When will the top four ever change?

MrJoeSoap

Pos|2007|2006|2005|2004|2003|2002|2001|2000
1|Man Utd|Chelsea|Chelsea|Arsenal|Man Utd|Arsenal|Man Utd|Man Utd
2|Chelsea|Man Utd|Arsenal|Chelsea|Arsenal|Liverpool|Arsenal|Arsenal
3|Liverpool|Liverpool|Man Utd|Man Utd|Newcastle|Man Utd|Liverpool|Leeds
4|Arsenal|Arsenal|Everton|Liverpool|Chelsea|Newcastle|Leeds|Liverpool


In the last eight seasons, only three clubs have managed to break the dominance of the "Big Four".

One of those clubs is now in League One having spent their way to near oblivion. Another has gone through managers like toilet paper since those "glory days" when reaching the heady heights of third and fourth.

Only Everton really have their heads held high at the moment, of those three clubs.

Now my question is, how long is it before two clubs can break the top four dominance in a single season? How long before we can go into a season not actually being able to name three of the four teams who will finish in the top four?

Has the financial gap increased to such an extent that a change is all but impossible for the next ten or so years? Or should we be expecting the likes of Villa, Everton, Man City etc to make serious pushes to dethrone the big four and make the league interesting again.

Or is 5th really the new 1st?

PS - First time I've made a table so bits and pieces may be slightly wrong!

_blank_

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

Or is 5th really the new 1st?

rofl.

What's the last time there was a merseyside battle for the title :D

AnCapaillMor

It'll change when another Roman comes along or a few of the top four do a serie A, juve\milan type thingy.

Xavi6

AnCapaillMor wrote: »

It'll change when another Roman comes along

Or a Thaksin.

Sven will spend wisely again in the summer and we'll be gunning for Liverpool's spot next year. I think it's between us and Everton to break it properly next season.

Either that or it'll go tits up and we'll be relegated.

Dave!

Liverpool are in the process of initiating such a change!

shoutman

I'd say that given a few years Aston Villa may be challenging. At present they have a good young core of ambitious players, a top class manager and the financial backing of a man who wants to create a dynasty at Villa park.

event

spurs could be a good shout next year under Ramos

and technically, back in 2003 two teams made it

newcastle finished 3rd and chelsea werent one of the big 4 back then, so they broke it then too

Nunu

I'd just like to point out that Chelsea have been challenging at the top for at least the past 10 seasons...not just since Abramovich arrived.

MrJoeSoap

Nunu wrote: »

I'd just like to point out that Chelsea have been challenging at the top for at least the past 10 seasons...not just since Abramovich arrived.

Indeed, they were third in 1999 and fourth the season before.

Bubs101

The top 4 will change when Platini makes it 3 teams for the Champions league and Liverpool just keep failing to make the grade or (I say this as a Chelsea fan) Chelsea implode because of backroom politics in a Hearts style

patmac

QPR in 5 years time. Their new owner is wealthier than Abramovich.

DSB

I think Villa may break it, in my opinion we've the best first 11 of the sides looking to push Liverpool for 4th, Man City and Everton have stronger squads so if we spend well in the summer we may well be up there. Liverpool are there for the taking.

Galvasean

Well this season 4th is up for grabs. If Liverpool cintinue to mess up Villa, City or Everton could easily take their place.
Next season will be a big challenge for 'pool. Unless they can improve significantly and seriously challenge for the title the likes of Villa, City, Everton, Spurs and possibly even West Ham and Portsmouth could overtake them.

Pepe LeFrits

Xavi6 wrote: »

Or a Thaksin.

Or a Wenger.

pd101

I'd say there's a good chance things will chance when Wenger and Ferguson leave Arsenal and United. They could fall back a bit for a season or two.

stick-dan

It pains me to say it as a liverpool fan but everton look fairly odds on for the last few seasons to be heading in the right direction to make an upset!:(

PHB

Everton look like they could do it this year.

In the long run?
Spurs I think will push next year.
City will spend lots and Sven knows how to do well in leagues, I think he could push them too.

Who will they displace? I think whichever top 4 team decides not to perform one year.

MrJoeSoap

Galvasean wrote: »

Well this season 4th is up for grabs. If Liverpool cintinue to mess up Villa, City or Everton could easily take their place.

This is kinda the point I'm making though. When will it be that it doesn't take Liverpool or any of the other three to "mess up" and allow someone else in? When can we expect there to be a reasonably even playing field between say five or six clubs?

Bubs101

I think part of the problem is that there's no clear 5th team anymore but 4 or 5 teams who could finish top of the rest. Everton, Spurs, Pomper, Villa and City all have good enough squads to break in when one of the top 4 has a bad season but for the same team to do it twice? unlikely. If there was only one contender it would probably happen quicker

PHB

Spurs I think most people would say are close to having the quality required to be expected to challenge without a team messing up.

Mr. Presentable

What's interesting is that it is essentially down to how much money the club spends and that Arsenal are managing to hold on despite that. For them it seems shrewd management is all that holds them there and when Mr Wenger goes it is unlikely they'll be able to maintain their position. If Mr Ferguson were to go it would make sod all difference unless they employed a plonker. Seriously, with all their wealth and a copy of the most recent FM any mug could keep Man Utd in the top four.

MrJoeSoap

nipplenuts wrote: »

Seriously, with all their wealth and a copy of the most recent FM any mug could keep Man Utd in the top four.

I don't know, the most recent FM is the toughest in a while.

PHB

It's still piss easy to be honest. Just buy Lulinha 2.2, Banega 3ish, Marcelo 5ish, Cassani 5ish, Cesar Delgado 5ish, then one of Benzema, Giovinco, or Ben Afra for about 17 million. And you've got yourself a world class side for about 40 million. Keep them for 2 years, sell off all the players for about 30 million each, then invest in a real side for the future Game gets boring after too many incarnations
I think I might actually take on the challenge of being at a big club right from the start, rather than a small club who you take up, or one of the clubs with huge potential (like Atletico Madrid or Spurs), maybe United and try to pay off the debt :P

Tusky

PHB wrote: »

It's still piss easy to be honest. Just buy Lulinha 2.2, Banega 3ish, Marcelo 5ish, Cassani 5ish, Cesar Delgado 5ish, then one of Benzema, Giovinco, or Ben Afra for about 17 million. And you've got yourself a world class side for about 40 million. Keep them for 2 years, sell off all the players for about 30 million each, then invest in a real side for the future Game gets boring after too many incarnations
I think I might actually take on the challenge of being at a big club right from the start, rather than a small club who you take up, or one of the clubs with huge potential (like Atletico Madrid or Spurs), maybe United and try to pay off the debt :P

Is it easier to take a small club up rather than start with a big club ?

Unearthly

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

I don't know, the most recent FM is the toughest in a while.

I found 07 much harder. I don't put much thought into training, tactics, media, or signings and I won the treble with Spurs in 2010

In 07 I just died with every team

Zaph

No chance of Leeds being on that table again for a very long time.

PHB

Tusky wrote: »

Is it easier to take a small club up rather than start with a big club ?

I don't know, i've never tried a big club. Small clubs are easy, you just buy promising youngstesr. Hire as many scouts with decent ratings as you can, scout every single player in the world under the age of 22, and then get whoever you can It's all about the scout network, the most exciting part of the season is the day after the new 16 year olds come onto the scene :P

With a big club with huge debt I think it'd be an interesting challenge :P best not to start now, might hurt the old college work :P

Racing Flat

Glad to see the OP referring to it as the 'top 4' as opposed to the 'big 4'. Big 4 is a misnomer. There's a Big 2, Liverpool and Man U. That's it. Arsenal could claim 3rd in a 'Big' league. Everton, Spurs, Man City, Leeds, Villa would fight for the next places. Notts Forest, Chelsea, West Ham, maybe Shef Wed would be in the next rung down. Chelsea being in the 'Big 4' is a joke, they are currently in the top 4. But Leeds were in the top 4 in the 70's, Forest in the 70's and 80's...

'Big' club should be based on
1. Success
2. Players
3. Fan base
4. Stadium

1. Liv and Man U are way ahead, Arsenal next, closing in on 100years unbroken in Premiership counts, others are way off including Chelsea.

2. Big clubs can attract the top players. Man U have always done this, Liverpool since the 60's, again these 2 clubs are way ahead. Name some Chelsea legends? You'll have a few from the 1970 team, Kerry Dixon and the present crop.

3. Average attendance down the years - the top 7 or 8 I named above are consistently high. But also factor in non-local fan base. This is where Liv and Man U are miles ahead and Arsenal really fall down. How many Arsenal fans do you know? This country seems fairly split down the middle with Liv and Man U fans. Most of my father's friends are Leeds fans. They've a huge support from their succes in the 70's. You always get a smattering of Spurs and West Ham fans, don't know why, but travel anywhere in the world and you'll find Liv and Man U fans - rarely Arsenal.

4. Some stadiums give their club a bit of standing e.g. Villa

So I don't think there's much of an argument that there really only is a big 2.

In the 70's and 80's they used to talk about the big 6 - Liv, Everton, Man U, Man City, Spurs, Arsenal. Leeds and Villa might challenge Man City for that spot, or maybe it could be a 'Big 8'. Chelsea don't make the cut IMO.

Mr Alan

Find it quite hilarious how people are now refering to a top 3 and then Liverpool....were people doing the same when Arsenal were struggling to make the 4th CL spot over the last couple of years? No.

Why not? Cause Arsenal were a squad in transition; well news for ya people: Torres-Benayoun-Babel-Arbeloa-Mascherano-Lucas....

Liverpool are the same and all the City fans, Everton fans, Villa fans-licking their lips at the prospect of picking us off is wayyyy too premature, despite our troubles ye still cant overtake us and i have a feeling things are looking up for us now.

In the words of a recent Kop favourite;

"They say our days are numbered, we're not famous anymore, but scousers rule the country like they've always done before"

Xavi6

Mr Alan wrote: »

Find it quite hilarious how people are now refering to a top 3 and then Liverpool....were people doing the same when Arsenal were struggling to make the 4th CL spot over the last couple of years? No.

Why not? Cause Arsenal were a squad in transition; well news for ya people: Torres-Benayoun-Babel-Arbeloa-Mascherano-Lucas....

Liverpool are the same and all the City fans, Everton fans, Villa fans-licking their lips at the prospect of picking us off is wayyyy too premature, despite our troubles ye still cant overtake us and i have a feeling things are looking up for us now.

In the words of a recent Kop favourite;

"They say our days are numbered, we're not famous anymore, but scousers rule the country like they've always done before"

You weren't sayin that a week or so ago. One European win means you're back on track? Come on now. Even your own players have admitted your problems are bigger than first thought.

gosplan

Racing Flat wrote: »

Glad to see the OP referring to it as the 'top 4' as opposed to the 'big 4'. Big 4 is a misnomer. There's a Big 2, Liverpool and Man U. That's it. Arsenal could claim 3rd in a 'Big' league.

Wouldn't be a liverpool fan by any chance?

Racing Flat wrote: »

'Big' club should be based on
1. Success
2. Players
3. Fan base
4. Stadium

Racing Flat wrote: »

1. Liv and Man U are way ahead, Arsenal next

Yeah, all Liverpool fans I know consider the last 20 years extremly successful.

Racing Flat wrote: »

2. Big clubs can attract the top players. Man U have always done this, Liverpool since the 60's, again these 2 clubs are way ahead.

Liverpool do not attract top players anymore. Torres and perhaps Alonso are the only ones I can think of that on reputation, would have gotten into any club. Some good homegrown ones though.

Racing Flat wrote: »

3. Most of my father's friends are Leeds fans. They've a huge support from their succes in the 70's.

As do Liverpool but success in the 80's as well has given them a few more fans.

Racing Flat wrote: »

So I don't think there's much of an argument that there really only is a big 2.

Neither do I, and if there was Liverpool wouldn't be in it. Two decades success two decades ago and they're somehow up there on par with Utd? give me a break.

Liverpool, since the inception of the premierleague have been pretty much like Newcastle except they have a higher average league position, a few cups, and Benitez's amazing track record in the champions league.

Mr Alan

Xavi6 wrote: »

You weren't sayin that a week or so ago. One European win means you're back on track? Come on now. Even your own players have admitted your problems are bigger than first thought.

when was i not saying this? was i saying i think Everton/City/Villa are gonna replace us in the big 4 in England? Doubt it

Mr Alan

gosplan wrote: »

Liverpool do not attract top players anymore.

I think Liverpools inability to attract top players at the minute is nothing to do with our stature as a club.

Sure we all know that all the top players care more for the CL than the PL anyway so that shouldnt be a problem.

its cause we havent had the appropriate spending power.

gosplan wrote: »

Liverpool, since the inception of the premierleague have been pretty much like Newcastle except they have a higher average league position, a few cups, and Benitez's amazing track record in the champions league.

ah here come on outta that!

gosplan

OK, I apologise for comparing you to Newcastle, you have been far better than that. But I think it's laughable that someone would say, there isn't a big 4, there's a big two ... and Liverpool are in it!

growler

Racing Flat wrote: »

Glad to see the OP referring to it as the 'top 4' as opposed to the 'big 4'. Big 4 is a misnomer. There's a Big 2, Liverpool and Man U. That's it. Arsenal could claim 3rd in a 'Big' league. Everton, Spurs, Man City, Leeds, Villa would fight for the next places. Notts Forest, Chelsea, West Ham, maybe Shef Wed would be in the next rung down. Chelsea being in the 'Big 4' is a joke, they are currently in the top 4. .

this smells of Liverpool.

No one else lives in the past as much as them, then again, i guess it gives them something to be happy about given their current form

zing

gosplan wrote: »

Yeah, all Liverpool fans I know consider the last 20 years extremly successful.

It's not been anywhere near as successful as some of us would have liked but 18 trophies over the last 20 years isn't exactly a bad haul is it ? Others may well have more but it's still not a bad haul..

d22ontour

Mr Alan wrote: »

Find it quite hilarious how people are now refering to a top 3 and then Liverpool....were people doing the same when Arsenal were struggling to make the 4th CL spot over the last couple of years? No.

Why not? Cause Arsenal were a squad in transition; well news for ya people: Torres-Benayoun-Babel-Arbeloa-Mascherano-Lucas....

2 quality players.
2 with potential.
2 squad players at best.

It's the other 18 players in the squad that matter just as much as the Torres's unfortunately for the Pool too many of them are not good enough for what Liverpool aspire to be.

Arsenal struggling and achieving 4th place spending fook all money .
Liverpool struggling and not certain of 4th place spending massive amounts of money.
Nice comparison.

:rolleyes:

herbieflowers

I don't even think it's to do with the quality of players, there's a good enough quality there with Pool it's just their manager can't seem to get the best out of those players. You don't need world-class players to have a good team that can beat other teams.