Best ever runners up?

[Guest]

So Liverpool could get 97 points and still not win the league. In terms of points no runner up has come close. So are they they best ever runners up if they don't win it? Are city the best if they don't. Who do you think are the best ever premier League runners up? Can do further back if you like

 

[Cicero]

3 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

So Liverpool could get 97 points and still not win the league. In terms of points no runner up has come close. So are they they best ever runners up if they don't win it? Are city the best if they don't. Who do you think are the best ever premier League runners up? Can do further back if you like

 

Points wise yes. Hard to compare different eras. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Every year we've been runners up, that's who the best runners up were.

[Smiley Culture]

We’ve had exciting title races in the past but in terms of quality of sides that have finisher runners up, I can’t see past the current Liverpool side. 

Arsenal around 1998-03, when they, largely, finished second in the Premier League are probably as close as you’re going to get, for me. 

 

[Mel81x+]

United when they lost to City on the last day of that season as well. They pushed them till the very end and thats putting points aside as well.

[Stan]

Whoever ends up 2nd this season, by a country mile. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Smiley Culture said:

We’ve had exciting title races in the past but in terms of quality of sides that have finisher runners up, I can’t see past the current Liverpool side. 

Arsenal around 1998-03, when they, largely, finished second in the Premier League are probably as close as you’re going to get, for me. 

 

I think most of their points totals were in the 70s though. We only finished a point behind the utd treble winning side but again the points total was low. I think the utd side that finished level with 89 points is a good shout

[RandoEFC+]

If Liverpool do finish 2nd they'll be hailed as the best runners up of all time without a doubt, and I'm not saying they shouldn't.

If City finish 2nd on 96 points, a lot less of a big deal will be made about how unlucky they were not to win the title even though in this season alone it's basically the same level of "can you believe we got 96/97 points and didn't win the league, that's so unlucky" in both scenarios.

It's not about any media favouritism or anything, I just think that because this City side won the title last season and other domestic trophies over the past few years, they'll never be remembered as "that City side who got 96 points and missed out on the title", they'll get remembered for their achievements, whereas if this Liverpool team don't win the league or Champions League this season or soon after to give the history books something else to remember them by, they will always be "the best team to finish 2nd in Premier League history".

I can't remember enough other title races to really compare but looking at the points then yes whoever finishes 2nd probably will be the best team to ever not win the league. My wider point is that this will only be relevant for more than 5 minutes if it's Liverpool because there's a chance that this nearest of misses could be one of the defining moments of the Klopp era, whereas if it's City it doesn't matter as much in the wider scheme of things beyond this one season. 

[Cicero]

Of all time? You think this Liverpool side would of bested the runners up in Arsenal 2000-2005 or Chelsea/United 2005-2010? 

[Spike]

Well... I know this is the English forum but Bayer Leverkusen are the runners-up.

[JoshBRFC+]

11 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Of all time? You think this Liverpool side would of bested the runners up in Arsenal 2000-2005 or Chelsea/United 2005-2010? 

None of those teams had the goat, VVD. 

 

[Cicero]

3 minutes ago, JOSHBRFC said:

None of those teams had the goat, VVD. 

 

Terry, Rio, and Adams aren’t worthy to shine his boots 

[Mel81x+]

6 hours ago, Spike said:

Well... I know this is the English forum but Bayer Leverkusen are the runners-up.

The early 2000s Bayer?

[Smiley Culture]

7 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

I think most of their points totals were in the 70s though. We only finished a point behind the utd treble winning side but again the points total was low. I think the utd side that finished level with 89 points is a good shout

You don’t work out how good a side were based solely on points gained. 

[Mel81x+]

6 minutes ago, Smiley Culture said:

You don’t work out how good a side were based solely on points gained. 

This is true and I think its more important to not just look at the last day but perhaps the more pivotal points in the season where points were dropped/gained as well. I suppose a thread on the worst runners up teams would probably generate a wider range of teams to pick from as there have been some teams that looked good and then just capitulated as the season got to the business end of things.

[Inverted]

3 hours ago, Mel81x said:

The early 2000s Bayer?

They are the only team to complete the runners-up Treble as far as I know. 

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Smiley Culture said:

You don’t work out how good a side were based solely on points gained. 

Yeah I know. But even if you think the league is better or worse now it's unlikely that a team that got 79 points will be better than a team that got 97 if Liverpool do.

[Cicero]

11 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Yeah I know. But even if you think the league is better or worse now it's unlikely that a team that got 79 points will be better than a team that got 97 if Liverpool do.

Would you say this Liverpool side is better than your 2003 Arsenal side?

I'd say the strength of the league says everything. For example, we finished on 93 points the 2017 season. Higher than our 2005 and 2006 league winning teams. Yet look at the difference in quality. 

 

 

 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Would you say this Liverpool side is better than your 2003 Arsenal side?

I'd say the strength of the league says everything. For example, we finished on 93 points the 2017 season. Higher than our 2005 and 2006 league winning teams. Yet look at the difference in quality. 

2017 (93 points)

2005 & 2006 (91 points)

 

I don't know. Maybe not man for man but strength in depth possibly. Also mentally they seem stronger. Couldn't see that 2003 side getting 90 plus points.

Also 2005 you got 95 points