I've really tried to resist stating the facts, but... Championships since Apertura/Clausura came into existance: 1991-Apertura 1993-Apertura 1994-Apertura 1996-Apertura 1997-Clausura 1997-Apertura 1999-Apertura 2000-Clausura 2002-Clausura 2003-Clausura 1996-Copa Libertadores 1997-Supercopa Yes, this year's Libertadores (and last year against Gremio) weren't fun. But, let's get real, they've done damn well over the last decade. As far as this campaign is concerned, it's been painful so far, but there have been loads of changes made in the club. Let's give Pelligrini a few more weeks before we hang him. Is that okay with you? I'm interested to see if the delay in the season is beneficial to the club getting its act together. The Copa Sudiamericana victory over Independiente was splendid. By the way...FREE ARIEL ORTEGA!
Manchester United and Juventus great domestically perennial underperformers when the stakes are highest
Are you kidding! River campeon de Argentina Clausura 2003! We lost to America de Cali yes but thats because we were battling both championships. We still made the quarters. We reload with talent every year and bring up some of the best players in the world. This apertura we are struggling but what can you do when you have an idiot coach who can't win with the most talented team. Overrated NO! underacheiving YES! Newcastle is overrated and we're seeing it this year! Arsenal seems overrated when Inter who can't score aganist anyone puts three in. Lazio is overrated and so is Auxerre. The list could go on and on!
Most English Teams, ManUtd, Liverpool, Newcastle, Leeds United, Arsenal etc. And when River lost to Cali in Copa Libertadores, didnt they get like 3 players sent off? I think they finished with liek 8 players.
We are overrated by the media. However as a long suffering Newcastle fan we know that we will never win anything EVER. AGAIN.
United and Barcelona are pretty peerless in the 'over-rated underachivers' stakes. Although Barca's position in those stakes dwarfs United. Barcelona are a truly farcial outfit. They have one less European Cup than Nottingham Forest for Chrissakes! This despite a stream of world-class players throughout their history. Think what Cloughie could have done if he had had the likes of Cruyff or Schuster at the City ground.
Agreed, Barca got my vote too, despite a fan of theirs laughin at it on this thread - but deep down he knows i'm right cos he never proved me wrong. Barcelona, for all the players they've had, all the support they have, for the size of the club have been pisspoor - 1 European Cup says it all.
All of La Liga barring Madrid. They have some great clubs and players, but apart from Madrid have won virtually nothing at all.
Well if you're just talking about the Champion's League/Cup than yes I would agree (and it seems that's all that is taken into account here). But if you include all of the European competitions like the Fairs/Uefa Cup and the defunct CWC then it is a totally false premise. Don't let your bias show too much alright? EDIT: So if you are just talking about the European Cup (Champion's League/Cup) then let's look at this statistically. Italy and Spain have 10 Cups, England have 9. You say barring Madrid, fair enough then. The most diverse league would have to be England, they have had 4 different winners. Italy have 3 and Spain have 2 (to add some others, Portugal have 2, Germany and Holland 3). Now let's make this more recent. Since the 90/91 season Spain have 4 Cups, Italy 3, Germany 2, and England 1. In that span Spain, Italy, and Germany have had 2 different clubs win the European Cup. So what does this mean? Well Jawz says throw out Madrid and the rest of La Liga is overrated. Okay throw out both Madrid and Barcelona from La Liga, throw out Milan and Juve from Serie A, throw out Bayern and Dortmund from Germany, and throw out Man Utd from England. Really it looks pretty similar to me don't you think?
Sarcasm aside, I recognize we have been irregualr in la Liga but we havent been that bad in Europe, I mean a 4 years span without titles, yes, but we have been above average, and even achieving records like the record winning streak last season in UCL.
I'd have to say the New York Yankees because all they do is buy their talent...oh wait...wrong sport! Hmmm. Guess I'll have to go with Manchester United.
as a spurs fan, i'm not about to criticize chelsea's relatively strong trophy haul over the last 5+ years. but i'm still not sure i understand why this is laughable. 'underachieving' and being 'overrated' go hand-in-hand.
How can any team or club be thought of as "overrated" if they win a majority of titles? Money doesn't play soccer or baseball. You have to know what the hell you're doing with it. Plenty of organizations shell out the bucks and fall on their faces. Ever hear of the New York Rangers?
Auxerre overrated? I dont' think so. For the most part no one seems to pick them to win the CL or things like that. They have a reputation for being a club that produces great talent. As for Newcastle, they've had a very similar start last year and still ended up at 3rd. They're thin but don't underrate the powers of Sir Bobby!
But if you are going to look at this statistically, you would have note that England were banned for 5 or 6 years at the end of the 80's when Liverpool probably would have won another 1 or 2.
Um......No, actually i don't think so. Underachieving = should have done better. Overrated = can't do better. There is a difference.