Thiago Silva

[Leo_Messi]

You are ignoring the most important factor, which is the state of the current team, which I talked about. So if you're picky with words let's say PSG ranks somewhere from 4th to 7th best team in Europe, same for attractiveness (money + status), but yea the club has no history in Europe, but everyone freaking knows that no ? And yes whether you like it or not Man City is definitely one of the largest clubs in Europe, how can you deny that ? It's a question of power, not morals.



That's a shit indicator. The fact that it is the "best" and only one tells a lot more about how incomparable the leagues are. I've already said that.
Look, if we were to judge a team based on 3 or 4 players from starting eleven, this current barça would be ranked best team in europe by a million miles.

Also already said that France was ranked second for many years in a row in the nineties. And I would laugh at someone attempting to use this to praise the Ligue 1.

It would have sufficed just to say that PSG is currently one of the strongest teams in Europe and then nobody would have objected at all but to call them "one of the largest clubs in the world" is simply not only outrageous but also very laughable. Same case with Man City.

No, the UEFA coefficient list is still the best measurement out there and it's widely recognized as such. 7 teams competing in Europe (over 33,3% of the entire league) is hardly a small sample. Besides the UEFA coefficient list has reflected the strength of the various leagues pretty accurately since like forever.

For how long was Ligue 1 placed second on the UEFA coefficient list in the 1990's? Probably only for 1 or 2 season's at most and that's actually quite possible as French clubs were strong in Europe in the 1990's.

If we are to ignore the UEFA coefficient list and everything else that I have mentioned what are the parameters that we have to use then? As I wrote as well then nobody here is going to tell me that French bottom table clubs are stronger than their equivalents in Spain, England, Germany and Italy because hardly anyone believes that. Outside of Ligue 1 fanboys that is.

 

[Jair Ventura]

Barcelona will continue to live and be among the elite after Messi like before him. PSG are fucked if Qatar decides to sell out.

For some reason I find it far more likely that Messi ages and loses his form than Qatar suddenly stops supporting one of its largest investments. Mind you, it's Messi and Messi alone that separates Barcelona from clubs like PSG.

Number of champions league for all the Ligue 1 teams combined >>> (and it belongs to Marseille).

I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here.

Lol, just read the rest of the posts in between.. Juvens my friends; you suffer from what we call chauvinisme don't let the crazy PSG propaganda get to your head, they still have a loooooooooooooooong way to go before becomming one of the largest club in football history, because they have none (history), as much as the storyline would like to convince us, PSG started being the serious contender it is 3 or 4yrs ago.

You guys are the ones talking about history. I don't know why.

Ligue 1 is the best league in the world while PSG is the biggest club in the world because some Qatari Bedouins bought them 4 years ago and because they have reached the CL quarterfinals 3 times in a row! They also have the most fans in Paris - a city famous for its many leading football clubs.

This is just sad.

 

[Vlom]

it's sad that you guys can't discuss things without getting all partisan & shit.
It is clear that Juvens is arguing about the present, not the past. And you should expect him to be biased because it's normal and so are you. Some tact never hurt anyone.

I'm not biased, i'm neither french nor spanish, I don't care wich league is best, wich team is the largest (except barça)..

Saying league1 is on the level of BPL > chauvinisme, plain and simple (and I hate the bpl hype)

Saying PSG is one of the largest clubs in the world > chauvinisme, again.

They will be, and I said it before, they've been doing great recruiting wise and are building a solid squad, but they are far from already being one of "the largest clubs in the world" ..

Some objectivity would be nice.

 

[Leo_Messi]

Anyway I don't bother engaging in silly debates with a user that makes ridiculous claims frequently and who hypes everything French.
You can continue living in your bubble where Ligue 1 is comparable to La Liga, EPL, Bundesliga and Serie A contrary to the UEFA coefficient list, the number of European trophies won (France is worse than Netherlands, Portugal etc. as well), history, actual level of play etc.

So because Ligue 1 has historically been providing largely cheap players to more potent leagues it somehow makes Ligue 1 a better league than those leagues that actually buy the best talents that Ligue 1 can offer? Hilarious logic.

 

[Jair Ventura]

It would have sufficed just to say that PSG is currently one of the strongest teams in Europe and then nobody would have objected at all but to call them "one of the largest clubs in the world" is simply not only outrageous but also very laughable. Same case with Man City.

I said, and I quote: "Three years into the project are Paris is already one the largest clubs in Europe". True in terms of the city they're stationed, finances, investment(into youth/academies), revenue, supporters, and championships won(recent) in Europe's top leagues. Bayern, Barca, and RM are definitely stronger, but no club beyond those.

edit:

Anyway I don't bother engaging in silly debates with a user that makes ridiculous claims frequently and who hypes everything French.

Stop saying it and just go away. You aren't here for any objective discussion anyway.

So because Ligue 1 has historically been providing largely cheap players to more potent leagues it somehow makes Ligue 1 a better league than those leagues that actually buy the best talents that Ligue 1 can offer? Hilarious logic.

PSG and Monaco and even Lyon have made efforts to keep that talent home. Things change.

 

[Jair Ventura]

I'm not biased, i'm neither french nor spanish, I don't care wich league is best, wich team is the largest (except barça)..

Saying league1 is on the level of BPL > chauvinisme, plain and simple (and I hate the bpl hype)

Saying PSG is one of the largest clubs in the world > chauvinisme, again.

They will be, and I said it before, they've been doing great recruiting wise and are building a solid squad, but they are far from already being one of "the largest clubs in the world" ..

Some objectivity would be nice.

Which clubs in Europe, beyond Barca, RM, and Bayern are larger/stronger/more capable than Paris? I'll wait as you struggle to come up with more than three or four clubs, all of which will be debatable. Afterwards, once we've determined that Paris is among the top 10 clubs in Europe, when 5 years previous they weren't even top 30, you'll be forced to concede that you were wrong to contradict a point that was relatively inarguable.

 

[TornAndFrayed]

No, the UEFA coefficient list is still the best measurement out there and it's widely recognized as such. 7 teams competing in Europe (over 33,3% of the entire league) is hardly a small sample. Besides the UEFA coefficient list has reflected the strength of the various leagues pretty accurately since like forever.

Its five to seven teams, stop stretching it lol. You say "still the best" but I already showed how that doesn't make it a good one just for that reason. And it's obvious if you think about it, so won't discuss it further. You ask me what to trust then but I already said several times now: there's nothing to trust when it comes to comparing leagues. Every analysis will be inaccurate at best. Which is why no one has the answer to which is the absolute best league, and most comments i hear about any leagues anywhere are derogatory, like bundesliga is a training session for Bayern, La Liga is a two (or 3 ?) horse race, BPL football is retarded, Italian football is boring and dying, french football sucks, etc.

@Mehssi: you're not objective, you are partisan and deliberately making it seem like this whole discussion is solely about history, than amalgamating history and "big club" status.

If you want to be objective, drop the whole eye for an eye rhetoric that infects most discussions of rivaling supporters. It takes an effort.

 

[Vlom]

This is pointless since you consider that winning the Ligue1 title, Coupe de la ligue and Coupe de france to be "championchips won" .. seriously, with the players and the money (especially the money) you have, you should be walking over France just like Bayern or Juve are in their respective league, that are harder no matter what you think about it, uefa ranking is their for something, and yet you struggle to accomplish that.

I'll say it again, PSG is a great team, I personally love them, and here in Morocco I have more PSG friends than Barça, but you all wanna be too big too fast, and most of you think you already are, it's simply not true, but I do wish you the best and hope you'll get there.

That's as far as i'll go in this argument

 

[Leo_Messi]

I said, and I quote: "Three years into the project are Paris is already one the largest clubs in Europe". True in terms of the city they're stationed, finances, investment(into youth/academies), revenue, supporters, and championships won(recent) in Europe's top leagues. Bayern, Barca, and RM are definitely stronger, but no club beyond those.

Understand once and for all that being rich (solely due to Qatari oil money) and having a strong squad is not enough to be labeled as "one of the biggest clubs in the world".

What relevance does it have that PSG is based in Paris? None is the answer.

Finances and revenues are part of the financial aspect which I have already covered. It is hardly surprising that PSG are rich given their owners. So it's now an achievement that Qataris bought them?

Investments in youth and academies is a parameter when "greatness" is discussed because of what exactly? When was the last time that the academy of PSG produced more than 3-4 top players? The reality is that there are several better football academies in France alone.

Supporters? Are you joking? PSG is not even in the top 20 when it comes to most supported teams in Europe. Hell probably not even top 25.

So because they have won 2 league titles in 3 seasons in the "mighty" Ligue 1 so far it makes them "one of the biggest clubs in the world"? LOL.

Keep telling yourself that PSG is the 4th strongest team in Europe. Yet oddly enough you have only CL quarterfinals to show on your CV in 4 years time. Or maybe we can't use actual results in Europe since apparently the UEFA coefficient list is not good enough either.

 

[Leo_Messi]

Its five to seven teams, stop stretching it lol. You say "still the best" but I already showed how that doesn't make it a good one just for that reason. And it's obvious if you think about it, so won't discuss it further. You ask me what to trust then but I already said several times now: there's nothing to trust when it comes to comparing leagues. Every analysis will be inaccurate at best. Which is why no one has the answer to which is the absolute best league, and most comments i hear about any leagues anywhere are derogatory, like bundesliga is a training session for Bayern, La Liga is a two (or 3 ?) horse race, BPL football is retarded, Italian football is boring and dying, french football sucks, etc.

Actually it's 6 teams for Ligue 1. At least that was the case this season. That's still almost 33,3% of all Ligue 1 teams and that's a considerable sample. No two ways about it. I don't understand why you are trying to neglect the fact that those 6-7 teams are usually the strongest teams in a given season in league x or y and that their performances in Europe against their counterparts from other leagues are obviously a relevant measure of strength. That should be obvious. I mean it's not a coincidence that UEFA uses this ranking.

We are not talking about THE best league but the 3-5 best leagues in Europe and there is a CONSENSUS that La Liga, EPL, Bundesliga and Serie A are part of that select group of leagues. With Ligue 1 usually being behind those 4. Historically and in recent years. Nobody has said that Ligue 1 is in the European bottom in terms of league hierarchy. It's just not at the top as some users here (read Juvens) is desperately trying to make it sound like using obscure arguments and parameters of what makes a league great. How about just looking at the results in Europe to begin with? But that's apparently not good enough.

 

[TornAndFrayed]

All in all silly discussion about what makes a club "large", doomed to be depleted by self-serving arguments.
too much bias: I summon the Ber (don't poke it) and take my leave.

And uefa uses the rankings to maintain the quality of the CL, its role is not to compare the whole leagues, lol.
I'll say it one last time, if you had to pick the 4 best players of any team and then compare, barça would be so much in front.

 

[Jair Ventura]

Understand once and for all that being rich (solely due to Qatari oil money) and having a strong squad is not enough to be labeled as "one of the biggest clubs in the world".

You're the only person in this discussion that's isolated the analysis of a clubs stature to historical success and money. No one else.

What relevance does it have that PSG is based in Paris? None is the answer.

What relevance does being based in one of the largest cities in France and one of the most iconic in the world have to do with the overall stature of a club? Eh... You're deliberately being obtuse for the sake of being contrary.

Finances and revenues are part of the financial aspect which I have already covered. It is hardly surprising that PSG are rich given their owners. So it's now an achievement that Qataris bought them?

Being strong financially has absolutely nothing to do with a clubs ability to compete. I've learned something new.

Investments in youth and academies is a parameter when "greatness" is discussed because of what exactly?

Because most top clubs lack competent youth and development.

When was the last time that the academy of PSG produced more than 3-4 top players? The reality is that there are several better football academies in France alone.

The reality is this has been analyzed by people more credible, competent, and less biased than yourself and the results are:

"La Liga giants Barcelona have produced more footballers currently playing in Europe's top leagues than any other club, according to new research by the CIES Football Observatory.

There are 43 different players who have come through Barca's La Masia academy currently plying their trades in the "big five" of Spain's La Liga, the English Premier League, German Bundesliga, Italian Serie A and French Ligue 1. Manchester United come second in the rankings with a total of 36 players developed, followed by Real Madrid [34], Olympique Lyon [33] and Paris Saint-Germain [27]."

http://www.espnfc.us/barcelona/stor...egrown-talent-tableaccording-to-cies-research

http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/pdf/wp86_eng.pdf

Supporters? Are you joking? PSG is not even in the top 20 when it comes to most supported teams in Europe. Hell probably not even top 25.

Of course not! A metro area with 10 million people and a single football club to support can way manage enough supports to break into the top 25 of Europe!

So because they have won 2 Ligue 1 titles in 3 seasons so far it makes them "one of the biggest clubs in the world"? LOL.

You keep quoting yourself, than laughing about it. It's odd.

Keep telling yourself that PSG is the 4 strongest team in Europe. Yet oddly enough you have only CL quarterfinals to show on your CV in 4 years time.

You're all over the place, man. Just quit like you said you were.

 

[Jair Ventura]

Actually it's 6 teams for Ligue 1. At least that was the case this season. That's still almost 33,3% of all Ligue 1 teams and that's a considerable sample. No two ways about it. I don't understand why you are trying to neglect the fact that those 6-7 teams are usually the strongest teams in a given season in league x or y and that their performances in Europe against their counterparts from other leagues are obviously a relevant measure of strength. That should be obvious. I mean it's not a coincidence that UEFA uses this ranking.

We are not talking about THE best league but the 3-5 best leagues in Europe and there is a CONSENSUS that La Liga, EPL, Bundesliga and Serie A are part of that select group of leagues. With Ligue 1 usually being behind those 4. Historically and in recent years. Nobody has said that Ligue 1 is in the European bottom in terms of league hierarchy. It's just not at the top as some users here (read Juvens) is desperately trying to make it sound like using obscure arguments and parameters of what makes a league great. How about just looking at the results in Europe to begin with? But that's apparently not good enough.

.......

Which clubs in Europe, beyond Barca, RM, and Bayern are larger/stronger/more capable than Paris? I'll wait as you struggle to come up with more than three or four clubs, all of which will be debatable. Afterwards, once we've determined that Paris is among the top 10 clubs in Europe, when 5 years previous they weren't even top 30, you'll be forced to concede that you were wrong to contradict a point that was relatively inarguable.

Still waiting. After you fumble through this, I'll ask you to explain to me how Lazio and Roma are stronger sides than Lyon and Monaco given "European results".

 

[Leo_Messi]

You're the only person in this discussion that's isolated the analysis of a clubs stature to historical success and money. No one else.



What relevance does being based in one of the largest cities in France and one of the most iconic in the world have to do with the overall stature of a club? Eh... You're deliberately being obtuse for the sake of being contrary.



Being strong financially has absolutely nothing to do with a clubs ability to compete. I've learned something new.



Because most top clubs lack competent youth and development.



The reality is this has been analyzed by people more credible, competent, and less biased than yourself and the results are:

"La Liga giants Barcelona have produced more footballers currently playing in Europe's top leagues than any other club, according to new research by the CIES Football Observatory.

There are 43 different players who have come through Barca's La Masia academy currently plying their trades in the "big five" of Spain's La Liga, the English Premier League, German Bundesliga, Italian Serie A and French Ligue 1. Manchester United come second in the rankings with a total of 36 players developed, followed by Real Madrid [34], Olympique Lyon [33] and Paris Saint-Germain [27]."

http://www.espnfc.us/barcelona/stor...egrown-talent-tableaccording-to-cies-research

http://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/pdf/wp86_eng.pdf



Of course not! A metro area with 10 million people and a single football club to support can way manage enough supports to break into the top 25 of Europe!



You keep quoting yourself, than laughing about it. It's odd.



You're all over the place, man. Just quit like you said you were.

I have mentioned several factors that contribute to a club's stature and prestige. Many more than you have mentioned. All you have been doing in this debate is telling us all how rich PSG is which is not an achievement at all when your club is rich solely due to being bought by rich Qatari's who own their richness to oil and gas money. That's not an achievement at all.

None whatsoever when it comes to the prestige of a club and their actual achievements on a football field. By that logic the best clubs would be based in the most populous cities of Europe (Moscow, Istanbul, London and Paris) but they are not. You are writing nonsense as many times before.

Who told you that? Yourself or what? I am telling you that the only reason why you have been able to buy a strong squad is due to Qatari oil money. Nothing more and nothing less. You can sugarcoat it all that you want. In most people's eyes that's hardly an achievement unlike the achievements of Atlético and Dortmund for instance.

No, they don't and PSG's academy is average at best.

Why are you talking about the academy of FCB? What has that to do with the academy of PSG once again?

Whether PSG is placed as number 15 or 20 makes no difference at all. The fact is that they are nowhere near being among the most supported clubs in Europe.

I am making fun of your claim of PSG (fucking PSG of all clubs) being one of the largest clubs in the world. That's indeed very funny.

How can PSG be the 4th best team (another absurd claim) when your best European result 4 years in a row has been a CL quarterfinal?

Anyway I will let you live in your own bubble and let you hype everything French to many users's amusement. Your claim of FCB facing difficulties financially and in keeping Messi etc. was also hilarious so thank you for that as well.

My last post.

 

[Jair Ventura]

I have mentioned several factors that contribute to a club's stature and prestige. Many more than you have mentioned. All you have been doing in this debate is telling us all how rich PSG is which is not an achievement at all when your club is rich solely due to being bought by rich Qatari's who own their richness to oil and gas money. That's not an achievement at all.

Yes, you're jealous of PSG's wealth. Tell us more.

None whatsoever when it comes to the prestige of a club and their actual achievements on a football field. By that logic the best clubs would be based in the most populous cities of Europe (Moscow, Istanbul, London and Paris) but they are not. You are writing nonsense as many times before.

- Moscow is an outlier for obvious reasons, while Turkey has only been a member of the European union since 2005.

- London supports 13 professional teams and features over 80 amateur leagues. Not sure what you're talking about here.

But hey, what are some of the other cities that fit the criteria of most populated in Europe?

3. London - Chelsea, Arsenal

4. Saint Peterburg - Zenit

6. Madrid - Real Madrid, Atletico Madrid

7. Rome - Roma, Lazio

9. Paris - PSG

16. Barcelona - Barcelona

17. Munich - Bayern Munich

19. Milan - A.C. Milan, Inter Milan


You're wrong, again.

No, they don't and PSG's academy is average at best.

Why are you talking about the academy of FCB? What has that to do with the academy of PSG once again?

I apologize, I didn't realize you couldn't read, but I guess I should've taken a hint by now. In any case, the article featured a CEIS report about the top talent producing clubs of the big 5 leagues. Barca ranked number 1, PSG ranked number 5. That's the association.

I am making fun of your claim of PSG (fucking PSG of all clubs) being one of the largest clubs in the world. That's indeed very funny.

*yawn*

As I am making fun of your inability to answer this simple question:

"Which clubs in Europe, beyond Barca, RM, and Bayern are larger/stronger/more capable than Paris? I'll wait as you struggle to come up with more than three or four clubs, all of which will be debatable. Afterwards, once we've determined that Paris is among the top 10 clubs in Europe, when 5 years previous they weren't even top 30, you'll be forced to concede that you were wrong to contradict a point that was relatively inarguable."

Still waiting.

My last post.

One can hope.