Best Sides To Have Played in the Premier League

[Danny]

A lot of discussion recently about this Liverpool side and how they rank as one of the best sides in the Premier League...my thought is that a mini generation of sorts for a team lasts about 3-4 seasons before you have to start making fairly large changes, and this current Klopp side is in it's 4th season and will most likely see fairly large changes in the Summer, this discussion is slightly unfair on Liverpool as the season hasn't ended and they may well win another title. I've listed the main generations below but I am missing United's Cantona years mainly because I was too young to pay attention so maybe @DeadLinesman would like to rank those sides in?

Anyway for me there are two clear leaders in this and I don't think they're touched by any other generation and that's United's treble winning side that also won 3 league titles in a row and the peak Ronaldo years where United won 3 in a row again and also the Champions League. I think they're untouchable tbh, any side to win 3 titles in a row and do a Champions League and Premier League double in one season automatically gets chucked up as the elite and everyone else after comes down to debate, even though the treble winning side won a treble which was unheard of and still hasn't been achieved, I'd rank the Ronaldo years side as the best personally.

 

Arsenal: 01/02 - 03-04

01/02: League (87 pts) & FA Cup

02/03:  FA Cup (78 pts)

03/04: League (90 pts) (Invincible)

04/05: FA Cup (83 pts)

x3 golden boot winner in Thierry Henry

 

Chelsea: 04/05 - 07/08

04/05: League (95 pts) & League Cup

05/06: League (91 pts)

06/07: Carling Cup (83 pts)

07/08: Nothinggggg (85 pts)

x1 golden boot winner in Didier Drogba.

 

Man City: 16/17 - 19/20

16/17: (78 pts)

17/18: League (100 pts) & League Cup

18/19: League (98 pts) & League Cup & FA Cup

19/20: League Cup (81 pts)

 

Liverpool: 17/18 - 19/20

17/18: Champions League finalists (75pts)

18/19: Champions League (97 pts)

19/20: League (99 pts)

x3 golden boot winners in Salah, and then joint Mane and Salah.

It's difficult to rank these, I loved watching the early Arsenal sides and Thierry Henry is still the best player to have played in the Premier League imo. They were a powerhouse of a team, I don't think in terms of points tallies that their peak ever really matched Man City's and Liverpool's but they've done something Liverpool haven't and that's continuously win multiple items of silverware. I think the invincible season is something to be proud of as an Arsenal fan but if you want to win the league and go down as the greatest domestic side, do you go unbeaten or set a points record? Man City have set the points record and then won every domestic competition in the following season, arguably, in the Premier League alone, the greatest side to have played. The League Cup is considered a major trophy but I don't think anyone actually views it as one, definitely not alongside the FA Cup. I think this Man City side have had a much larger peak than that Arsenal side, but not had the consistency in winning the league and FA Cup as much as they did over a 4 year period.

Liverpool have two annoying issues in this, the first is as I said this is their 4th season of this generation of players, even though City look like favourites to win it atm they could go on and win the league again, or the FA Cup, Champions League whatever. The second issue is that they achieved 97 points in a season and didn't win the league. That is mental, of any of the teams listed only one of them achieved more than 97s points and that was City in both league title wins, and if they'd won two league titles I'd probably have them higher than I have...but regardless of points accrued, you've got to beat the teams you're competing with and they didn't. But it is debatable and close.

Compared to Liverpool, I think this City side have been more consistent in winning silverware even if they haven't won the Champions League, the league is your bread and butter when talking about those major competitions and winning the Premier League is a bigger achievement than the Champions League imo, even if the Champions League is viewed with more glitz and glamour these days.

Chelsea under Jose brought in this new level of shithousery that took the country by storm, and they won both of the back to back titles by around Christmas which at the time wasn't exactly common. But then after that they only won two League Cup's which is good to win in a season, winning a League Cup is a good marker to set for teams that eventually go on to storm the league, but in of itself it's not a lot to shout about.

Overall I think you could make a different argument for a club's individual season against each other, and this list may change based on my mind changing  But for a period of 3-4 years which imo is generally how long one group of players will play alongside eachother, I would rank them, currently, as follows:

1. Man Utd 06-09

2. Man Utd 98-01

--------------------------------------

3. Arsenal 01-04 

4. Man City 17-19

5. Chelsea 04-08

6. Liverpool 17-20

7. ----------------------- (put the Cantona years in somewhere you coffin dodgers )

[Happy Blue]

2018 City is the best team to ever play in the Premier League and would beat all the rest 

[DeadLinesman]

I’d say the 92-94 side is third place behind 06-09.

98-01 is the best team United have ever produced.

[Happy Blue]

1 minute ago, DeadLinesman said:

I’d say the 92-94 side is third place behind 06-09.

98-01 is the best team United have ever produced.

Phil Foden would DESTROY that United team 

[DeadLinesman]

@Happy Blue the best teams have to worry about the Champions League mate, whereas you concentrate on the league because you bottle it every single year 

[Cicero]

@Danny We won the FA Cup as well in 2006/07

 

Personally, the United 98/99 side tops it. The mentality of that team to grind out and win the treble is nothing short of extraordinary. This is all personal preference. 

 

1. 99 United team. 

2. 2006-2009 United & 2004-2008 Chelsea (these were too close to call)

3. 2002-2004 Arsenal 

4. 2017-2019 Man City 

5. 2018-2020 Liverpool. 

[Happy Blue]

Just now, DeadLinesman said:

@Happy Blue the best teams have to worry about the Champions League mate, whereas you concentrate on the league because you bottle it every single year 

CL is mostly down to luck though as Chelsea proved winning it from mid table in the Premier League, shit teams have won it   ..the FA Cup is the hardest cup to win because you are up against hundreds of English teams who play in competitive leagues not 2 team leagues like the rest of Europe which keeps them fresh for the CL when they have won the league by Christmas

[Danny]

6 minutes ago, Cicero said:

@Danny We won the FA Cup as well in 2006/07

 

Personally, the United 98/99 side tops it. The mentality of that team to grind out and win the treble is nothing short of extraordinary. This is all personal preference. 

 

1. 99 United team. 

2. 2006-2009 United & 2004-2008 Chelsea (these were too close to call)

3. 2002-2004 Arsenal 

4. 2017-2019 Man City 

5. 2018-2020 Liverpool. 

I'm just creating discussion  But yeah of course it was an FA Cup winning side, though I wouldn't move it any higher still

[DeadLinesman]

4 minutes ago, Happy Blue said:

CL is mostly down to luck though as Chelsea proved winning it from mid table in the Premier League, shit teams have won it   ..the FA Cup is the hardest cup to win because you are up against hundreds of English teams who play in competitive leagues not 2 team leagues like the rest of Europe which keeps them fresh for the CL when they have won the league by Christmas

Well you draw league 2 teams in every round of the Fa Cup so of course it’s easy to win 

[Danny]

12 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

I’d say the 92-94 side is third place behind 06-09.

98-01 is the best team United have ever produced.

My memory of the treble winning side is a side who played great football and had great players, big players...but it definitely didn't have a Ronaldo in it, and you'd put Rooney into that team too wouldn't you? My memory of the Champions League win is that Bayern were actually the favourites whereas your win you were marked as one of the best sides in the competition.

[Cicero]

2 minutes ago, Danny said:

I'm just creating discussion  But yeah of course it was an FA Cup winning side, though I wouldn't move it any higher still

I'm merely pointing out you left it out on your list 

[Danny]

Just now, Cicero said:

I'm merely pointing out you left it out on your list 

I know I know, just letting everyone else know before a smart arse points out something else I missed out 

[Happy Blue]

2018 City by a mile, you just cant argue with it! 

[DeadLinesman]

6 minutes ago, Danny said:

My memory of the treble winning side is a side who played great football and had great players, big players...but it definitely didn't have a Ronaldo in it, and you'd put Rooney into that team too wouldn't you? My memory of the Champions League win is that Bayern were actually the favourites whereas your win you were marked as one of the best sides in the competition.

You didn’t need a Ronald or a Rooney. We had the best quartet in league history strictly speaking from a striker point of view. Cole and Yorke were almost telepathic that season. Solksjaer and Sheringham were also class. 
 

Then you had Beckham, Giggs, Keane and Scholes on midfield. 
 

Irwin, Neville, Stam at the back with Berg and Johnsen deputising. 
 

Then Schmeichel.

 

My god that was a glorious team.

[MUFC]

2006-2009 was Uniteds best side for me. They were more balanced in my opinion.

I think the side Jose had in his first stink at Chelsea, without doubt would be toughest to beat. Simply because breaking them down was really tough. The Klopp Liverpool sides, Peps City, the best united and Wenger sides. Out of them all, who would be better at breaking down Joses Chelsea which has Essien and Makele proteting a strong defence?

[UNORTHODOX]

Pains me to say it because during this time i was a young teenager just dreaming about Liverpool having a team like that Man United 2006-2009. I think they were the best and were unlucky to come up against that incredible Barca side in Europe.

[Stan]

Trying to work out the sheer ignorance of this place.

[Danny]

Just now, DeadLinesman said:

You didn’t need a Ronald or a Rooney. We had the best quartet in league history strictly speaking from a striker point of view. Cole and Yorke were almost telepathic that season. Solksjaer and Sheringham were also class. 
 

Then you had Beckham, Giggs, Keane and Scholes on midfield. 
 

Irwin, Neville, Stam at the back with Berg and Johnsen deputising. 
 

Then Schmeichel.

 

My god that was a glorious team.

No one needs a Ronald mate (unless you're talking Koeman or de Boer), but Ronaldo would still have walked straight into that team (obviously different time periods with different advancements in sport science so I don't want to go into direct comparisons too much) and I think Rooney does too. I completely agree that you had what was probably the most complete striker set-up, the Rooney/Ronaldo/Tevez (later Berbatov) I think had a higher peak in terms of the two of the better players of both groups but falls off around the Tevez/Berbatov mark. But the Ferdinand/Vidic partnership was probably a greater partnership than Stam and Berg/Johnsen even if individually you'd have Stam in over one of Ferdinand or Vidic? I dunno, obviously you know more than me and I think away from Rooney/Ronaldo the treble side has better individuals throughout their side, at their peak too, but I think the 08 side just edges it because they have Ronaldo and Rooney on top of what is already a great side with the likes of VDS, Evra, Ferdinand, Vidic, Scholes, an underrated Carrick, Tevez, Berbatov...

But then you make a fair point in that of the two teams, away from trying to put Rooney and Ronaldo into the treble winning side, the only other players who would make it in there are one of Ferdinand/Vidic (probably Ferdinand in terms of a balanced partnership with Stam). Think I need to watch back those years, any excuse to watch David Beckham in his prime too 

[Cicero]

14 minutes ago, MUFC said:

2006-2009 was Uniteds best side for me. They were more balanced in my opinion.

I think the side Jose had in his first stink at Chelsea, without doubt would be toughest to beat. Simply because breaking them down was really tough. The Klopp Liverpool sides, Peps City, the best united and Wenger sides. Out of them all, who would be better at breaking down Joses Chelsea which has Essien and Makele proteting a strong defence?

Genuinely a big "what if" had Mourinho stayed with us in 2008. The team made it to two finals and lost the premiership on the last day. Team basically managed themselves. 

[Panna King]

40 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

I’d say the 92-94 side is third place behind 06-09.

98-01 is the best team United have ever produced.

That doesn't count as they were racist back then 

[Danny]

8 minutes ago, Stan said:

Trying to work out the sheer ignorance of this place.

You'd have to go back 21 seasons to find a side win the league with less or equal points than you did that season and that team managed to win two other major competitons with it 

[Stan]

3 minutes ago, Danny said:

You'd have to go back 21 seasons to find a side win the league with less or equal points than you did that season and that team managed to win two other major competitons with it 

Nah not taking part in this sham. Disgusting. 

[Azeem]

15 minutes ago, Stan said:

Trying to work out the sheer ignorance of this place.

That was just an extra long purple patch

[DeadLinesman]

11 minutes ago, Danny said:

No one needs a Ronald mate (unless you're talking Koeman or de Boer), but Ronaldo would still have walked straight into that team (obviously different time periods with different advancements in sport science so I don't want to go into direct comparisons too much) and I think Rooney does too. I completely agree that you had what was probably the most complete striker set-up, the Rooney/Ronaldo/Tevez (later Berbatov) I think had a higher peak in terms of the two of the better players of both groups but falls off around the Tevez/Berbatov mark. But the Ferdinand/Vidic partnership was probably a greater partnership than Stam and Berg/Johnsen even if individually you'd have Stam in over one of Ferdinand or Vidic? I dunno, obviously you know more than me and I think away from Rooney/Ronaldo the treble side has better individuals throughout their side, at their peak too, but I think the 08 side just edges it because they have Ronaldo and Rooney on top of what is already a great side with the likes of VDS, Evra, Ferdinand, Vidic, Scholes, an underrated Carrick, Tevez, Berbatov...

But then you make a fair point in that of the two teams, away from trying to put Rooney and Ronaldo into the treble winning side, the only other players who would make it in there are one of Ferdinand/Vidic (probably Ferdinand in terms of a balanced partnership with Stam). Think I need to watch back those years, any excuse to watch David Beckham in his prime too 

I just cant find any weakness in that 98/01 team, whereas there were a few gaps in midfield quality wise during the 06/09 era. Both excellent teams, but my obvious bias from memory and fondness is abundant to be fair.

[Stan]

2 minutes ago, McAzeem said:

That was just an extra long purple patch

Show some respect.