Leicester City...

Congratulations to Leicester - they have done exceptionally well and its great to see a different team raise the trophy, however it's not as much of an underdog situation as the media portrays, the owner has ploughed over £100M into the club and over £26m this season on players. Still small change compared to Man City's expenditure but hardly a small club made good story. Well done to them though, they deserved it.
It's however nowhere near what Nottingham Forest achieved 1977-1980.
A true rags to riches story is Bournemouth who were on minus 17 points in League 2 as recently as 2008 without the ability to field a full senior squad who managed to not only get to the premier league but stay there this season. That has hardly been mentioned in the media for some reason.....
 
Purbeck said:
Congratulations to Leicester - they have done exceptionally well and its great to see a different team raise the trophy, however it's not as much of an underdog situation as the media portrays, the owner has ploughed over £100M into the club and over £26m this season on players. Still small change compared to Man City's expenditure but hardly a small club made good story. Well done to them though, they deserved it.
It's however nowhere near what Nottingham Forest achieved 1977-1980.
A true rags to riches story is Bournemouth who were on minus 17 points in League 2 as recently as 2008 without the ability to field a full senior squad who managed to not only get to the premier league but stay there this season. That has hardly been mentioned in the media for some reason.....
Click to expand...
I'm going to disagree with a couple of points here. To say that it's not a 'small club made good' story is laughable. Leicester are a small club - their outlay this season is probably one of the lowest in the Premiership and they have undoubtedly done good.

I made the point earlier that Forest's achievements were against the backdrop of a far more level playing field. However there are two other points to bear in mind - firstly Clough had a decent transfer fund (Trevor Francis, England's first million transfer), but more importantly Liverpool dominated that era, there was nowhere near the competition from the likes of Manchester United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs, nowadays. The point - it only needed Liverpool to have an off season and the rest were in with a chance and it was Forest that took it.

To my mind there's no question that Leicester's is the greater achievement.
 
UKRob said:
I'm going to disagree with a couple of points here. To say that it's not a 'small club made good' story is laughable. Leicester are a small club - their outlay this season is probably one of the lowest in the Premiership and they have undoubtedly done good.

I made the point earlier that Forest's achievements were against the backdrop of a far more level playing field. However there are two other points to bear in mind - firstly Clough had a decent transfer fund (Trevor Francis, England's first million transfer), but more importantly Liverpool dominated that era, there was nowhere near the competition from the likes of Manchester United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs, nowadays. The point - it only needed Liverpool to have an off season and the rest were in with a chance and it was Forest that took it.

To my mind there's no question that Leicester's is the greater achievement.
Click to expand...
That's why they call it the beautiful game. Two people can look on exactly the same thing and see it differently and never agree !
I think this seasons premiership is the weakest for a long time, just my opinion. Leicester sit mid table for expenditure this season so still a very good achievement. IF Leicester now go on to win the champions league twice on the trot then in my mind it will match Forest. I have no doubt others would disagree as they are entitled to.
For now I'm pleased for them to become only the 6th team out of 48 try to win the league. They deserved it. Well played Leicester.
 
Last edited:
Whilst just up the road, Tigers are a wealthy club with a large fan base. Huge. Loyal.

Anyway, does Forest have to have done better than Leicester? It's like arguing which of two boxers from different generations would win a fight. Still, if you enjoy it, I suppose ...

In the here and now - Well Done Leicester!!
 
joe mcclaine said:
Just something blokes do.

Make lists, compare, top tens.

The sort of conversation that takes place every day in pubs up and down the country.

Higgins / Davis ... Tyson / Ali ... Monroe / Hepburn ... Charlton / Best ... Faldo / Nicklaus ... Beatles / Stones ... Batman / Superman ... Vintage Gillette / Modern Stainless ... Frazzles / Scampi Fries ... etc, etc.
Click to expand...

Batman would clearly lose, he's just a normal guy.... :)
 
Purbeck said:
the owner has ploughed over £26m this season on players.
It's however nowhere near what Nottingham Forest achieved 1977-1980.
A true rags to riches story is Bournemouth who were on minus 17 points in League 2 as recently as 2008 without the ability to field a full senior squad who managed to not only get to the premier league but stay there this season. That has hardly been mentioned in the media for some reason.....
Click to expand...
Few points I'd like to come back on.
1. Leicester's squad cost just over £50m (according the BBC) which brackets them with Stoke, Watford, Swansea, Bournemouth, WBA, Crystal Palace & Norwich. To put some context on it Liverpool paid £32m for Christian Benteke. Manchester City and Manchester Utd both spent north of £400m each whilst Liverpool and Chelsea spent between £250m and £300m each. By any measure that is a superb achievement
2. I tend to agree about Nottingham Forest - they achieved, from a not dis-similar starting point - a degree of sustained success in England and Europe. Back in those days the European Cup was only contested by league winners so it had no dross in the competition.
3. Regarding Bournemouth - their achievement is, too, immense but I think it is regularly trumpeted in the media. However Leicester's story is bigger and more astonishing, in my opinion.
 
jds said:
Few points I'd like to come back on.
1. Leicester's squad cost just over £50m (according the BBC) which brackets them with Stoke, Watford, Swansea, Bournemouth, WBA, Crystal Palace & Norwich. To put some context on it Liverpool paid £32m for Christian Benteke. Manchester City and Manchester Utd both spent north of £400m each whilst Liverpool and Chelsea spent between £250m and £300m each. By any measure that is a superb achievement
2. I tend to agree about Nottingham Forest - they achieved, from a not dis-similar starting point - a degree of sustained success in England and Europe. Back in those days the European Cup was only contested by league winners so it had no dross in the competition.
3. Regarding Bournemouth - their achievement is, too, immense but I think it is regularly trumpeted in the media. However Leicester's story is bigger and more astonishing, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Sounds like we're not far away in opinions, I do however think this season has been the poorest standard of Premiership for a long time, the likes of Man U, Chelsea, Newcastle, even Man City and Liverpool having - by their own standards - poor seasons.
Not taking anything away from Leicester, they have done their job and you can only beat what is put in front of you.
As was mentioned earlier, comparing Forest is hard, they started a league below and won the league, but it was a different game back then with gamesmanship and tactics playing a huge part. It's like comparing different cars on different tracks. Personal opinions will only ever be just that - an opinion and never able to prove either way.
Going on to win and retain European cup when only champions were entered and it was knock out format instead of league is the true Roy of the rovers story which will never be repeated. But then it's comparing apples with oranges.
 
Just one other point to throw into the debate around Forest/Leicester. When Forest won the league the vast majority of players in the top levels were from England, Scotland, Wales and the two lots of Irish - imagine taking out all of today's players who don't fall into those nationalities, and then spreading the remaining available talent around, and you'll get some idea of what I mean by a more level playing field in those days.
 
UKRob said:
Just one other point to throw into the debate around Forest/Leicester. When Forest won the league the vast majority of players in the top levels were from England, Scotland, Wales and the two lots of Irish - imagine taking out all of today's players who don't fall into those nationalities, and then spreading the remaining available talent around, and you'll get some idea of what I mean by a more level playing field in those days.
Click to expand...
And they only had one sub per game, not a second team to come on....

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
This has got me thinking about the Leeds team in the early seventies who were all internationals. Off the top of my head:

Welsh - Sprake, Yorath.
Scots, Bremner, Grey, Lorimer
Irish - Giles
English - Hunter, Reaney, Madeley, Clarke, Jones

There are a couple more that I can picture but not name. Give them the advantage of modern training and better pitches, they'd still be a force to be reckoned with.
 
UKRob said:
Just one other point to throw into the debate around Forest/Leicester. When Forest won the league the vast majority of players in the top levels were from England, Scotland, Wales and the two lots of Irish - imagine taking out all of today's players who don't fall into those nationalities, and then spreading the remaining available talent around, and you'll get some idea of what I mean by a more level playing field in those days.
Click to expand...
Horses for courses. If it was such a level playing field back then, surely the feat that Forest managed would be replicated more often - rather than never ?!
Likewise I'm sure Leicesters achievement will not be replicated anytime soon.
 
in the 70s and 80s, other than forest, there were also a few teams who came from nowhere and came close to achieving title wins. QPR had a cracking side and finished runners up with players like peter eastoe, gerry francis, dave thomas and don masson. watford in the early 80s came close too with luther blissett and john barnes. it backs the level playing field theory up a bit. aston villa got their success of league and european cup, it wasnt all forest and liverpool :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom