out that they try to copy each other style but with small differences. and currently the style that everybody plays is a defensive and tactical one. a good example is psv which played great football with a average squad in 2004 and should have played the CL final. now they played very defensive and resort more on physics then movement. i dont really enjoy cl football at all and yet all you hear is how its the greates tournament in the world and stuff.

is this because Real played badly and are out? would you feel differently if they were in the next round, especially after playing well?

in which case you are blaming the CL for your team being bad

I think that this year the matches have been more interesting than in some years, although I think it could get more boring from now on without country protection. Worst matches are nearly always due to familiarity with the opposition.

no no please dont think that im only saying this because real going out. i said this all the time on the old 606 board and this one too. i couldnt care less if Real went through. Even if we did go through i kind of hate it if went ot the semis or something playing as bad as we do currently. just try to do your own comparison with CL games pre 2004 and you will see my point.

I think it has been a poor CL so far.

Partly because we are out but mostly because it is a year of "Safety First" football.

No teams have caught my eye (expect for Werder but I already knew their style), and I haven't though "These guys are great!!". No young players have been a revelation. All games end with at most 2-3 goals..

I think it has been pretty boring watching games that didn't involve your own team because it has been overly tactical and physical.

Oleguerisntthatbad wrote:I think it has been a poor CL so far.

Partly because we are out but mostly because it is a year of "Safety First" football.

No teams have caught my eye (expect for Werder but I already knew their style), and I haven't though "These guys are great!!". No young players have been a revelation. All games end with at most 2-3 goals..

I think it has been pretty boring watching games that didn't involve your own team because it has been overly tactical and physical.

good point. i cant remember that many great performances the last couple of years from new players. its been hard to shine for individuels when all coaches always talks about spirit and fight after games instead of saying we defended for our lives because we cant play football.

Oleguerisntthatbad wrote:it has been overly tactical and physical.

You Spanish need to stop being tarts, it has to be said.

Football is a contact Sport. Live with it.

Obispo wrote:

Oleguerisntthatbad wrote:it has been overly tactical and physical.

You Spanish need to stop being tarts, it has to be said.

Football is a contact Sport. Live with it.

The way it is being played now is soooo fucking boring that I am starting to think that Platini is on to something..

It is like watching 32 Greece 2004 teams competing.. very exciting

Excuses, excuses. You were crap. Get over it.

I think Olegeur is right, who's left that is renowened for being an attacking team?


Man United is the only one.





& Roma.

Saintsarama KCMG wrote:Excuses, excuses. You were crap. Get over it.

I already said that part of it was because we were out, and we lost to a much better team...

but it still doesn't change the fact that CL football has been dreadful this year.. How many times have we seen a team getting massacred, or brilliant, flowing football???

Brilliant tactics yes, but then I might as well watch chess or something..

The competition isnt very good this year but like all international/club tournaments it hasnt been since 2003.

Too many negative teams and tactics. Previously games not involving your team were very entertaining, now is not the case.

Thats why we must all pray for Chelsea vs Liverpool and put it on Channel 5 as well.

Parks lives wrote:Thats why we must all pray for Chelsea vs Liverpool and put it on Channel 5 as well.

Yep.. that would be great.. COME ON LIVERPOOL!!!!

In other words, unless teams play open enough for your own team to be successful, you don't find it entertaining?

Barca don't play too well in tight games, a lot of CL games this season have been tight, ergo you are at a disadvantage. You've got used to playing crap Spanish sides that can't defend for toffee and don't get the same instant gratification from the more cultured and careful Champions League. I found your game against Liverpool the other night utterly enthralling...

Parks lives wrote:I think Olegeur is right, who's left that is renowened for being an attacking team?


Man United is the only one. :P





& Roma.

And even then Querioz is trying his best to turn us into the other teams, when we play in Europe. But yeah league wise were the only true attacking team left as were the only team that play with 5 out of 6 attacking players and two attacking side backs.

Saintsarama KCMG wrote:In other words, unless teams play open enough for your own team to be successful, you don't find it entertaining?

Barca don't play too well in tight games, a lot of CL games this season have been tight, ergo you are at a disadvantage. You've got used to playing crap Spanish sides that can't defend for toffee and don't get the same instant gratification from the more cultured and careful Champions League. I found your game against Liverpool the other night utterly enthralling...

It was a crap match.. except for the first 15 and last 15 where there was some action. The rest of it was a stalemate.

I like attacking football, that is what I want to watch. So I don't find the neutral games with "safety first" teams interesting. It is like watching paint dry. This has nothing to do with our success or lack thereof.