The greatest football teams ever (at club level)

[Mark]

Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).

I think these are the top 3:

1 Real Madrid 1956-60
2 AC Milan 1988-96
3 Independiente 1972-75

I don’t really know what order the rest should be put in. Here’s a list of the other main candidates.

Santos 1962-63
Internazionale 1964-66
Estudiantes de La Plata 1968-71
Ajax 1971-73
Bayern Munchen 1974-76
Boca Juniors 1977-79
Sao Paulo 1992-94
Barcelona 2009-11
Real Madrid 2014-18
Penarol 1960-62

And an honourable mention to Velez Sarsfield 1994. They beat the Sao Paulo team of 1992-94 in the final of the Copa Libertadores and then beat AC Milan’s team of 1988-96 to win the World Club Championship. They must have been a very good team. Without any other international titles, I don’t think they won enough to earn a place in the top 10 of all time though.

Let’s see if we can work together to compile a Top 10.

How would you rate these teams?

[Al Kamista]

Are English teams excluded from this analysis?

Don't see a single one, which is really odd because England is the second most successful country in European competition, which in itself is the highest level played in world football. Or is it your self-proclaimed personal vendetta against England, which renders this a not very objective analysis.

[MH]

On 2021-10-07 01:59, Mark wrote:
> Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).

Do you mean best teams (groups of more or less stable players over a
certain time window) or clubs (success over a certain time window, in
spite of many changes in playing personnel ?

In any case, your suggestions below are flawed because the length of the
window is so variable. Why allow Santos for one year in the same
conversation as Milan for 8 years ?

The question needs to be defined better. If you are talking about a
single year, teams like Celtic 1966-67 and Man United 1998-99 belong in
the conversation along with quite a few others.

You could probably find an 8 year window when Liverpool won more than
Milan did in the period you described below. (eg. 1976-1984), if you
allow such a long window.

If it is the "team" (group of consistent players that form a more or
less cohesive unit), 8 years is too long. FOr example the 1976-77
Liverpool side would really only have had Phil Neal in common with the
1983-84 side.

So you really need to better define your question. It could be phrased
as most successful clubs over a 5,4, or 3 year window, for example.
Success in strong domestic leagues should weigh about as much as winning
knockout international cups. Domestic cups could be the tie-breakers.

[Blueshirt]

On 07/10/2021 15:57, Al Kamista wrote:
> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 3:59:51 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
>> Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
>>
>> I think these are the top 3:
>>
>> 1 Real Madrid 1956-60
>> 2 AC Milan 1988-96
>> 3 Independiente 1972-75
>>

>> [ Snip ]

>>
>> How would you rate these teams?
>
> Are English teams excluded from this analysis?

Of course they are! ;-)

I thought most people here knew of the anti-English bias in some
quarters of RSS. Some of it deserved, some of it not.

> Don't see a single one, which is really odd because England is the second most successful country in European competition, which in itself is the highest level played in world football. Or is it your self-proclaimed personal vendetta against England, which renders this a not very objective analysis.
>

Liverpool FC of the Bob Paisley era (1974-1984) would surely rank in any
list of "greatest teams". Liverpool dominated European football during
that era: Three European Cups, two UEFA Cups and a Cup-Winners Cup. If
they were not one of the best football sides ever then I don't know who
would fit the criteria.

[MH]

On 2021-10-07 16:17, Blueshirt wrote:
> On 07/10/2021 15:57, Al Kamista wrote:
>> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 3:59:51 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
>>> Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the
>>> international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
>>>
>>> I think these are the top 3:
>>>
>>> 1 Real Madrid 1956-60
>>> 2 AC Milan 1988-96
>>> 3 Independiente 1972-75
>>>
>>> [ Snip ]
>>>
>>> How would you rate these teams?
>>
>> Are English teams excluded from this analysis?
>
> Of course they are! ;-)
>
> I thought most people here knew of the anti-English bias in some
> quarters of RSS. Some of it deserved, some of it not.
>
>> Don't see a single one, which is really odd because England is the
>> second most successful country in European competition, which in
>> itself is the highest level played in world football. Or is it your
>> self-proclaimed personal vendetta against England, which renders this
>> a not very objective analysis.
>>
>
> Liverpool FC of the Bob Paisley era (1974-1984) would surely rank in any
> list of "greatest teams". Liverpool dominated European football during
> that era: Three European Cups, two UEFA Cups

Only one under Paisley.

and a Cup-Winners Cup.

Nope, Liverpool never won the CWC. Maybe you are confusing the European
Super Cup.

If
> they were not one of the best football sides ever then I don't know who
> would fit the criteria.

Certainly if you take only August 1975 to May 1981 as a window (shorter
than some of the ones Mark specifies), you come to 4 leagues title in 6
years, plus 3 European cups, 1 UEFA cup, and 1 league cup. Reasonable
continuity in the team too, (Clemence, Neal, Thompson, Kennedy throughout)

[Blueshirt]

On 08/10/2021 01:09, MH wrote:
> On 2021-10-07 16:17, Blueshirt wrote:
>> On 07/10/2021 15:57, Al Kamista wrote:
>>
>>> Don't see a single one, which is really odd because England is the
>>> second most successful country in European competition, which in
>>> itself is the highest level played in world football. Or is it your
>>> self-proclaimed personal vendetta against England, which renders this
>>> a not very objective analysis.
>>
>> Liverpool FC of the Bob Paisley era (1974-1984) would surely rank in
>> any list of "greatest teams". Liverpool dominated European football
>> during that era: Three European Cups, two UEFA Cups
>
> Only one under Paisley.

Nope!

Liverpool FC won three European Cups with Bob Paisley. In fact, Bob
Paisley was the first manager to win the European Cup three times.

> and a Cup-Winners Cup.
>
> Nope, Liverpool never won the CWC.  Maybe you are confusing the European
> Super Cup.

Yes, I did mean the Super Cup.

>> If they were not one of the best football sides ever then I don't know
>> who would fit the criteria.
>
> Certainly if you take only August 1975 to  May 1981 as a window (shorter
> than some of the ones Mark specifies),  you come to 4 leagues title in 6
> years, plus 3 European cups, 1 UEFA cup, and 1 league cup.  Reasonable
> continuity in the team too,  (Clemence, Neal, Thompson, Kennedy throughout)

Bob Paisley won six league titles and the three European Cups in his
nine seasons in charge of Liverpool FC.

[MH]

On 2021-10-08 04:03, Blueshirt wrote:
> On 08/10/2021 01:09, MH wrote:
>> On 2021-10-07 16:17, Blueshirt wrote:
>>> On 07/10/2021 15:57, Al Kamista wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don't see a single one, which is really odd because England is the
>>>> second most successful country in European competition, which in
>>>> itself is the highest level played in world football. Or is it your
>>>> self-proclaimed personal vendetta against England, which renders
>>>> this a not very objective analysis.
>>>
>>> Liverpool FC of the Bob Paisley era (1974-1984) would surely rank in
>>> any list of "greatest teams". Liverpool dominated European football
>>> during that era: Three European Cups, two UEFA Cups
>>
>> Only one under Paisley.
>
> Nope!
>
> Liverpool FC won three European Cups with Bob Paisley.

Please read again. I said and meant only one UEFA cup under Paisley.
The first was under Shankly. I know they won three European cups - see
below.

In fact, Bob
> Paisley was the first manager to win the European Cup three times.
>
>> and a Cup-Winners Cup.
>>
>> Nope, Liverpool never won the CWC.  Maybe you are confusing the
>> European Super Cup.
>
> Yes, I did mean the Super Cup.
>
>>> If they were not one of the best football sides ever then I don't
>>> know who would fit the criteria.
>>
>> Certainly if you take only August 1975 to  May 1981 as a window
>> (shorter than some of the ones Mark specifies),  you come to 4 leagues
>> title in 6 years, plus 3 European cups, 1 UEFA cup, and 1 league cup.
>> Reasonable continuity in the team too,  (Clemence, Neal, Thompson,
>> Kennedy throughout)
>
> Bob Paisley won six league titles and the three European Cups in his
> nine seasons in charge of Liverpool FC.

For sure. But again, the question here is what Mark originally meant by
team/side (and why he limited it to one season for some, and 8 for
others). Turnover in 9 seasons is such that you could argue it is not
really the same team. Although assuring continuity and replacing
players with ones who fit in and do the job as well or better than the
previous ones is a great accomplishment in and of itself, I think a lot
of people, when they talk of a great "side" are implying a nucleus of
players that remains fairly constant.

Anyway, the lack of inclusion of late 70s/early 80s Liverpool in Mark's
list is wrong headed and even malicious.


>
>
>
>

[Mark]

Up till the turn of the century, no English team had been World Champions. The majority of the teams I've mentioned have either won their continental Championship at least 3 years in a row, or the World Club Championship at least twice.

Santos was 2 years. They won the Copa Libertadores and the World Club Championship in 1962 and 1963.

I mean team, as in group of more or less stable players over a certain time window. Re Milan, I think they had at least 5 players in 1988 that were still there in 1996. Paolo Maldini, Franco Baresi, and Alessandro Costacurta; and I think also Carlo Ancelotti and Roberto Donadoni. If I'm wrong, or 5 isn't enough, we could lop 1988 and/or 1996 off as they only won the Italian League Championship those years. Or alternatively, maybe we could class Milan as 2 teams; split them into the Arrigo Sacchi era and the Fabio Capello era or something.

[Al Kamista]

In terms of prestige, the World Club Championship is a small fraction of the prestige of the European Champions League. You may disagree, but what I am saying is the prevailing view of almost all top players, coaches, management, and fans.

[Futbolmetrix]

On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 11:57:28 AM UTC-4, alka... wrote:

> In terms of prestige, the World Club Championship is a small fraction of the prestige of the European Champions League.
> You may disagree, but what I am saying is the prevailing view of almost all top players, coaches, management, and fans.

This reminds me of the discussions we would have with our South American friends in RSS in the mid 1990s...

The basic consensus at the time was that in Northern Europe (England and Germany) the Intercontinental/Toyota Cup were viewed as an annoying glorified friendly, and why do we even have to travel half way around the globe to participate in it; whereas in Southern Europe (Italy and Spain), it was viewed as a relatively big thing, and people actually cared about it quite a bit.

Curiously enough, the period of English/German dominance in Europe (1970-1984) coincided with a period in which the South American teams had the upper hand more often than not. So it's difficult to say whether the Northern Europeans didn't win the IC because they snubbed it, or they snubbed it because they *couldn't* win it.

Since the early 2000s, the disparity between European club football and South American club football has objectively grown so much that even in Italy and Spain the Club World Cup is now way behind the Champions League in terms of prestige.

As for Liverpool of the late70s-early 80s, they declined to participate twice, were once soundly beaten by Flamengo, and a second time narrowly beaten by Independiente. Maybe they should still be classified as one of the all-time great clubs even if they didn't win the Big One (according to Mark), just like 1974 Netherlands or 1954 Hungary?

By the way, it's not completely unreasonable to take the position that that Liverpool club was not really all that great. Yes, a lot of domestic dominance and European success, but at a time, where there was basically no opposition. And if you look at the members of that team (whose superstars were the backbone of the Scottish national team), what did they ever achieve at international level?

[Blueshirt]

On 08/10/2021 13:50, MH wrote:
> On 2021-10-08 04:03, Blueshirt wrote:
>>
>> Liverpool FC won three European Cups with Bob Paisley.
>
> Please read again.  I said and meant only one UEFA cup under Paisley.
> The first was under Shankly.  I know they won three European cups - see
> below.

You are correct. My apologies.

>> Bob Paisley won six league titles and the three European Cups in his
>> nine seasons in charge of Liverpool FC.
>
> For sure.  But again, the question here is what Mark originally meant by
> team/side (and why he limited it to one season for some, and 8  for
> others). Turnover in 9 seasons is such that you could argue it is not
> really the same team.  Although assuring continuity and replacing
> players with ones who fit in and do the job as well or better than the
> previous ones is a great accomplishment in and of itself, I think a lot
> of people, when they talk of a great "side" are implying a nucleus of
> players that remains fairly constant.
>
> Anyway, the lack of inclusion of late 70s/early 80s Liverpool in Mark's
> list is wrong headed and even malicious.

Well, I'd go with the wrong-headed...

[Blueshirt]

On 08/10/2021 15:34, Mark wrote:
> Up till the turn of the century, no English team had been World Champions. The majority of the teams I've mentioned have either won their continental Championship at least 3 years in a row, or the World Club Championship at least twice.

The World Championship? Seriously? <rolls eyes>

There was no prestige in the Intercontinental Cup back then. I'd take
three European Cups above one or two Intercontinental Cups if I was a
Liverpool fan... I think the majority of football people in Europe would
too. You are, of course, entitled to think differently.

[MH]

On 2021-10-08 10:20, Futbolmetrix wrote:
>
>
> By the way, it's not completely unreasonable to take the position that that Liverpool club was not really all that great. Yes, a lot of domestic dominance and European success, but at a time, where there was basically no opposition.

That is a little unfair, given that rival teams in the English first
division (as it was then) also won the European cup then. In fact, as
you would remember it, there was a period from 1977 to 1984 when only
England based teams won the European cup (since 1983 did not happen,
right?) . And in that time we had Ipswich and Spurs winning the UEFA
cup as well, with Everton getting the CWC in 1985.

So a bit disingenuous to suggest winning the league was a stroll for
Liverpool. They won the league by 1 point in 1976, again by 1 in 1977,
came second to Forest the following year, won by 8 in 1979, then 2 in
1980. 5th place in 1981. Then 4, 11, and 3 point margins.
(interesting to look at all the second placed teams as they included
QPR, Man United, Ipswich, Forest, and Watford. Possibly a sign of a
competitive league)

As for European competition, the Bundesliga was very strong at the time,
and even had all 4 semifinalists in the UEFA cup one year. Italy and
Spain might not have been up to usual standards, but then the smaller
leagues (Belgium, Sweden, eastern Europe) were producing impressive teams.

And if you look at the members of that team (whose superstars were the
backbone of the Scottish national team), what did they ever achieve at
international level?
>

No Scots in 1977, a fair number after (along with key Irishmen like
Lawrenson and Whelan, and a Welshman (Rush).
Were they the backbone of the Scotland team ? Hansen did not get picked
nearly often enough (some coaches preferred Miller and MacLeish), and
Dalglish only rarely played as well for Scotland as he did for Celtic
and Liverpool. Not sure why. But Scotland's capacity for self
destruction at world cups is one of the certainties of this world. They
should have at least made it out of the group stage in 1978, 1982, and 1986
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Mark]

Most of their other players were English. They didn't exactly achieve a lot at international level either.

[Mark]

Possibly players, coaches, management, and fans in England and Germany. Not in Italy or Spain or anywhere outside of Europe.

Anyway, what are we going to do about Milan? How many players have to still be playing for them for them to still be regarded as the same team? And should we be thinking team (as in regular starting 11), or squad?

[Futbolmetrix]

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 6:09:19 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:

> Anyway, what are we going to do about Milan? How many players have to still be playing for them for them to still be regarded as the same team? And should we be thinking team (as in regular starting 11), or squad?

Maldini, Baresi and Donadoni were regular starters throughout the whole period (1987-88 to 1995-1996). Costacurta made only a handful of appearances in the first year, then became a regular starter. Tassotti was on the roster the whole period, a regular starter up until the last two years, when his minutes started to drop off. Massaro was on the roster up until the end of the 1994-95 season, mostly part of the regular rotation. Filippo Galli was also on the roster the whole period, but he was mostly a bench player after the first couple of years when Costacurta emerged as the regular starter.

OK, now I think I have to go and throw up.

[Futbolmetrix]

On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 1:40:58 PM UTC-4, MH wrote:
> On 2021-10-08 10:20, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> >
> >
> > By the way, it's not completely unreasonable to take the position that that Liverpool club was not really all that great. Yes, a lot of domestic dominance and European success, but at a time, where there was basically no opposition.

> That is a little unfair,

Well, I chose my words carefully. "It's not completely unreasonable" doesn't necessarily mean that I agree with the position. But my main point is that European Club football in the late 1970s-early 1980s was probably at its lowest in terms of quality at the very top (EC1 final between Nottingham Forest and Malmoe, seriously?). So being the best of a somewhat mediocre bunch is maybe less of an achievement than being the best in a different period.

>
> So a bit disingenuous to suggest winning the league was a stroll for
> Liverpool. They won the league by 1 point in 1976, again by 1 in 1977,
> came second to Forest the following year, won by 8 in 1979, then 2 in
> 1980. 5th place in 1981. Then 4, 11, and 3 point margins.
> (interesting to look at all the second placed teams as they included
> QPR, Man United, Ipswich, Forest, and Watford. Possibly a sign of a
> competitive league)

Competitive league = no outstanding teams.

> >
> No Scots in 1977, a fair number after (along with key Irishmen like
> Lawrenson and Whelan, and a Welshman (Rush).
> Were they the backbone of the Scotland team ? Hansen did not get picked
> nearly often enough (some coaches preferred Miller and MacLeish), and
> Dalglish only rarely played as well for Scotland as he did for Celtic
> and Liverpool. Not sure why. But Scotland's capacity for self
> destruction at world cups is one of the certainties of this world. They
> should have at least made it out of the group stage in 1978, 1982, and 1986

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. If the 1983 EC1 final had been played and won by Juve, who would then have been favorite to win the 1984 final, then Trapattoni's Juve (with three straight ECs, and, say, two out of three ICs) would firmly be in the conversation among the very best of all time.

I think people expected more of Scotland because their backbone (Hansen, Souness, Dalglish) was the backbone of the best club team in the continent (plus a sprinkling of other players from Liverpool's domestic competitors). But if the best club team in the continent wasn't all that great, that may explain Scotland's underachievement.

[Mark]

I'm a bit unsure whether that's enough players or not. Maybe not. How does a minimum of 11 players in the squad being the same, and/or a minimum of 6 regular starters sound? And would calling it AC Milan 1989-94 work? (As far as I remember we only lose 2 Italian Championships and 1 x European Cup runners-up that way.)

[Al Kamista]

Nice try. It's the case everywhere in Europe now. You're trying to piggyback off Futbolmetrix's comment, where we clearly said that that *used* to be the case decades ago. It's no longer true.

[Al Kamista]

On Friday, October 8, 2021 at 12:20:48 PM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:

> By the way, it's not completely unreasonable to take the position that that Liverpool club was not really all that great. Yes, a lot of domestic dominance and European success, but at a time, where there was basically no opposition. And if you look at the members of that team (whose superstars were the backbone of the Scottish national team), what did they ever achieve at international level?

It's an interesting thought.

I actually think the most dominant English teams I have ever seen were City (2017-2019) and Liverpool (2018-2020). Their sheer point totals over those 2 respective seasons, 198 for City and 196 for Pool, were staggering.

[Mark]

Even if your statement is correct, the prestige the World Club Championship had in the 1970s and 80s is what's relevant.

[Al Kamista]

That it had some prestige, is not in dispute. And it still does today. How heavily it should be weighed against other top European and domestic competitions is another matter.

[Mark]

On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 8:59:51 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
> Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
>

I propose this as our top 10 best club sides ever:

1 Real Madrid 1956-60
2 AC Milan 1989 (or 88)-94 (or 95 or 96)
3 Independiente 1972-75
4 Sao Paulo 1992-94
5 Real Madrid 2014-18
6 Ajax 1971-73
7 Bayern Munchen 1974-76
8 Santos 1962-63
9 Internazionale 1964-66
10 Boca Juniors 1977-79

Agree? Disagree? Can I officially declare this the rss Top 10?

And can I declare it the top 10 ever? Does anyone want to present a case for Torino or River Plate's team of the 1940s or anyone? Or does anyone feel strongly that it should just be classed as the Top 10 since 1955?

[Futbolmetrix]

On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 4:05:34 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 8:59:51 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
> > Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
> >
> I propose this as our top 10 best club sides ever:
>
> 1 Real Madrid 1956-60
> 2 AC Milan 1989 (or 88)-94 (or 95 or 96)
> 3 Independiente 1972-75
> 4 Sao Paulo 1992-94
> 5 Real Madrid 2014-18
> 6 Ajax 1971-73
> 7 Bayern Munchen 1974-76
> 8 Santos 1962-63
> 9 Internazionale 1964-66
> 10 Boca Juniors 1977-79
>
> Agree? Disagree? Can I officially declare this the rss Top 10?

You can declare what you want, but in all the hullabaloo about Europe vs. South America, I failed to notice that you did not include Barcelona 2009-2015 (you can change the dates slightly if you prefer). That is a ridiculous omission. Given the quality of the team (also confirmed by the successes of Spain's NT during their peak), the influence it had on the game, and the quality of the opposition it had to beat to win its titles, I would actually put them at the very top.

On pretty much any dimension, Barca 2009-2015 >> Milan 1989-1994.

[Jesus Petry]

Also, that Independiente team is way too high on the list. Sure, it was a great team, but at the time, repeating Libertadores titles was much easier, as the defending champions entered already at the semifinals. Plus, domestically they were very far from dominating. Only won one Metropolitano just before that period (1971), then were never even runners-up of the league until they won again in 1977.
Santos of the sixties should be higher, as they not only won back-to-back Libertadores and Intercontinental titles, they also dominated local competition for most of the decade, and Brazilian clubs were very strong in that period.
Also, Boca Juniors of the early 2000's is more impressive to me than the 70's version.
About the Europeans on the list I don't know enough to judge.

Tchau!
Jesus Petry

[MH]

On 2021-10-14 02:05, Mark wrote:
> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 8:59:51 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
>> Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
>>
>
>
> I propose this as our top 10 best club sides ever:
>
> 1 Real Madrid 1956-60
> 2 AC Milan 1989 (or 88)-94 (or 95 or 96)
> 3 Independiente 1972-75
> 4 Sao Paulo 1992-94
> 5 Real Madrid 2014-18
> 6 Ajax 1971-73
> 7 Bayern Munchen 1974-76
> 8 Santos 1962-63
> 9 Internazionale 1964-66
> 10 Boca Juniors 1977-79
>
> Agree? Disagree?

Disagree.

Can I officially declare this the rss Top 10?

No.

>
> And can I declare it the top 10 ever?

No


I think if you are comparing sides across a lot of different eras, you
probbably need to make your windows much narrower - like a year or two,
and to define better what you are including in the analsyis. Domestic
dominance needs to be weighted more heavily, since a lot more matches
are involved. Winning a few cup competitions, however prestigious, is
just winning a few games, and involves luck, bad refereeing, penalty
shoot-outs and so on. Some arguments also have to be made based on the
strength of the league at the time.

[Blueshirt]

On 14/10/2021 09:05, Mark wrote:
> On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 8:59:51 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
>> Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
> I propose this as our top 10 best club sides ever:
>
> 1 Real Madrid 1956-60
> 2 AC Milan 1989 (or 88)-94 (or 95 or 96)
> 3 Independiente 1972-75
> 4 Sao Paulo 1992-94
> 5 Real Madrid 2014-18
> 6 Ajax 1971-73
> 7 Bayern Munchen 1974-76
> 8 Santos 1962-63
> 9 Internazionale 1964-66
> 10 Boca Juniors 1977-79
>
> Agree? Disagree? Can I officially declare this the rss Top 10?

No, you can't! The criteria used to determine those teams are based on
nothing more than one person's preference, warped ideas of greatness and
clearly some bias.

Have you seen all of those teams play or is your knowledge solely from
Wikipedia? No FC Barcelona with Xavi, Inesta and Messi? What planet are
you living on?

> And can I declare it the top 10 ever? Does anyone want to present a case for Torino or River Plate's team of the 1940s or anyone? Or does anyone feel strongly that it should just be classed as the Top 10 since 1955?

Declare what you want, but it will only ever be *your* opinion, and as
we all know, opinions are like arse-holes ... everyone has one.

[Mark]

I did mention Barca for consideration in the OP. 1 reason I didn't include them in the proposed Top 10 is because of the huge influence of money in the game this century. It's too easy for the top 3 teams in Spain, Italy, England, France and Germany to win titles these days, because the rest of the world can't hang onto their best players; so the level of the opposition away from the top is lower.

I don't think they won enough to be particularly high in the top 10 anyway.

[Futbolmetrix]

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 9:56:59 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:

> > On pretty much any dimension, Barca 2009-2015 >> Milan 1989-1994.

> I did mention Barca for consideration in the OP. 1 reason I didn't include
> them in the proposed Top 10 is because of the huge influence of money
> in the game this century.

Whereas Real in the 1950s and Berlusconi's Milan were on a shoestring budget. Money has always been part of the game.

> It's too easy for the top 3 teams in
> Spain, Italy, England, France and Germany to win titles these days,

Maybe domestically. But the Champions League is extremely competitive. Winning it 3 times in seven years is a considerable accomplishment.

> because the rest of the world can't hang onto their best players; so the level of the opposition away from the top is lower.
>
> I don't think they won enough to be particularly high in the top 10 anyway.

Barcelona 2009-2015: 3 CLs, 3 CWCs, 6 out of 7 domestic titles.
Milan 1988-1994: 3 CLs, 2 ICs, 4 out of 7 domestic titles.

While Milan may have had more competition at home and across the Atlantic, winning the CL in the CL era was orders of magnitude harder than winning the EC1 in Milan's time (remember also that Milan's first two titles came with the English teams out due to the ban).

[Futbolmetrix]

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 10:23:28 AM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 9:56:59 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
> Maybe domestically. But the Champions League is extremely competitive. Winning it 3 times in seven years is a considerable accomplishment.

By the way, the only reason Barca didn't win three times in a row between 2009 and 2011 is the explosion of an Icelandic volcano that forced them to travel to Milan by bus for the key semifinal first leg. (and some questionable refereeing calls in that first leg, but I guess they even out with the calls they got at Stamford Bridge in 2009...)

[Al Kamista]

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 9:56:59 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
> On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 12:03:30 PM UTC+1, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 4:05:34 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
> > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 8:59:51 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
> > > > Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
> > > >
> > > I propose this as our top 10 best club sides ever:
> > >
> > > 1 Real Madrid 1956-60
> > > 2 AC Milan 1989 (or 88)-94 (or 95 or 96)
> > > 3 Independiente 1972-75
> > > 4 Sao Paulo 1992-94
> > > 5 Real Madrid 2014-18
> > > 6 Ajax 1971-73
> > > 7 Bayern Munchen 1974-76
> > > 8 Santos 1962-63
> > > 9 Internazionale 1964-66
> > > 10 Boca Juniors 1977-79
> > >
> > > Agree? Disagree? Can I officially declare this the rss Top 10?
> > You can declare what you want, but in all the hullabaloo about Europe vs. South America, I failed to notice that you did not include Barcelona 2009-2015 (you can change the dates slightly if you prefer). That is a ridiculous omission. Given the quality of the team (also confirmed by the successes of Spain's NT during their peak), the influence it had on the game, and the quality of the opposition it had to beat to win its titles, I would actually put them at the very top.
> >
> > On pretty much any dimension, Barca 2009-2015 >> Milan 1989-1994.
> I did mention Barca for consideration in the OP. 1 reason I didn't include them in the proposed Top 10 is because of the huge influence of money in the game this century.

You are literally all over the place.

[Blueshirt]

On 15/10/2021 15:23, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 9:56:59 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
>> I did mention Barca for consideration in the OP. 1 reason I didn't include
>> them in the proposed Top 10 is because of the huge influence of money
>> in the game this century.
>>

>> I don't think they won enough to be particularly high in the top 10 anyway.
>
> Barcelona 2009-2015: 3 CLs, 3 CWCs, 6 out of 7 domestic titles.
> Milan 1988-1994: 3 CLs, 2 ICs, 4 out of 7 domestic titles.

Liverpool FC 1975-1983: 3 CLs, 1 UEFA Cup, 6 out of 8 domestic titles.

[Futbolmetrix]

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 1:19:33 PM UTC-4, Blueshirt wrote:

> > Barcelona 2009-2015: 3 CLs, 3 CWCs, 6 out of 7 domestic titles.
> > Milan 1988-1994: 3 CLs, 2 ICs, 4 out of 7 domestic titles.
> Liverpool FC 1975-1983: 3 CLs, 1 UEFA Cup, 6 out of 8 domestic titles.

In terms of continental success, there is no question that Liverpool is up there with Barca and Milan. However, I would rank Liverpool below those two teams for the following reasons:

- Barca and Milan boasted some all-time greats (Van Basten, Baresi, Maldini, Messi, Xavi, Iniesta), who also demonstrated their greatness at the international level. With all due respect, none of the Liverpool players of the 1970s-1980s rise to that level.

- Barca and Milan are also historically significant teams because of how they influenced the way the game is played. Sacchi's systematic pressing and Guardiola's juego de posicion. The same cannot be said about Liverpool.

- Barca and Milan can credibly lay claim to being the best teams in the *world* at their time. Sure, Liverpool can say that they didn't care about the IC, but you can't also claim to be the best in he world if you don't prove it on the field. Liverpool's problem.

- Winning the CL in Barca's time was a lot more difficult than winning it in Liverpool's time, because you had to get past a larger number of very strong teams. (Note that I didn't put Milan in this category: from that point of view, they are about the same as Liverpool, if now even weaker because of the English team ban)


Having said that, Liverpool 1977-1984 clearly belongs in any list of the top European club teams of all time, but I wouldn't put them at the very top.

[Futbolmetrix]

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 4:40:45 PM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:

> - Barca and Milan can credibly lay claim to being the best teams in the *world* at their time. Sure, Liverpool can say that they didn't care about the IC, but you can't also claim to be the best in he world if you don't prove it on the field. Liverpool's problem.

Blueshirt, you are Chelsea fan, right? So make sure that you and your fanmates make the team feel that the CWC matters, because 20 years down the road you will be in some internet debate arguing where Chelsea 2021 ranks among the all time greats, and at least for some people that will matter.

[Blueshirt]

What English (or some other European) clubs - and their national
associations - in the 1970's thought of the Inter-Continental Cup
(mainly glorified friendly matches) will be a lot different to what
European teams will think in today's world of a FIFA backed expanded CWC
and all of the money it will entail... TV rights will be much more
lucrative compared to back then as well. For me though, the World
Champions are France and I couldn't tell you what club team are [cough]
"World Champions" without looking it up on Google.

After saying that, I won't be around in 20 years time to worry about it
either... but I would like to think that Chelsea one day would have a
team comparable to the FC Barcelona team of Pep's era; Abidal, Pique,
YaYa Toure, Alves, Inesta, Xavi, Busquets, Messi etc. as I saw them play
and they were an awesome team.*



* We won't mention the bald Norwegian referee from 2009 whose name I can
remember without resorting to Google!

[MH]

On 2021-10-15 14:40, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 1:19:33 PM UTC-4, Blueshirt wrote:
>
>>> Barcelona 2009-2015: 3 CLs, 3 CWCs, 6 out of 7 domestic titles.
>>> Milan 1988-1994: 3 CLs, 2 ICs, 4 out of 7 domestic titles.
>> Liverpool FC 1975-1983: 3 CLs, 1 UEFA Cup, 6 out of 8 domestic titles.
>
> In terms of continental success, there is no question that Liverpool is up there with Barca and Milan. However, I would rank Liverpool below those two teams for the following reasons:
>
> - Barca and Milan boasted some all-time greats (Van Basten, Baresi, Maldini, Messi, Xavi, Iniesta), who also demonstrated their greatness at the international level. With all due respect, none of the Liverpool players of the 1970s-1980s rise to that level.

What about Keegan who won European footballer of the year when with
Hamburg? One could argue that the sentiment at the time was
anti-English club, and a player playing for an English club did not get
the recognition. Certainly I experienced this sentiment in Germany in
the 80s - English football was "primitive" "kick and rush" and so on.
Anyone who watched Liverpool's passing from those days would have
realized it was not true.
Where did this bad reputation come from ? Perhaps the excessive
physicality of teams like Leeds ? Perhaps the bad behaviour of English
fans ?

>
> - Barca and Milan are also historically significant teams because of how they influenced the way the game is played. Sacchi's systematic pressing and Guardiola's juego de posicion. The same cannot be said about Liverpool.
>
> - Barca and Milan can credibly lay claim to being the best teams in the *world* at their time. Sure, Liverpool can say that they didn't care about the IC, but you can't also claim to be the best in he world if you don't prove it on the field. Liverpool's problem.
>
> - Winning the CL in Barca's time was a lot more difficult than winning it

i.e. the EC1. This is an argument with lots of weight behind it. On
the other hand, just getting into the EC1 in the 70s and 80s was much
more challenging, and that meant winning your league - in the case of
Liverpool, winning one of the top two leagues in Europe at the time.
(England first in UEFA rankings 1970-1975, followed by 3,2,3,4,2, then
2nd for 4 of the next 5 years. Germany was the chief competitor.
Liverpool beat their German opponents to win two finals, and also beat
them on route to winning in 1978 (and don't dis Bruges - they disposed
of your Juve and Atletico on the way to the final). Liverpool also got
past Bayern in the semis in 1981.

in Liverpool's time, because you had to get past a larger number of
very strong teams. (Note that I didn't put Milan in this category: from
that point of view, they are about the same as Liverpool, if now even
weaker because of the English team ban)
>
>
> Having said that, Liverpool 1977-1984 clearly belongs in any list of the top European club teams of all time, but I wouldn't put them at the very top.

Fair enough.

However, this whole discussion would be more interesting and focused, if
people were to look at what they, for their various reasons (surely all
subject to some bias), consider to have been some of the great and
dominant European teams, and to then select their best season, then we
can compare those.

Eg. Liverpool 1976-77 or Bayern 1973-74 (though they were more
dominant in the league the two years before; they were worse in the
league in 1975 and 1976) or Ajax 1972 or whatever.

I would argue on behalf of Celtic 1966-1967 because they won every
competition they played in (except the intercontinental cup which was a
debacle if not a disgrace that year - anyway, that was the next season
though still in 1967).
But, people will say, "that is only the Scottish league", perhaps not
remembering that the Scottish league was much stronger back then than
now, and that Celtic were pushed by Rangers very hard that year - a
Rangers team good enough to get to the Cup Winners Cup final - plus
Dumferline, Dundee United and Kilmarnock did pretty respectably in the
Fairs Cup that year as well. Scotland were frequently as high as 3rd in
the UEFA rankings in those days.

Finally, the way they beat favourites Inter in the final was impressive,
and much applauded at the time. Stein was a major innovator, and one
could argue he invented total football before the Dutch, and attacking
fullbacks before Ramsey.

I don't expect much agreement on that, but thought I would make the case.

To be eligible for nomination, I would suggest that a team would have to
win its league (or at least have a phenomenal season, losing out on goal
difference or by a point), and win its continental tournament (or lose
on penalties after mitigating circumstances). It would also have to
have significant achievements in the seasons on either side of the
"peak" year.
>
>
>
>
>

[Mark]

On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 3:23:28 PM UTC+1, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> On Friday, October 15, 2021 at 9:56:59 AM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
>
> > > On pretty much any dimension, Barca 2009-2015 >> Milan 1989-1994.
>
> > I did mention Barca for consideration in the OP. 1 reason I didn't include
> > them in the proposed Top 10 is because of the huge influence of money
> > in the game this century.
> Whereas Real in the 1950s and Berlusconi's Milan were on a shoestring budget. Money has always been part of the game.

Not to the extent it is now. The financial gulf between the rich 5 of western Europe and the rest of the world is FAR bigger than it was back then.

> > It's too easy for the top 3 teams in
> > Spain, Italy, England, France and Germany to win titles these days,
> Maybe domestically. But the Champions League is extremely competitive. Winning it 3 times in seven years is a considerable accomplishment.
> > because the rest of the world can't hang onto their best players; so the level of the opposition away from the top is lower.
> >
> > I don't think they won enough to be particularly high in the top 10 anyway.
> Barcelona 2009-2015: 3 CLs, 3 CWCs, 6 out of 7 domestic titles.
> Milan 1988-1994: 3 CLs, 2 ICs, 4 out of 7 domestic titles.

Fair enough. Looks like I was wrong there.

>
> While Milan may have had more competition at home and across the Atlantic, winning the CL in the CL era was orders of magnitude harder than winning the EC1 in Milan's time (remember also that Milan's first two titles came with the English teams out due to the ban).

In Milan's era there was competition from Crvena Zvezda, Steaua Bucuresti and others from Eastern Europe, and teams from Portugal and the Netherlands etc. In the CL era, you get more competition from Valencia, Bayer Leverkusen, Chelsea, Man City and RB Leipzig than from anywhere outside the rich 5 of western Europe. It's got to be easier to win it now surely?

[Al Kamista]

Then you should also be a little more consistent in your criteria. On the one hand, you play up the prestige of the CWC in these analyses, but on the other you downplay Liverpool's 70s/80s ECs because you question the strength of their competition (which I don't disagree with). As discussed here many times, the format of the CWC is laughable when we are talking big boy trophies. For European clubs, you play a semifinal against an Asian, African, or NAan team, the level of which is probably at that of a 2nd or 3rd tier team from their own country, and then one match against a SAan team, which Europe now wins a vast majority of the time. So one truly competitive match. A domestic cup in one of Europe's big 5 leagues is much harder to win than the CWC.

So if you want to play up difficulty of winning, then the CWC shouldn't seriously be in the conversation, or weighed very very lightly.

[Futbolmetrix]

On Saturday, October 16, 2021 at 5:06:19 PM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
> Not to the extent it is now. The financial gulf between the rich 5 of western Europe and the rest of the world is FAR bigger than it was back then.

Agreed. That's why the accomplishments today are more valuable than the ones of 40 years ago.

> In Milan's era there was competition from Crvena Zvezda, Steaua Bucuresti and others from Eastern Europe, and teams from
> Portugal and the Netherlands etc. In the CL era, you get more competition from Valencia, Bayer Leverkusen, Chelsea, Man
> City and RB Leipzig than from anywhere outside the rich 5 of western Europe. It's got to be easier to win it now surely?

Because you have to travel to less distant places? Yes, maybe that factors in a bit. But in terms of quality there is not a shadow of a doubt that your typical CL team in the knockout rounds is a lot better than the typical R16 participant of 40 years ago.

First, it's just a logical argument: teams that can accumulate the best talent from all over the world are going to be better on average than teams that have to restrict themselves to players born in Yugoslavia or Romania only.

Second, we can actually compare the quality of the two groups of teams using ClubElo ratings.

These are the ClubElo ratings on October 1, 1977 (a random date from the Liverpool era):

http://clubelo.com/1977-10-01/UCL
1 ENG 1 Liverpool 1890 1977-09-24 Bob Paisley (since 1974-08-26)
2 ITA 2 Juventus 1864 1977-09-28 Giovanni Trapattoni (since 1976-07-01)
3 FRG 5 Gladbach 1819 1977-09-28 Udo Lattek (since 1975-07-01)
4 GDR 12 Dresden 1783 1977-09-28 Walter Fritzsch (since 1969-07-01)
5 BEL 15 Brugge 1767 1977-09-28 Ernst Happel (since 1974-01-21)
6 ESP 16 Atlético 1763 1977-09-28 Luis Aragonés (since 1974-11-26)
7 NED 19 Ajax 1758 1977-09-28 Tomislav Ivić (since 1976-07-01)
8 POR 27 Benfica 1730 1977-09-28 John Mortimore (since 1976-07-01)
9 FRA 58 Nantes 1662 (-0.2) 1977-09-30 Jean Vincent (since 1976-07-01)
10 BUL 66 Левски 1643 1977-09-28 Ivan Vutsov (since 1977-07-01)
11 YUG 75 Crvena Zvezda 1636 1977-09-28 Gojko Zec (since 1976-07-01)
12 SCO Celtic 1572 1977-09-28 Jock Stein (since 1965-07-01)
13 AUT Wacker Innsbruck 1542 (+1.1) 1977-09-30 Georg Keßler (since 1977-07-01)
14 GRE Παναθηναϊκός 1522 1977-09-28 Kazimierz Górski (since 1976-12-04)
15 DEN FC København 1425 1977-09-28
16 NIR Glentoran 1256 1977-09-29

There is a more than 600 point gap between the best team and the worst, and about 200 points between number 1 and the median.

What about Februray 1, 2009, the year of Barcelona's first triumph?
http://clubelo.com/2009-02-01/UCL

1 ENG 1 Man United 1997 (+2.8) 2009-01-31 Alex Ferguson (since 1986-11-06)
2 ESP 2 Barcelona 1962 2009-01-24 Pep Guardiola (since 2008-07-01)
3 ENG 3 Chelsea 1948 2009-01-28 Luiz Felipe Scolari (since 2008-07-01)
4 ENG 4 Liverpool 1940 2009-01-28 Rafa Benítez (since 2004-06-16)
5 ESP 5 Real Madrid 1900 (+5.2) 2009-01-31 Juande Ramos (since 2008-12-09)
6 ITA 6 Inter 1886 2009-01-28 José Mourinho (since 2008-07-01)
7 ENG 7 Arsenal 1875 (-5.9) 2009-01-31 Arsène Wenger (since 1996-10-01)
8 GER 9 Bayern 1847 2009-01-30 Jürgen Klinsmann (since 2008-07-01)
9 ITA 10 Roma 1843 2009-01-28 Luciano Spalletti (since 2005-07-01)
10 ESP 11 Atlético 1841 2009-01-25 Javier Aguirre (since 2006-07-01)
11 ITA 12 Juventus 1838 (-14.3) 2009-01-31 Claudio Ranieri (since 2007-07-01)
12 ESP 13 Villarreal 1837 2009-01-24 Manuel Pellegrini (since 2004-07-01)
13 FRA 15 Lyon 1816 2009-01-17 Claude Puel (since 2008-07-01)
14 POR 16 Porto 1811 2009-01-24 Jesualdo Ferreira (since 2006-08-15)
15 POR 41 Sporting 1716 (-5.5) 2009-01-31 Paulo Bento (since 2005-10-18)
16 GRE 63 Παναθηναϊκός 1679 2009-01-24 Henk ten Cate (since 2008-06-13)


The gap between top and bottom is much lower (about 330 points), and so is the gap between top and median (about 150 points)

I could look at other years as well, but my impression is that you would get a similar picture. I agree that it was more difficult to *be* in the last 16 in the old days (because you had to win the championship the previous year), but once you were there, the quality of opposition you faced was substantially weaker.

[Futbolmetrix]

Good point. If modern day CL =100, then I would say:

1970s-1980s EC1: 90
1970s-1980s IC: 85
2000s CWC: 65

[Al Kamista]

Really??

Let's take last season's CL/CWC winners as an example.

After a 6 match group stage, Bayern had to beat Chelsea, Barcelona, Lyon, and PSG to win the CL.
In the CWC, they beat Al Ahly and Tigres to win the cup.
You're weighing that as 65% of the achievement of winning a CL? On what basis? Because clearly it has little do to with how challenging it was to win a said trophy, which you have already touted as a key criteria for measuring greatness.

[Mark]

On Sunday, October 17, 2021 at 4:18:15 PM UTC+1, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> On Saturday, October 16, 2021 at 5:06:19 PM UTC-4, Mark wrote:
> > Not to the extent it is now. The financial gulf between the rich 5 of western Europe and the rest of the world is FAR bigger than it was back then.
> Agreed. That's why the accomplishments today are more valuable than the ones of 40 years ago.

Because the opposition can't hang onto their best players, and is therefore weaker?

> > In Milan's era there was competition from Crvena Zvezda, Steaua Bucuresti and others from Eastern Europe, and teams from
> > Portugal and the Netherlands etc. In the CL era, you get more competition from Valencia, Bayer Leverkusen, Chelsea, Man
> > City and RB Leipzig than from anywhere outside the rich 5 of western Europe. It's got to be easier to win it now surely?
> Because you have to travel to less distant places? Yes, maybe that factors in a bit.

No, because Serbia, Romania, Portugal, Netherlands etc had better teams.

But in terms of quality there is not a shadow of a doubt that your typical CL team in the knockout rounds is a lot better than the typical R16 participant of 40 years ago.
>
> First, it's just a logical argument: teams that can accumulate the best talent from all over the world are going to be better on average than teams that have to restrict themselves to players born in Yugoslavia or Romania only.

True, but teams that can't even hang onto players wherever they're born are going to be weaker opponents.

And what about the earlier rounds, where (now) weak teams like Ajax, Crvena Zvezda, and Dynamo Kyiv have to play? What's the ClubElo ratings for the whole tournament?

[Mark]

Does anybody else want to propose a Top 10?

[Futbolmetrix]

On Sunday, October 17, 2021 at 10:31:00 PM UTC-4, alka... wrote:

> After a 6 match group stage, Bayern had to beat Chelsea, Barcelona, Lyon, and PSG to win the CL.
> In the CWC, they beat Al Ahly and Tigres to win the cup.
> You're weighing that as 65% of the achievement of winning a CL? On what basis? Because clearly it has little do to with how challenging it was to win a said trophy, which you have already touted as a key criteria for measuring greatness.

I never said that "how challenging it is to win a trophy" is the only criteria. By that token, winning the league should always be weighted more heavily than winning the EC1/CL, because you have demonstrate consistency week in and week out (and given the trophy case of the team I support, I would have a strong incentive to make that case, but I don't).

[Al Kamista]

OK, fair enough.

I just really struggle to see how such a ceremonial and (relatively) easy to win trophy should count so significantly towards all-time greatness. It doesn't matter how much prestige some countries attached to it (which is largely an emotional concept), when the actual accomplishment entails beating a minnow (which most people can't name a single player from), and a South American team which is only halfway decent (compared to the European giants).

It just flies in the face of reason, when the objective is to determine who are some of the greatest club teams in history. It is almost Benny-esque logic ;-)

[Jesus Petry]

I can't make an absolute top 10, but will nominate South American candidates to a top 30 (?):

Santos 61-68: 2 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 6/10 cup/league titles (Pelé, Gilmar, Zito, Dorval, Coutinho, Pepe)
Peñarol 58-68: 3 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 9/11 league titles (Néstor Gonçalves, Spencer, Joya)
Independiente 70-75: 4 Libertadores, 1 ICC, 2/12 league titles (Bochini, Pavoni, Balbuena, Commisso, Sá, Galván)
Boca Juniors 00-03: 3 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 2/8 league titles (Riquelme, Tévez, Abbondanzieri, Schiavi, Burdisso)
São Paulo 91-93: 2 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 1/3 league titles (Cafu, Raí, Zetti, Müller)
Flamengo 80-83: 1 Libertadores, 1 ICC, 3/4 league titles (Zico, Júnior, Moser, Andrade, Leandro, Adílio, Tita, Nunes)
São Paulo 05-08: 1 Libertadores, 1 CWC, 3/4 league titles (Rogério Ceni, Júnior, Souza, Aloísio)
Internacional 06-10: 2 Libertadores, 1 CWC, 1 Sudamericana (Fernandão, Clemer, Índio, Alex Raphael, D'Alessandro)
River Plate 96-00: 1 Libertadores, 1 Supercopa, 5/8 league titles (Gallardo, Salas, Sorín, Saviola, Aimar)
Vasco da Gama 97-00: 1 Libertadores, 1 Mercosur, 2/4 league titles (Juninho Pernambucano, Edmundo, Mauro Galvão, Felipe, Pedrinho)
Internacional 75-79: 3/5 league titles, one unbeaten (Falcão, Figueroa, Valdomiro, Caçapava, Batista, Jair)
Grêmio 94-97: 1 Libertadores, 1/4 league titles + 2/4 cups (Danrlei, Paulo Nunes, Dinho, Carlos Miguel)
Olimpia 78-83: 1 Libertadores, 1 ICC (vs. Malmö, but hey!), 6/6 league titles
Palmeiras 93-94: back-to-back league titles with a great team (Edmundo, Zinho, César Sampaio, Mazinho, Evair)
Corinthians 98-00: 1 CWC, back-to-back league titles (Edílson, Marcelinho Carioca, Ricardinho, Rincón, Luizão)

The current Libertadores finalist teams of Palmeiras and Flamengo are worthy candidates to joining this list. They've been strong for a while.

Tchau!
Jesus Petry

[Futbolmetrix]

On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 10:36:08 AM UTC-4, alka.. wrote:

> I just really struggle to see how such a ceremonial and (relatively) easy to win trophy should count so significantly towards
> all-time greatness. It doesn't matter how much prestige some countries attached to it (which is largely an emotional
> concept), when the actual accomplishment entails beating a minnow (which most people can't name a single player from),
> and a South American team which is only halfway decent (compared to the European giants).

On the road to the 1977 European Cup, Liverpool beat Crusaders (Northern Ireland) and Trabzonspor (Turkish club football at the time was not much better than Northern Irish club football). How many players from those teams could a typical 1970s Liverpool fan name?

[Al Kamista]

Yes, and they then went on to beat St. Etienne, FC Zurich, and Borussia M for the title. Etienne and BM were very respectable European teams at the time. In the same competition, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, and Benfica (a proper powerhouse then) were eliminated. The key point is that it was a proper competition, with a proper format and several very strong teams.

[Mark]

On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 5:45:04 PM UTC+1, jesus...@gmail.com wrote:
> Em quarta-feira, 20 de outubro de 2021 às 08:19:43 UTC-3, Mark escreveu:
> > On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 9:05:34 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
> > > On Thursday, October 7, 2021 at 8:59:51 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
> > > > Who are the Top 10 best football club sides ever? (or since the international club tournaments were invented around 1956 anyway).
> > > >
> > > I propose this as our top 10 best club sides ever:
> > >
> > > 1 Real Madrid 1956-60
> > > 2 AC Milan 1989 (or 88)-94 (or 95 or 96)
> > > 3 Independiente 1972-75
> > > 4 Sao Paulo 1992-94
> > > 5 Real Madrid 2014-18
> > > 6 Ajax 1971-73
> > > 7 Bayern Munchen 1974-76
> > > 8 Santos 1962-63
> > > 9 Internazionale 1964-66
> > > 10 Boca Juniors 1977-79
> > >
> > > Agree? Disagree? Can I officially declare this the rss Top 10?
> > >
> > > And can I declare it the top 10 ever? Does anyone want to present a case for Torino or River Plate's team of the 1940s or anyone? Or does anyone feel strongly that it should just be classed as the Top 10 since 1955?
> > Does anybody else want to propose a Top 10?
> I can't make an absolute top 10, but will nominate South American candidates to a top 30 (?):

I won't rank each team, but I'd say:

Tier 1:

> Santos 61-68: 2 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 6/10 cup/league titles (Pelé, Gilmar, Zito, Dorval, Coutinho, Pepe)
> Peñarol 58-68: 3 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 9/11 league titles (Néstor Gonçalves, Spencer, Joya)
> Independiente 70-75: 4 Libertadores, 1 ICC, 2/12 league titles (Bochini, Pavoni, Balbuena, Commisso, Sá, Galván)
> Boca Juniors 00-03: 3 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 2/8 league titles (Riquelme, Tévez, Abbondanzieri, Schiavi, Burdisso)
> São Paulo 91-93: 2 Libertadores, 2 ICC, 1/3 league titles (Cafu, Raí, Zetti, Müller)

(Was that Cafu that played in 3 World Cup Finals?)

Tier 2:

> Flamengo 80-83: 1 Libertadores, 1 ICC, 3/4 league titles (Zico, Júnior, Moser, Andrade, Leandro, Adílio, Tita, Nunes)
> São Paulo 05-08: 1 Libertadores, 1 CWC, 3/4 league titles (Rogério Ceni, Júnior, Souza, Aloísio)

(Cicinho was a good player too)

> Internacional 06-10: 2 Libertadores, 1 CWC, 1 Sudamericana (Fernandão, Clemer, Índio, Alex Raphael, D'Alessandro)
> River Plate 96-00: 1 Libertadores, 1 Supercopa, 5/8 league titles (Gallardo, Salas, Sorín, Saviola, Aimar)
> Vasco da Gama 97-00: 1 Libertadores, 1 Mercosur, 2/4 league titles (Juninho Pernambucano, Edmundo, Mauro Galvão, Felipe, Pedrinho)

Olimpia 78-83: 1 Libertadores, 1 ICC (vs. Malmö, but hey!), 6/6 league titles

Tier 3:

> Internacional 75-79: 3/5 league titles, one unbeaten (Falcão, Figueroa, Valdomiro, Caçapava, Batista, Jair)
> Grêmio 94-97: 1 Libertadores, 1/4 league titles + 2/4 cups (Danrlei, Paulo Nunes, Dinho, Carlos Miguel)

> Palmeiras 93-94: back-to-back league titles with a great team (Edmundo, Zinho, César Sampaio, Mazinho, Evair)
> Corinthians 98-00: 1 CWC, back-to-back league titles (Edílson, Marcelinho Carioca, Ricardinho, Rincón, Luizão)
>
> The current Libertadores finalist teams of Palmeiras and Flamengo are worthy candidates to joining this list. They've been strong for a while.

Why didn't you include Estudiantes 1968-71: 3 Copa Libertadores, 1 runners-up, 1 IC, 0/8 league titles (maybe that's why!) or Velez Sarsfield 1993-98: 1 Copa Libertadores, 1 IC, 4/11 league titles ?

[Jesus Petry]

Yes.

> Tier 2:
> > Flamengo 80-83: 1 Libertadores, 1 ICC, 3/4 league titles (Zico, Júnior, Moser, Andrade, Leandro, Adílio, Tita, Nunes)
> > São Paulo 05-08: 1 Libertadores, 1 CWC, 3/4 league titles (Rogério Ceni, Júnior, Souza, Aloísio)
> (Cicinho was a good player too)
> > Internacional 06-10: 2 Libertadores, 1 CWC, 1 Sudamericana (Fernandão, Clemer, Índio, Alex Raphael, D'Alessandro)
> > River Plate 96-00: 1 Libertadores, 1 Supercopa, 5/8 league titles (Gallardo, Salas, Sorín, Saviola, Aimar)
> > Vasco da Gama 97-00: 1 Libertadores, 1 Mercosur, 2/4 league titles (Juninho Pernambucano, Edmundo, Mauro Galvão, Felipe, Pedrinho)
> Olimpia 78-83: 1 Libertadores, 1 ICC (vs. Malmö, but hey!), 6/6 league titles
> Tier 3:
> > Internacional 75-79: 3/5 league titles, one unbeaten (Falcão, Figueroa, Valdomiro, Caçapava, Batista, Jair)
> > Grêmio 94-97: 1 Libertadores, 1/4 league titles + 2/4 cups (Danrlei, Paulo Nunes, Dinho, Carlos Miguel)
> > Palmeiras 93-94: back-to-back league titles with a great team (Edmundo, Zinho, César Sampaio, Mazinho, Evair)
> > Corinthians 98-00: 1 CWC, back-to-back league titles (Edílson, Marcelinho Carioca, Ricardinho, Rincón, Luizão)
> >
> > The current Libertadores finalist teams of Palmeiras and Flamengo are worthy candidates to joining this list. They've been strong for a while.
> Why didn't you include Estudiantes 1968-71: 3 Copa Libertadores, 1 runners-up, 1 IC, 0/8 league titles (maybe that's why!)

Good team, but a very dirty one. They would use every trick to win, no matter what. Even had the motto "La gloria o Devoto" (the glory or Devoto, the name of a Buenos Aires prison).

> or Velez Sarsfield 1993-98: 1 Copa Libertadores, 1 IC, 4/11 league titles ?

I've almost included them. Maybe I should. Chilavert, Gareca, Basualdo. Good spot!

Tchau!
Jesus Petry