Is it the logical thing to player Liverpool with Giroud and Lacazette on the bench and Welbeck up front?
I increasingly don't get him either but I don't believe for one moment that his failure in the CL doesn't bother him.
Printable View
Is it the logical thing to player Liverpool with Giroud and Lacazette on the bench and Welbeck up front?
I increasingly don't get him either but I don't believe for one moment that his failure in the CL doesn't bother him.
Because he's at the end of his career and he probably knows he will never win it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Özim
What's the point of admitting a regret you realise you will never be able to rectify.
Even defeat or setback bothers him. You can see him growing visibly frustrated because there's nothing he can do about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
I don't think your comparison works as one is technology based and cannot change, whereas the other is a human being (supposedly a very intelligent one) who has a brain and can think and adapt to his environment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
Wenger should be able to adapt, in fact he'd probably only need to look at the winning formula he had before and apply some of those principles to get closer certainly, there's not real reason we can't be successful as we have the resources, problem is the man continues with failed methods he never even used when he was sucessful, this is small weak players, 5 yard passing football, no leaders, lots of deadwood, no real desire on the pitch and no discipline.
These aren't things that were prevalent when we were winning at all, quite the opposite, these are things he's brought in after that, when none of the leadership he inherited was there anymore (he'd sold or got rid of all of those). In that sense did the fact he had Adams, Keown, Seaman, Bergkamp and the fact they could pass on their knowledge to the likes of Vieira, Toure etc play a major part in his success (i.e essentially an outside influence), we know his knowledge of the French market obviously also played a part, but this wasn't a skill as such, that was just the fact he was French and followed the French league very closely, more closely than others.
He could win it if he tried hard enough and did the right things, the fact he would think he can't suggest he should know he shouldn't even be here. We should be aiming to win the league and/or the CL, if we have a manager who doesn't believe he can surely that's a problem, maybe not to our club having said that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
His decisions are without a doubt quite often odd, but IMO in the last 10 years everything he's said and done suggests he's a man that doesn't put winning at the top of the agenda, finances seem to be foremost in his thinking, there's plenty of example of him failing to give us the best chance to win trophies, examples you'd probably not see many other managers are top clubs make, examples that show a lack of ambition and drive to win IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
He is 68 in October, at best we won't even be in the competition for a yearQuote:
Originally Posted by Özim
And there are many, many coaches who are currently better than Wenger who haven't won it. And some may not come close to it.
The winners this year are going to come from a very narrow group.
That Wenger hasn't learned from his myriad mistakes in Europe is kind of incidental. I think Wenger could completely change his ways in coaching, player recruitment etc and realistically we'd be no significantly closer to winning the competition.
Real Madrid and Barcelona have won six of the last nine between them.
Again I think if finances were at the top of his agenda we wouldn't be running such a massive wage billQuote:
Originally Posted by Özim
Wenger is obsessed with proving that he can do it without spending loads. And the irony is that he's failed so badly at that, that another club (Leicester City) managed to adopt his blueprint sucessfully.
I think being given more power over the day to day running of the football club than any other manager has at any other club has made him hyper sensitive to financial considerations, simply because he has been lauded as someone who has achieved great things on very little spend.
He does things constrained by a set of rules only he understands which he frequently bends anyway. He is obsessed with this total football model, you saw the article by Keown where he refused to show a player defensive mistakes he was making because it might interfere with the technical aspects of his game.
Wenger has certainly not been standing still. Stan bought his shares for 500 million and he just recently turned down a bid approaching 1.5 billion. That's why Wenger still has a job. He delivers where it counts for this owner and this board and all the rest is total bullshit. We know this to be the case because nothing ever changes at this club. Or, you could look at that another way and say everything always stays the same. Stan's valuation continues to rise, the execs including Wenger continued to get paid and on the pitch we continue to fail to be competitive at the top level. If you look past all the smoke it's actually pretty easy to see what is happening at this club and where the focus and priorities lie. Judge them by their actions, not their words and certainly not their promises.Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
There is not one coach that has had a chance to build team after team with one of the top European clubs and not won the Champs League. We're talking two decades with Arsenal and he's only ever progressed beyond the last 16 on a handful of occasions. He's in a league of his own for this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
There's a big difference between the wage bill and transfer activity. The former is a known quantity that can be projected into the future. The latter is a gamble that can either add benefits for an outlay and protracted costs or add nothing significant for that same outlay and costs. I'm pretty sure which Wenger prefers, the stability of the payroll compared to the casino of the transfer market. He's told us this enough times with his irrelevant speeches about his version of value.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
If you want stability you want your players to stay, so you pay them to stay. Even the shit ones. Everything becomes quantifiable and predictable (where have we heard that before?). And you have a nice little FFP excuse to play with, we can't gamble because we have to account for the wages. We have to get rid of players (take profit) before we can spend. Furthermore, how do you keep a squad of professionals content with mediocrity? By paying them to shut up and get on with it.
I heard the cost of player wages has dropped from over 70% to around 60% of earnings. In the big picture this is another long term benefit. Everything is being run in a way you'd run an investment fund. The mitigation of risk wherever possible and with the goal of stability. You want a mixed basket but one tending towards the conservative so unexpected outcomes can be smoothed out. Admirable if you are running a bank (not that bankers are anywhere near as conservative s Arsenal Football Club), disastrous in the modern game if your aim is to compete at the top.
The 92 million bid for Lemar has all sorts of rumours swirling around it. Some say the player pulled out. Others say we pulled out. Some say Liverpool were never interested at all and it was Lemar's representatives that were putting all the rumours out there, thus driving up the fee to a ridiculous level at the last minute to deter a (possibly and probably phantom) Liverpool bid. When you consider Liverpool did hang on to Coutinho then it's not outrageous to suggest Arsenal were spun a line and they bought it. So why bid 92 million at all? The question becomes, why not bid 50 or 60 million when the players was eager to come here? Why leave it until the very last minute when Lemar was getting ready for a major International match? I think the answer is fairly obvious. This was a cynical ploy to give the appearance we were ready to compete at the top, managed in such a way that failure was inevitable. Even if Lemar had said yes, there remained many ways to scupper the deal. So I write that off as a con-job, much like the pre-season Mbappe con-artistry. Yes, I do consider them to be that cynical. They are using a football club as a front for their activities so they need to keep the public relations in at least some working order.
Anyway, they can now set sail again in the sturdy ship. The wage bill is under control, no 300k for Alexis or Ozil now. The transfer window has replaced the lost revenues from failure to qualify for the CL. All that remains to be done is claim a victory for keeping 2 or the 3 players that can soon walk on a free and, oh look, Ivan just did that this morning. Well played. Some will believe it. Many perhaps. Enough, for sure, And the rest won't care and the good ship Kroenke will sail on.
The true intent of this club became clear when Wenger was awarded his contract. Nothing logical can explain that decision if our real focus as a club is football.
We aren't one of the top European clubs. We aren't in the realm of Real Madrid, Barcelona or Bayern Munich. And we don't have the spending power of City, Chelsea, United or PSGQuote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
PSG has spent £200 million on closing that gap because they've not got past the quarter finals once.
Jurgen Klopp is a better coach than Wenger, him winning the European cup is not on the horizon unless he joins one of the clubs I've mentioned.
Same with Diego Simeone, he might get there with the likes of Chelsea but there is only a certain level he can reach with Atletico Madrid (by far in fact he has massively over achieved)
Wenger has had the chance to do better in the competition for sure and he's wasted it.....we definitely probably should have won it in 03/04. It's unacceptable that we have been knocked out by the likes of PSV and Monaco.
But looking at it now, the Champions League is currently a prize for elite clubs and clubs whose spending is relative to the GDP of countries like Luxembourg.
It is to put it simply a closed shop
For a manager like Klopp just qualifying for it is a big achievement, does he have the ambition to win it? Yeah of course but it doesn't make it anymore likely to happen.
In the Q&A he was asked if he thought we could win the league and he said yes :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Özim
He's wrong, obviously, but he says he believes we can.
We most certainly do have the spending power of the elite clubs. Not on a sustained basis, but at least to the degree we could bring in some key players that we have needed for a long time. Perhaps the stadium did stunt our prospects in the transfer window, but it didn't seem to impact as harshly on the bank balance which has increased 500% since Kroenke arrived. And now, apparently, we have no money. They have been playing this trick season after season. Every Arsenal fan knows the old 2% away from greatness joke. A joke because we all know we are way more than 2% behind. But 2 key players, that could have made a difference in any number of transfer windows. There's a quarter of a billion quid in the bank and the nonsense about it not being available because it needs to go elsewhere can easily be dismissed because that balance keeps growing, season upon season. So where else does the cash need to go and why hasn't it gone there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
Lies, lies, lies, all lies. Success breeds success and we won't invest what's required to generate that initial spark. This is the reality we have seen. We'll spend when there's no competition and we mislead the fans when other clubs are taking the players we are all envious of. Well we've finally reached an inevitable destination, because even if we were willing to spend the money now I doubt the top players would want to come here. How sad and how convenient. Wasn't our fault guv, honest.
That's clearly where you're going wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
You've assumed there has to be a logical reason behind decision making
The reason for it was fear. Wenger was afraid because he has literally nothing going on in his life outside the club and the club are worried because everything has been done by Wenger for so long they can't conceive of anything being different
Kroenke gave Wenger the undiluted contract because it's easier for him to give Wenger the power and control he wants because he knows Wenger can't fuck up enough to have a detrimental effect on the club as an asset. So in Kroenkes case it's purely financial but there's hardly ever been any pretence of anything different.
Gazidis may be ambitious but he's too much of a gimp to do something about it or move on, and Wenger has an unshakeable belief in his own methodology.
Placing any value on what comes out of Wenger's gob is obviously a mistake, what with him being a lying bastard an all. I think we can see from this thread, take whatever Wenger says, believe the opposite. Yes, of course, he does want to win the CL, much like I want to leap over the moon. Words are easy. And no, of course the incompetent cock can't win the title, but etiquette demands he makes the claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
Well you are agreeing with me. Kroenke's sole focus is financial. When you don't give a fuck about the football beyond confirming you can continue to get arses on seats and keep the spreadsheet projections rolling then hiring Wenger again actually des become logical. You know he'll play your game and play it well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
You're right in the sense that Real Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern Munich have become part of the elite through past success that has given them the reputation that makes them marketable qualities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
You're absolutely right we quite probably could match PSG, City and Chelsea in the market for One season, where they have the advantage is that they can do it every season and can up the ante anytime they choose.
You seem to be convinced that I'm mitigating for Wengers failings, I'm not. His failure is even when it's possible to compete he has completely failed to do so....that no matter what the season the same failings, the same excuses etc
What I am saying is look at Spurs and their points total last season, that would have been enough for them to win the title in years gone by. But last season Chelsea won 30 games (unprecedented in a 38 game season) and teams like that can reach that kind of level whenever they wish by just pouring their money into transfers.
We can claim it's because Antonio Conte is a genius but his tactical tweaks were quite obvious, and a lot of it came down to figurative dick stroking of individuals who Mourinho managed to piss off.
And will Conte win the champions league this season? No probably not.
I'm merely saying that isn't Wengers focus, if it was hed clearly be doing it a lot better and more efficiently. For Kroenke it goes without saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
Whilst it's helpful to have a coach who knows what they are doing and are young and tactically aware and hungry. If you have a ridiculous amount of money it doesn't always matter and that's why city won the title with Manuel Pellegrini.
And sometimes it's unhelpful. Pep Guardiola is trying to get players to gel into a very specific system and way of playing, when sometimes with a club like city it's easier just to put out your strongest team and know they will be good enough to win no matter how the opposistion sets up.
It's possibly why Wenger might have done better with City, he'd have been unconstrained by tactical considerations. The only drawback would be his bizarre insistence on putting players out of position.
Dortmund and Atletico are smaller clubs than Arsenal. Klopp and Simeone haven't had decades to build squad after squad with consistent qualification like Arsene has. That's the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
Simeone has won the UEFA Cup with Atletico and reached the final of the CL twice along with a semi and quarter final place.
Also, bare in mind, these two coaches haven't had the sort of players Wenger has had. When we had Bergkamp, Henry, Vieira, Sol Campbell, Pires, Ljunberg, Wiltord, Gilberto....world cup winners and experienced internationals...he should have done better an especially when more teams were winning it.
Actually, the chav fans are starting to grumble because Abramovich has been running a much tighter ship of late and has been selling before he spends. The chav model has changed considerably in recent years. I think they banked close on 60 mill this time around just from moving on some of their loan legion. I might be wrong on that, I read it in passing and didn't dig into the details. But regardless, the chavs are methodically moving away from being a cash dumping outfit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
The gypos, until Pep's arrival and his unique approach to being a genius, were going the same way. These "doping" clubs (Utd aside because they are a one-off freak in terms of earning power) are all tending towards balancing the books. They all did it the right way around, invest, reap the rewards, create sustainability. We created sustainability at a time the league was going through an explosion of growth and with all the inflation that brings. So it never worked for us and our long term boasting is proving to be hollow. We wanted a risk averse model and if you won't take a risk then you won't see a reward. Just compare us to where we were back when Wenger first joined. Hiring the bloke in the first place was viewed as a massive risk. Signing Bergkamp for a club record fee, a player who has tailed off badly in Milan, signing Vieria, another player who was underachieving at the time. Look at how those risks paid off. But when Kroenke arrived, all change. But he couldn't do it alone and Wenger's boasts about conservatism have been the loudest of all.
I'm not saying you are trying to excuse Wenger, what I'm saying is you seem to still believe his focus is on the football. Well maybe it is, but only in the sense AFC needs to run a football club as the vehicle that delivers the earnings. In terms of running a competitive club, I can't see how Wenger has been interested in that in years, otherwise he'd have taken the steps necessary to compete. He hasn't taken any of them. He's done the reverse.
I agree completely. But that's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that the ECL is now a totally closed shop unless you spend so much you end up being the subject of FFP investigation. So you can be a poor coach like Wenger is or a very good coach like Klopp or Simeone....it's not going to make a huge amount of difference. The latter may find themselves getting to the latter stages more often but ultimately they will come up against sides that can wipe them off the face of the earth with the sheer talent in their side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
Wenger has no excuse for failing to win the competition in the past, but it's probably sensible to recognise that no matter what he does....that ship has sailed for him and probably for Arsenal for the foreseeable future (with or without him as manager)
Yeah and I'm saying that isn't deliberate on his part it's a result of being a poor coach who may possibly have been elite level twenty years ago, but is barely even average now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
You mention Chelsea and they are starting to struggle in terms of recruitment because of this tight ship running and are largely reliant on the accumulation of top quality talent over the last five years in order to make them competitive.
City and United will keep on buying and buying and buying. And for that reason we should recognise that even with a better coach the top prizes will be out of reach more often than not. It's just a case of being able to take the oportunity when either slips and with Wenger we just can't anymore.
Arsenal should be achieving what the likes of Dortmund, Atletico or even Leicester have
But it's also about recognising that if and when we do achieve these things it will be the outlier not the usual (like it was with them)
The problem with Wenger is knowing we will never be able to take the oportunity no matter what.
Agreed that the CL is a bit of a silly example. So far beyond us we'll need a faster than light breakthrough to get back in the same galaxy. The disgrace is how far behind we are in our own domestic league. A double digit deficit is normality and yet we still hear from them how we will be challenging based on nothing changing. Everton don't pop up each season with claims of a pending title triumph. Everyone would laugh if they did. But Wenger still does it and it's more than embarrassing this late in the same old game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
What this lot can't do is admit the truth, we have been steered into second tier status. The reverse of where these geniuses were supposed to be driving us. And all the excuses we have to listen to. Financial doping and economic downturns and finishing double digits behind Leicester when all our other rivals collapsed.
This debate started because Zim assumed as he does that Wenger saying he's not bothered by not winning the champions league is a sign of his lack of ambition. I think he's lying to mask the fact that he knows he's had his chance he fluffed it and he'll probably never get one again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
If Spurs and Liverpool are competitive in the league, if Leicester City can win the league we have absolutely no excuse of course.
I don't expect us to win the league that often, but I expect us to be competitive to the bitter end every season.
I'm not so sure about that. I still think there is a chance for an outsider and it's not as if the outsiders are all dropping out at the early stages. Looking at recent history, Atletico have made it to the final twice and Juve came close in 2015 with Dortmund in the final in 2014. Bayern winning in 2013 was the start of their European resurgence because they weren't spoken of as that much of a force outside of that year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
Winning the competition is hard but the amount of times Wenger has gone out at the group stage or first round of the knock out stage is pretty poor. Take Monaco from last year as an example. That teams been dismantled now but we can say that team had the next generation of French internationals playing for them. They made it to the semi finals. With the Golden Age French players at his disposal and more, Wenger could only make it as far as the QF on two occasions in the CL. With his best ever team he could never make it far in the comp. It's a really poor record and I've never seen a coach have chance after chance to rebuild a team after being dismantled.
The Ornstein post really sums us up as a club: naive, dithering & lacking ruthlessness.
One of the reasons why Chelsea sold Matic was that he had two years and left and refused to commit to signing a new contract -- I so wish we would have a similar policy instead of letting players and agents abuse us by stalling new contract offers and letting them wind into their final year. Either sign when there's two years left to go or you're sold - NO EXCEPTIONS! They way things are with us, we're constantly firefighting and next year it's going to get worst with the likes of Ramsey & Jack up.
By the way did anyone see our blundering chairman Sir Chips Keswick committing a PR blunder by admitting he preferred horse racing to football at the weekend when he was interviewed on TV? :lol:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/43834...-horse-racing/
Out of touch useless old fart. The fact that he, someone who likely doesn't even like football, is our chairman symbolises the shambles we're in.
Here's a novel idea ...... how about for board members we have people who are actually Arsenal fans who're in tune with the modern game instead of an absentee Yank with zero interest & his crony son and ancient elitist Tories in it for the freebies.
Maybe an ex player/legend like Pires, Keown, Dixon etc ..... heck for even some of his weird behaviour at times, I'd have Sol Campbell ahead of them.
The last time a club that didn't either have a massive European reputation or wasn't a club that was massively financially doped won the EC was arguably Inter in 2010.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
The days of plucky Liverpool (who even themselves are a club of huge European pedigree) or Porto winning the competition are a long way away.
Wenger has failed to make a dent in the competition, his failure to get past the last 16 most times whether we are playing PSV or Barcelona is totally unacceptable.
The better managers like Simeone and Klopp are chipping away and maybe in an outlier season coming close, but they aren't winning the thing.
Neither is Conte neither is Allegri. Yes I agree there is a difference, Wengers failure to win in the past is a reflection on him as a coach....there's isn't so much. It doesn't mean that if Zidane picks up the trophy again or Unai Emery does it with PSG they are better than them.
It's just that the ECL is ultimately for the likes of Real Madrid and PSG (and maybe City)
PSG and Man City? Neither have made it to the final. City made it to the semi final once since striking oil. You might be confusing the dominance of the two Spanish giants. Look at the finals over the last 5 seasons. Juve have made it to the final twice, Atletico twice and Dortmund has one. These aren't super rich teams. I'd agree with your point if it's been a seasons of Barca v Real v Man City v PSG finals on rotation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
No but the only club to have won the title other than the big reputation European teams since 2010 is ChelseaQuote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
Granted it's speculative but City and PSG will do whatever it takes to break into that select elite.
The rest might threaten intermittently but will be on the outside looking in
If City and PSG fail to make the breakthrough that makes the ECL an even more elite competition
Consider this for a minute:
Of all the teams Kroenke owns, we are far and away the most successful when it comes to the performance of the team.
We aren't the first team he has taken from elite to mediocrity and if his other ventures are any sort of guide, we have a lot further to fall.
Wenger :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Niall Quinn
:run:
At least his other teams can't get relegated LMAO
Chelsea won the Champs league in 2012. Then Bayern in 2013, Real 2014, Barca 2015 and then Real back to back for 2016 and 2017.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
It's really just the two Spanish giants dominating. Nobody else. I wouldn't say it's closed door otherwise we'd see the same pattern with the bigger teams crushing the smaller each year. That's not the case.
Last season Juve beat Barca on their way to the final. In 2015 they kicked Real Madrid out.
Monaco knocked out Man City last season.
Atletico knocked out both Bayern and Barca in 2016 to get to the final. They took out Chelsea and Barca to make the final in 2014.
Dortmund knocked out Barca to make the final against Bayern.
You just wouldn't see these results if it were a closed door. It would be would always be a case of the richest and biggest teams in making it to the semis. Barca and Real having half of the worlds best players split between them is why they're so dominant. Freaks of football.
You can disagree as much as you like
Juventus, Atletico Madrid and Dortmund have all reached the final since 2009. All have knocked out big clubs in doing so.
None of them have won it, and this is what matters.
The two most elite clubs in Europe by some way are as you say Real Madrid and Barcelona. They have six of the last nine CL trophies between them, two of the three other clubs that won it in that period are Bayern Munich another club with historically massive reputation and Chelsea an oligarch club. If that's not a closed shop I don't know what is.
Barcelona have not done a good job of replenishing their ageing stars so that makes it even more elite going forward. And it's possible that PSG's 200 million on Neymar might make them close. And if you check the betting prices for the CL you will probably find Real and PSG with the shortest odds.
Newcastle, Aston Villa, Norwich, Blackburn all pushed United for the title in the 90s. Of the first five titles United won four, thus it was dominated by United. The same way the two Spanish Giants have dominated the champions league in the past decade.
No I can't :sulk:Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
If it were that much of a closed shop, we'd see a pecking order of richest all getting to the later stages and the poorest going out a lot earlier. Madrid and Barca are have half of the worlds best players spread between them. Ronaldo and Messi are freaks of nature. We're already seeing the Barca dominance fall apart and it's just a matter of time before we see the same with Real Madrid. Who knows what team will win it next but I wouldn't say it's a competition where you can just splash millions and win. City and PSG are examples. Same goes for Chelsea. They may win won but I can't see many others doing what we've seen under this Messi/Ronaldo era.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
Sigh....ok let me explain this using a different sportQuote:
Originally Posted by Delusions of Grandeur
Tennis in terms of the grand slams is largely a closed shop
There isn't always a pecking order as to who gets to the business end of the tournaments
Of the previous 59 grand slam tournaments played between 2003 and now, 47 have been won by Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic.
Of the eight Wimbledon titles Federer won, three times he played Andy Roddick in the final. In 2009 Roddick beat better players than himself to get to the final but he still ultimately came up short.
Murray has reached Five Australian open finals, on four of those occasions he has lost to Djokovic
Nadal between 2005 and 2017 has won ten of thirteen Roland Garros titles, Federer got to three consecutive finals against Nadal and came no closer to beating Nadal during those three games. But as an elite player he was able to profit in 2009 when an out of sorts Nadal was beaten in the fourth round by Robin Soderling who then reached the final only to be trounced by Federer.
Since 2003, Wimbledon has been won by Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray....the four players who have occupied the top four spots in the ATP rankings during that time. Phillipousis, Berdych, Raonic and Cilic have reached the finals in that time.
An unknown Marcos Baghdatis beat many, many higher seeds to reach the Aussie Open final in 2006, he even gave Federer a game for the first set and a bit but Federer triumphed in four seats.
So taking the other sport as an example, it doesn't end up with a structured pecking order. But with the exception of the odd outlier it tends to result in the cream rising to the top. Whether they end up beating each other or some plucky challenger.
Plus with the CL you have had Bayern and Real and Barca feature in the semi finals numerous times From 2009 to now Barca have been in five, Real in seven and Bayern in six
Dunno if anyone has seen or posted this yet. https://www.theguardian.com/football...s-angeles-rams