Other games (2024/25)

[Kimbo]

3 hours ago, Sempiternal said:

Loaded question imo, because the clubs are in two different states, but the top 4 thing is just a modern creation, classing it as trophy. West ham certainly wouldn’t swap their season for ours.  

What happens if you aim for top 4, bomb out of every comp, Chelsea, spurs, arsenal to a degree did this. Now spurs have no Europe, no trophies. I’m glad we finished in the CL, but on first consideration I’d take finishing in the top 10 and winning either the league cup or the conf 100 percent. No one cares that we finished in the top 4 in the 90s, but I do care we haven’t won a trophy for donkeys years 

I agree that top 4 isn’t really that special, I just wouldn’t swap it for any old trophy.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Kimbo

[ponsaelius]

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

 

Fair enough, didn't spot that - what they did after 1969 is probably less relevant (to my point) than what they did before. The point I'm making is that a third competition isn't unusual and, if anything, today's is arguably comprised of more 'big' clubs (however you want to define that) than the iterations of yesteryear were. 

 

Yeah it's a fair point.

 

Just probably worth noting that Hungary, while not in their 50s heyday, were a big footballing country (twice WC quarter finalists in the 60s) with a stronger domestic game than they have now. And within that context Ujpest are the second biggest club after Ferencvaros - so it wasn't like we were playing a scrub side that it might appear today.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by ponsaelius

[number37]

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

 

You mean it has zero prestige to a dozen or so clubs (of all the millions of clubs in Europe) whose target - realistically or otherwise - is to reach the latter stages of the Champions League. 

 

Like I was saying last night, defining the Conference League by how it compares with a far more prestigious competition is such a grim way to view it, imo. Not everything is about the tedium of the Champions League's annual rinse and repeat.

 

A competition should be defined by its own competitors.

 

I swear most of the derision is subconsciously borne out of that fucking awful name which is deliberately pitched to sound subservient to UEFA's cash cow tournies. 

 

You're right and I think it's also important to note that the 'big' clubs aren't in the Conference League so obviously they're not going to think it has any prestige. It's not like Arsenal or whoever not caring about the League Cup and so they just field their kids and reserves, they're not prioritising their Champions League campaign over Conference League because they're not in the latter. 

 

Maybe prestige isn't the way to look at it - perhaps it's the old "you can only beat what's in front of you" approach. No one will say the FA Vase is more prestigious than the FA Cup but try telling Whitley Bay their achievements are meaningless because Manchester United has low regard for that particular tournament, not that they're eligible anyway. I'm sure Whitley Bay would love a crack at the Champions League but I'm also sure they rather enjoyed their glory at Wembley despite the fact it's a lesser competition and not worth the time of the Sky teams. 

[Yorkie]

15 minutes ago, number37 said:

 

You're right and I think it's also important to note that the 'big' clubs aren't in the Conference League so obviously they're not going to think it has any prestige. It's not like Arsenal or whoever not caring about the League Cup and so they just field their kids and reserves, they're not prioritising their Champions League campaign over Conference League because they're not in the latter. 

 

Maybe prestige isn't the way to look at it - perhaps it's the old "you can only beat what's in front of you" approach. No one will say the FA Vase is more prestigious than the FA Cup but try telling Whitley Bay their achievements are meaningless because Manchester United has low regard for that particular tournament, not that they're eligible anyway. I'm sure Whitley Bay would love a crack at the Champions League but I'm also sure they rather enjoyed their glory at Wembley despite the fact it's a lesser competition and not worth the time of the Sky teams. 

 

Absolutely, that's totally what I'm getting at when I say you have to define a competition by those competing in it. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Yeah it's a fair point.

 

Just probably worth noting that Hungary, while not in their 50s heyday, were a big footballing country (twice WC quarter finalists in the 60s) with a stronger domestic game than they have now. And within that context Ujpest are the second biggest club after Ferencvaros - so it wasn't like we were playing a scrub side that it might appear today.

 

 

 

 

Don Revie apparently said Ujpest were one of the best teams his Leeds had played according to dad. Ujpest knocked them out of the Fairs Cup the year we won it. Leeds went on to win the league, so they mustn't have been shabby.

[Jaqen]

3 hours ago, Sempiternal said:

Loaded question imo, because the clubs are in two different states, but the top 4 thing is just a modern creation, classing it as trophy. West ham certainly wouldn’t swap their season for ours.  

What happens if you aim for top 4, bomb out of every comp, Chelsea, spurs, arsenal to a degree did this. Now spurs have no Europe, no trophies. I’m glad we finished in the CL, but on first consideration I’d take finishing in the top 10 and winning either the league cup or the conf 100 percent. No one cares that we finished in the top 4 in the 90s, but I do care we haven’t won a trophy for donkeys years 

 

When it's been so long without a trophy for sides like ourselves or West Ham then it's pretty clear what the better season is. Or at least the prize is better. 

 

That said we are one of the few clubs outside the top 6 that have the potential to break it. West Ham finishing in the top 4 aren't in the same position to build on it like we will be able to. So I guess for the 'project' top 4 is better than it can accelerate our growth and lead to competing for trophies more regularly quicker. I think what we've done has been more impressive and difficult too. But aye you'd still take a trophy over it really. 

[ponsaelius]

The Fairs Cup wasn't weak at all really. The one club per city and qualification rules were a bit all over the place but it wasn't too similar to the later UEFA Cup and the line up was definitely far stronger than the current edition of the Conference League.

 

For example in the year we were in there was:

 

3rd, 4th, 5th, 10th in England - Liverpool, Leeds, Chelsea, Newcastle

2-4th in Serie A - Napoli, Juve and Fiorentina

2nd, 4th and 6th in France - Nice, Marseille, Metz

4-7th in Spain - Valencia, Zaragoza, Atletico Madrid and Athletic Bilbao

2nd in Holland - Feyenoord

2nd in Portugal - Sporting

3rd in Yugoslavia - Dinamo Zagreb

2nd, 3rd and 5th in Scotland - Rangers, Hibs, and Aberdeen

3rd and 4th in Belgium - Liege and Waregem

 

You can continue through the Eastern European leagues which were much stronger at the time where big sides were entered.

 

If you were to go off current European format many of these clubs would have been playing in the European Cup instead. Indeed it is arguable that the Fairs Cup and subsequent UEFA cup often had more depth, on paper, than the European Cup.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by ponsaelius

[Tsunami]

Ujpest had a team full of internationals, did the domestic double that year and the year after, got to 2 European Cup QF and a SF. They were a top side. 
 

As for West Ham, you can only win who you are put up against and it’s a European trophy. Fair play, rotten name for it. Sounds like it’s for a semi pro league, I mean, Conference, really?

[Yorkie]

If the Fairs Cup was stronger/more prestigious than today's Conference League then I'm happy to stand corrected; my research went as far as checking Ujpest's list of European honours pre-1969. Maybe the old Cup Winners' Cup is a more worthwhile comparison in terms of who's in it. Ultimately I'm just trying to defend the concept of there being a third tournament.

[Cronky]

23 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

Ujpest had a team full of internationals, did the domestic double that year and the year after, got to 2 European Cup QF and a SF. They were a top side. 
 

As for West Ham, you can only win who you are put up against and it’s a European trophy. Fair play, rotten name for it. Sounds like it’s for a semi pro league, I mean, Conference, really?

 

No-one fancied us to beat Ujpest. 

[Kid Icarus]

Enough of the teams involved are prestigious enough to make it a more than worthy tournament imo. I'd go as far as saying that certainly in the PL, the teams getting into it are at the level of those who were playing in the Europa and doing well not that long ago. The Europa is undermined by CL drop outs now anyway imo, regardless of whether we benefit from that setup next season. The Europa Conference is better for being a closed shop once teams qualify. 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Yorkie said:

If the Fairs Cup was stronger/more prestigious than today's Conference League then I'm happy to stand corrected; my research went as far as checking Ujpest's list of European honours pre-1969. Maybe the old Cup Winners' Cup is a more worthwhile comparison in terms of who's in it. Ultimately I'm just trying to defend the concept of there being a third tournament.

 

Definitely seems closer to the Cup Winners Cup particularly later on. I remember Chelsea winning it beating pretty average teams like Tromso. 

 

Edit: just looked and there were only 4 rounds before the final.

 

Chelsea had finished 6th.

 

Slovan Bratislava (3rd in Slovakia)

Tromso (5th in Norway)

Real Betis (4th in Spain)

Vicenza (8th in Italy)

Stuttgart (4th in Germany)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Optimistic Nut

[Hanshithispantz]

16 hours ago, Stifler said:

The thing is though, for the top 4/nations in the Conference League, each one of those teams would have qualified for the Europa League a couple of years ago.

Ok both Fiorentina and West Ham have had bad seasons, but that could have happened in the Europa League, in fact it did with Seville this year.

For what it’s worth, unless they get a ban, then Juventus will be in the Conference League next season, hardly a minnow.

I'm not saying they're minnows.

 

It's just at some point in the League Cup it's extremely likely you're going to have to play one of the top 4, look at the finals for the past decade:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_EFL_Cup_finals

 

I like the Conference league, I just think it's a lot harder to win the League Cup.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Hanshithispantz

[Hanshithispantz]

Like I imagine West Ham's odds for winning it were pretty low, you'd have gotten massive odds in the winning the League Cup.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Hanshithispantz

[tgarve]

10 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

Like I imagine West Ham's odds for winning it were pretty low, you'd have gotten massive odds in the winning the League Cup.

 

 

 

You wouldn’t really , probably 4/1 or something 

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

I reckon if Gareth Southgate moved to a club and won the Conference League Yorkie would explode. 

[Erikse]

Winning it gave them a spot in the Europa League, that in itself is pretty neat for a team like West Ham.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Erikse

[Yorkie]

1 hour ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

I reckon if Gareth Southgate moved to a club and won the Conference League Yorkie would explode. 

 

 I'll stop talking about the Conference League for a bit now it's over. 

 

... England fixtures next week.

[Beth]

On par with winning the League Cup imo, so still better than anything we've managed since 1969.

 

Let's be honest here, if we'd been offered the choice of winning the LC or a top four finish, 99% of us would've taken the former.

[Dancing Brave]

53 minutes ago, Beth said:

 

 

Let's be honest here, if we'd been offered the choice of winning the LC or a top four finish, 99% of us would've taken the former.

I agree with that 100%

[madras]

3 hours ago, Beth said:

On par with winning the League Cup imo, so still better than anything we've managed since 1969.

 

Let's be honest here, if we'd been offered the choice of winning the LC or a top four finish, 99% of us would've taken the former.

I'm the 1%.

[Hanshithispantz]

5 hours ago, tgarve said:

You wouldn’t really , probably 4/1 or something 

4/1 for West Ham to win the LC?

 

Vlla are 25/1 to win the LC next year, the ECL odds aren't out yet but I would be amazed if they were any where near that.

 

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by Hanshithispantz

[Hanshithispantz]

As for the ECL vs top 4 thing, we still talk about Shearer vs Inter Milan, the Barcelona 3-2, BELAMYYYYYYYYY!!! IT'S IN!!! ect.

 

A season definitely isn't just forgotten if you don't win a trophy.

 

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by Hanshithispantz

[Astroblack]

Would rather have top four than winning the League Cup this year. Being in the CL means we can attract a certain caliber of player and could potentially set us up for decades upon decades of success. 
 

West Ham won a trophy and now they’re going to lose their best player. No one’s leaving us. 

[TheBrownBottle]

16 hours ago, Yorkie said:

PS if we're saying that UEFA's third competition isn't a major trophy then we are genuinely downgrading our own historic achievements. The Fairs Cup's one city rule probably meant that competition had even fewer 'big' teams in it than today's Vana-euro-rama, even in the context of 1969. Ujpest Doza certainly hadn't pulled up any trees in Europe by the time they faced us, and never achieved anything notable thereafter.  

I agree re the unnecessary downgrading of competitions, but it’s a bit harsh on Ujpest tbf.  They knocked out Don Revie’s Leeds in the semi (the same Leeds side which won the English league title that season) and Revie described them as the best team in Europe.  On winning the Fairs Cup NUFC had to knock out some big sides - including Rangers (at a time when Rangers and Celtic were the equal of any English side) and Feyenoord - who won the European Cup the year after.