tough to know what this season will be remembered for in 10 years. doesn't always depend on who won what, eg 2013/14 is undoubtedly the season of suarez despite city winning the league and mickey mouse double

dont think it'll be arsenal's fa cup, city's 3rd place trophy or mun's mickey mouse double. i dont even think it'll be chelsea's title tbh

my guess is it goes down in history as 'that season after leicester'

2011/12: aguerooooOOO + chelsea CL
2012/13: rvp/mun
2013/14: suarez/slip
2014/15: cesc/hazard (?)
2015/16: leicester
2016/17: that season after leicester
2017/18: kane's 45 league goal season

8bus, the point you are missing is noone is saying Utd had a great season. I mean my original post on the matter i said the season was a disappointment.

The whole Top 4 trophy thing is a term that was made to poke fun of Arsenals fall from legit title contenders into also rans. The fact that earlier today you said that Top 4 should weigh into considerations says it all.

City were poor this season and finished 3rd, their reward is CL next season. Utd were poor this season and finished 6th. They also have CL next season but also had 2 days where they won trophies. If you by any measure consider City have had a better season then you are doing it wrong.

That's the point you dopes are missing. It's not about City. people are legitimately arguing utd had a better season than the Spurs? Looool ok. I dgaf about city in this argument. It's the stupid irrational obstacle that a club qualified for a ridiculous tournament and won it therefore has a better season than 2 i.e Spurs

League cup tho

Fa cup tho

Lol

If you're going to do that bit can I suggest that you actually get it right?

Thayer finding new places to be appallingly wrong? Who would have guessed

2014/15 is a really tough one actually.

Surely, 2016/17 is the year that spurs finished 2nd?

>>>>


Utterly ridiculous, Spurs take qualification into CL with 2 trophies over qualification into CL with no trophies if in both circumstances they finish above Arsenal and Arsenal not getting it is the cherry on the top.

Guess we are just looking at results here though as well, start of the season the priority for clubs is different. This so called big 6 it's

1. League
2. CL
3. FA Cup
4. LC
5. EL

Obviously it depends on what you have qualified for. Mentioned it yesterday wonder if more clubs will start taking the EL serious and taking a back seat in the league if you will. With Spurs tanking the EL this season, in favour of the league I refuse to believe that they tried against Gent or who ever the hell it was that knocked them out.

Would Spurs fans swap finishing 2nd for 5th with EL?

Arsenal fans going forward, you currently have 8.33% equality for the EL and 6.67% for the league. Would you prefer to tank the EL early and put all your eggs into the league? Or go concentrate more on the EL and risk top 4?

I don't think both is achievable now in this league, Chelsea done it when they won it. Plop were finishing >10 behind 4th and Spurs weren't this good. The league in general wasn't as strong either with all this extra TV money.

Spurs last league 60, FA 91, 08

Cup winners 63 and UEFA cup 84.

They've qualified for the CL a few times since they last won something. Trophies > top 4 trophy

The only way I'd even consider taking EL and 5th is if Arsenal finished 6th. And even then I don't think I would. Sucks to not win a trophy but I've still seen the glorious football we've played for the last 4-5 months and there are very few hypotheticals that would compel me to unsee it in favor of something else.

oh wow that was actually said tongue in cheek.

Spurs' ultimate aim really is to just finish above Arsenal.

Guess that's what happens when you have been second fiddle for the mental blocks to start appear.

That's what drove Fergie on, beating Plop.

We've got 20, they've got 18. They have 5 and we have 3.

It'd be really pathetic if we start singing 'WE'VE QUALIFIED MORE TIMES THAN YOU'

Not 2nd best season in PL but from all PL clubs it's clear they've got 2nd best results behind Chelsea.

2 cups and CL is 2 cups more than the rest with CL.

I still hate them.

Exactly, like Celtic with the Lisbon lions 50 years on celebrations of winning it.

You guys having a celebration for next year as you qualified for it? 50th anviersary of 68 Wembley!

Yeah you are a complete arsehole.

Quite salty with it.

GIRUY invincible treble winners! Won't be repeated by any shower of dirty hun bastards. I hope that hurts.

Settle Marty.

If you didn't win it in 67 there would be no 50th anniversary of it. Celtic aren't going to have a ceremony for qualifying are they?

Like wise us next year with 50th anniversary of 68 as I said.

People remember winning trophies not qualifying.

I don't even think there are any active Rangers fans itt either.

Just had a look up the teams that have qualified for the champions league:-



Spurs have got there twice haven't won a trophy in that time.

Newcastle the same. They haven't won anything for yonks. Bet they'd trade one of those qualifications for an FA cup, especially when they got to the final in 98 and 99 losing on both occasions.

Leeds got the semi before they went busto.

Leiceter and Blackburn both won the leagues to get their qualification. Once in a blue moon qualification to the CL or once in a blue moon trophy?

Surely it has to be the latter each and every time. Add in qualification and two trophies it isn't even a question.

If we continue to have 6 going into 4 as well, missing out on the CL may become a regularly occurrence for members of the big 4.

Obviously trophies are what is remembered about a season a decade after the fact but I'm pretty sure that's because it's always been done that way and if we take a step back and look at it objectively, it doesn't make that much sense when you look at the sport as something that's meant to entertain.

Football season is 10 months long and people don't only start being entertained by it or deriving meaning from it once the trophies are handed out. The current Spurs team is a good example- surely winning a trophy would be great and if they don't fans will look back at it with a bit of regret, but I don't think any team but Leicester (a historical outlier) has given their fans as much enjoyment these last two years as Spurs. Of course, winning or losing trophies at the end is a huge swing but imo it overshadows what happens for 99% of the season a bit too much. For Spurs fans I hope they don't let their enjoyment of watching the best football that is currently on offer in England be diminished by sick "trophies tho" gotchas from fans of other teams

Chelsea and Utd clearly had the most successful seasons, don't see how anyone can dispute that.

yes on reflection i'd rather watch a load of exceptional young english lads rip the league apart for my team than fellaini and lingard huff and puff their way to victory in third rate competitions

spudsfan wins the enjoyable viewing experience trophy. when you add that to their finished above arsenal trophy and harry kane's golden boot its a no contest

Literally nobody has argued Utd had a better season than Spurs.
Again, you spent 8 bajillion, got Pep, and barely did better than last year. Meaningless hardware is still better than that.

Winning things is what counts. Spurs season can only be seen as a success in relative terms, and I'm not talking about finishing above Arsenal - I don't even get how fans living 5000 miles (or even 50) away care about finishing above Arsenal - it's a big deal if your mates/family/colleagues are split between two rival clubs, but not just to taunt fans over the internet....

Anyway, Spurs can be pretty happy but we should have won something.

Why is it so hard to acknowledge that everybody is entitled to define success the way the want and therefore judge how successful one football team has been according to their own view? Or does the internet dictate that there must be only one and only one answer to this question and everybody that doesn't agree is a moron?

Google seems to tell me success = the achievement of an aim or a purpose. If your aim is to watch tiki taka football every saturday and discount trophies then good for you. if your aim is to win trophies then good for you as well

lol alright. spuds clearly too big-time to care about silly little things such as local rivalries

Sort by trophies....yes. That is the whole ****ing point of sport ROFL.

I can't believe the people here are genuinely arguing that watching their team play exciting football > trophies. Winning trophies is the most enjoyable thing about football. Good football without winning is like sex without cumming. Playing good football and winning trophies doing it is the ultimate in football experience. But the winning part is key.

Brazil fans still go on about the 1950 final. Losing is the nut low. It's not shrug your shoulders at least we played good football. It's depress an entire footballing nation and pass that depression down to your kids and their kids. Enjoyable football is great but it's a means to an end. It's enjoyable because it is good at winning. There is no such thing as good losing football.

Here here!

Yes but Wikipedia defines purpose as a fully aquatic marine mammal sometimes referred to as mereswine, classified under the family Phocoenidae.

Oh wait, that's porpoise. Carry on.

Anyone got any word on wenger?

Whose everyone wanting, Reading or Hud?