Rank top 10 clubs by strength - 2010-11

this is ranking not by succes or how many big players they have, but just the strenght of clubs on the field, meaning how strong they were.

1. barca
2. madrid
3. man u
4. porto
5. inter
6. chelsea
6. arsenal
7. bayern
8. milan
9. dortmund
10. napoli

1. Barca
2. Madrid
3. Arsenal

imo. rest I'm unsure

1.Barca
2.Madrid
3.United
4.Arsenal
5.Man city
6.Dortmund
7.Porto
8.Chelsea
9.AC milan
10.Valencia
11.Tottenham

edit;i missed porto ,they will slot in exactly at 5th place

depends on 2010-2011 form


edit again:Dortmund........

The BoyWonder wrote:this is ranking not by succes or how many big players they have, but just the strenght of clubs on the field, meaning how strong they were.

1. barca
2. madrid
3. man u
4. porto
5. inter
6. chelsea
6. arsenal
7. bayern
8. milan
9. dortmund
10. napoli

u've got two 6th place teams
and if u were trying to imply they were tied 6th then bayern shouldve been 8th and u shouldnt have had a number 10 so it was still 10 teams on the list

The BoyWonder wrote:this is ranking not by succes or how many big players they have, but just the strenght of clubs on the field, meaning how strong they were.

1. barca
2. madrid
3. man u
4. porto
5. inter
6. chelsea
6. arsenal
7. bayern
8. milan
9. dortmund
10. napoli

Inter ahead of Milan? After what happened last season

1.barca

2.real madrid

3.manchester united

4.chelsea

5.bayern

6.internazionale

7.arsenal

8.porto

9.ac milan

10.olympique lyonnais

1.barca

2.real madrid

3.manchester united

5.bayern

6.chelsea

7.ac milan

8.arsenal

9.internazionale

10.Malaga

1. Barca
2. Madrid
3. Man U
4. Arsenal
5. Chelsea
6. FC Porto
6. AC Milan
6. Borussa Dortmund
9. Bayern
10. Internazionale

milanista99 wrote:

The BoyWonder wrote:this is ranking not by succes or how many big players they have, but just the strenght of clubs on the field, meaning how strong they were.

1. barca
2. madrid
3. man u
4. porto
5. inter
6. chelsea
6. arsenal
7. bayern
8. milan
9. dortmund
10. napoli

Inter ahead of Milan? After what happened last season

What happend is injury ravaged Inter side with poor coaches, i mean Matrix played in 1s game and super combo duo Chivu-Ranocchia in 2nd

As i understood he only asked for purely who is better on paper, no?

Inter: 361.200.000 €
Milan: 255.125.000 €

http://www.transfermarkt.de/en/serie-a/startseite/wettbewerb_IT1.html

I still think Inter has better team on paper then Milan

real madrid
barca
man u
man city
chelsea
arsenal
milan
inter

1. Barca
2. Madrid
3. Manchester United
4. Bayern Munich
5. Inter
6. Arsenal
7. Chelsea
8. Milan
9. Porto
10. Borussia Dortmund

Barca

Madrid
United
Bayern


City
Chelsea
Inter
Milan
Arsenal
Dortmund

LOL at first i thought he meant Physical strength so I was about to write down Stoke

1. Barca
2. Madrid
3. Manchester United
4. Bayern Munich
5. Milan
6. Arsenal
7. Inter
8. Chelsea
9. Porto
10.Man City

Probably subject to change when transfer window is over but how it stands atm in my view.

CroInter wrote:

milanista99 wrote:

The BoyWonder wrote:this is ranking not by succes or how many big players they have, but just the strenght of clubs on the field, meaning how strong they were.

1. barca
2. madrid
3. man u
4. porto
5. inter
6. chelsea
6. arsenal
7. bayern
8. milan
9. dortmund
10. napoli

Inter ahead of Milan? After what happened last season

What happened is injury ravaged Inter side with poor coaches, i mean Matrix played in 1s game and super combo duo Chivu-Ranocchia in 2nd

As i understood he only asked for purely who is better on paper, no?

Inter: 361.200.000 €
Milan: 255.125.000 €

http://www.transfermarkt.de/en/serie-a/startseite/wettbewerb_IT1.html

I still think Inter has better team on paper then Milan

Excuses, excuses, excuses

We won the Scudetto by a 6 point gap. We beat you twice. Inter had more injuries than Milan but we also had our fair shares of injuries, which cost us a Champions League quarter-final place. At one point almost our entire first team midfield was injured and we had to play youth players like Merkel and Strasser and at the ending stages, all our CFs (Pato, Ibra, Inzaghi) were injured/suspended. You complain about Chivu, Materazzi, Ranocchia? We had to deal with Boneheadera, Oddo and Antonini. And during some matches, Allegri inexplicably put Ambrosini, Gattuso and Seedorf together in a 3 man midfield.

And Inter better on paper than Milan? Are you basing this on the 2009-10 season. This season a lot of your players for dropped (Julio Cesar, Maicon, Milito) and some of ours improved (Thiago Silva, Abbiati, Godbate)and we got some excellent players in the transfer market (Ibra, Cassano, Van Bommel, Mexes, Taiwo)I think that as of RIGHT NOW, Milan has the better team on paper than Inter but that's just my opinion, you can keep yours

And by the way, the OP didn't say team best on paper

The BoyWonder wrote:this is ranking not by succes or how many big players they have, but just the strenght of clubs on the field, meaning how strong they were.

milanista99 wrote:

CroInter wrote:

milanista99 wrote:

The BoyWonder wrote:this is ranking not by succes or how many big players they have, but just the strenght of clubs on the field, meaning how strong they were.

1. barca
2. madrid
3. man u
4. porto
5. inter
6. chelsea
6. arsenal
7. bayern
8. milan
9. dortmund
10. napoli

Inter ahead of Milan? After what happened last season

What happened is injury ravaged Inter side with poor coaches, i mean Matrix played in 1s game and super combo duo Chivu-Ranocchia in 2nd

As i understood he only asked for purely who is better on paper, no?

Inter: 361.200.000 €
Milan: 255.125.000 €

http://www.transfermarkt.de/en/serie-a/startseite/wettbewerb_IT1.html

I still think Inter has better team on paper then Milan

Excuses, excuses, excuses

We won the Scudetto by a 6 point gap. We beat you twice. Inter had more injuries than Milan but we also had our fair shares of injuries, which cost us a Champions League quarter-final place. At one point almost our entire first team midfield was injured and we had to play youth players like Merkel and Strasser and at the ending stages, all our CFs (Pato, Ibra, Inzaghi) were injured/suspended. You complain about Chivu, Materazzi, Ranocchia? We had to deal with Boneheadera, Oddo and Antonini. And during some matches, Allegri inexplicably put Ambrosini, Gattuso and Seedorf together in a 3 man midfield.

And Inter better on paper than Milan? Are you basing this on the 2009-10 season. This season a lot of your players for dropped (Julio Cesar, Maicon, Milito) and some of ours improved (Thiago Silva, Abbiati, Godbate)and we got some excellent players in the transfer market (Ibra, Cassano, Van Bommel, Mexes, Taiwo)I think that as of RIGHT NOW, Milan has the better team on paper than Inter but that's just my opinion, you can keep yours

Couldn't agree more.

1. Barca
2. Madrid
3. Arsenal
4. Man Utd
5. Milan
6. Inter
7. Bayern
8. Porto
9. Dortmund
10. Napoli

I love how people put Milan behind Arsenal and such, but I guess thats what you get from playing your B-team against Spurs and losing.

Still, a class midfielder is needed for Milan to be CL contenders I would assume.

Eivindo wrote:I love how people put Milan behind Arsenal and such, but I guess thats what you get from playing your B-team against Spurs and losing.

Still, a class midfielder is needed for Milan to be CL contenders I would assume.

Lineup [4-3-2-1]
32 C. Abbiati
20 I. Abate
13 A. Nesta
33 T. Silva
18 M. Jankulovski
10 C. Seedorf
27 K. Boateng
16 M. Flamini
70 Robinho
7 Pato
11 Z. Ibrahimovic


B team

Barca
ManU
Inter
Chelsea
Milan
Madrid
Bayern
Man City
Napoli
Lille

Wait can someone explain to me how everyone's ranking Arsenal ahead of Chelsea when they comfortably finished ahead of them despite having their worst season in about a decade?

Gil wrote:Wait can someone explain to me how everyone's ranking Arsenal ahead of Chelsea when they comfortably finished ahead of them despite having their worst season in about a decade?

Delusional?

CroInter wrote:

Eivindo wrote:I love how people put Milan behind Arsenal and such, but I guess thats what you get from playing your B-team against Spurs and losing.

Still, a class midfielder is needed for Milan to be CL contenders I would assume.

Lineup [4-3-2-1]
32 C. Abbiati
20 I. Abate
13 A. Nesta
33 T. Silva
18 M. Jankulovski
10 C. Seedorf
27 K. Boateng
16 M. Flamini
70 Robinho
7 Pato
11 Z. Ibrahimovic


B team

When Silva is used as a midfielder = loss. Its not that Silva cant play that role, its just that Allegri wanted to get more pace into the midfield, with Gattuso and Slowdorf inhabiting the area already. What he didnt know, was that the veterans was gonna be so badly out-run anyway. Gattuso played the first game and was absolutely horrible, yet, he got to play the whole first game (If i remember correctly). He wanted to fight hooligans instead.

Key player Pirlo was also out in both games.(mostly)

We even played with youngsters in the second legg as our midfield was in ruins. I shouldnt have said B-team but thats the feeling I got when I saw our midfield:D

Pirlo = key player yet Milan were glad to sell him in the summer.