If Liverpool top Arsenal's "Invincibles" and City's Centurions when they win the Premier League you will hear careful, responsible analysts say that Liverpool are "one of the best teams" ever in England's top flight. The prudent "one of". If Liverpool repeat as Champions League titlists they will have won in two successive years their domestic league once--in a runaway--and finished runner-up by one little peepy point in the other, and been European champions back-to-back. You will not hear them be said to be even "one of the best" soccer teams of all time. Why is that?
In these "best of" debates in America I have always defaulted to the improvement of athletes over time to say that this year's best team is better than the best team of a previous generation. My eyes glaze over when someone claims that the 1972 Nebraska college football team would are the equal of, say, this year's best team, LSU; or that the Perfect Season 1972 Miami "Dolphins" would go undefeated in today's NFL too. The players of today are measurably bigger, stronger, and faster--don't even go there with me. It is similar in the NBA although not, to me, clearly so. The great Boston "Celtics" teams of the 1960's--Bill Russell, the Jones brothers, Tommy Heinsohn, later John Havlicek--the great "Lakers" teams of the same era--Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, later Wilt Chamberlain--would lose to Miami's Big Three back-to-back champions or to Golden State's three-in-four-years champions, I think.
Do you see similar, clear, measurable, physical superiority in today's professional baseball or hockey players? Hmm, I don't. I don't see much physical difference (steroids don't count) in MLB or NHL players today compared to the greats of earlier eras. Bobby Hull of the 1960's would still be a Golden Jet today. Are baseball pitchers today throwing faster than Bob Gibson did in the '60's? I don't think so.
Circling back to Liverpool, does my adage hold in soccer as it does in tackle football and, I think, in basketball? Or is soccer more like baseball and hockey? Are the players on this Liverpool team, or on City's Centurions bigger, faster, stronger than those of Bayern Munich's 1973/74 team (#2 best all time) or Inter Milan's 1964/65 team (#3)? I don't see a clear physical difference at all between today's best soccer players and yesteryear's.
So prudent sports journalists then take the "best of era" tack. You can't compare teams from different eras. Yes, you can in tackle football your stupid idiot, probably you can in basketball (rules changes though, hmm: three point line. Ooh); you cannot, I agree, in baseball or hockey or soccer (although I have only been a soccer fan this millennium). So what can we say about the greatness of Liverpool, 2018/19-2019/20? Since the Premier League has only been around since 1992 we can clearly say that if Liverpool goes unbeaten and doesn't draw twelve times they are the best team of the Premier League era...Excuse me, infamous forces have just firebombed my home...Manchester United people (13 time Premier League champs, two three-peats, three repeats) will violently disagree. And I must say, they have a point. Therefore, as a prudent blogger, I can say ich bin ein this Liverpool team is "one of the best" in Britain and in all of Europe (iftheyrepeatasUCLchampstoo) since 1992/3.
In these "best of" debates in America I have always defaulted to the improvement of athletes over time to say that this year's best team is better than the best team of a previous generation. My eyes glaze over when someone claims that the 1972 Nebraska college football team would are the equal of, say, this year's best team, LSU; or that the Perfect Season 1972 Miami "Dolphins" would go undefeated in today's NFL too. The players of today are measurably bigger, stronger, and faster--don't even go there with me. It is similar in the NBA although not, to me, clearly so. The great Boston "Celtics" teams of the 1960's--Bill Russell, the Jones brothers, Tommy Heinsohn, later John Havlicek--the great "Lakers" teams of the same era--Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, later Wilt Chamberlain--would lose to Miami's Big Three back-to-back champions or to Golden State's three-in-four-years champions, I think.
Do you see similar, clear, measurable, physical superiority in today's professional baseball or hockey players? Hmm, I don't. I don't see much physical difference (steroids don't count) in MLB or NHL players today compared to the greats of earlier eras. Bobby Hull of the 1960's would still be a Golden Jet today. Are baseball pitchers today throwing faster than Bob Gibson did in the '60's? I don't think so.
Circling back to Liverpool, does my adage hold in soccer as it does in tackle football and, I think, in basketball? Or is soccer more like baseball and hockey? Are the players on this Liverpool team, or on City's Centurions bigger, faster, stronger than those of Bayern Munich's 1973/74 team (#2 best all time) or Inter Milan's 1964/65 team (#3)? I don't see a clear physical difference at all between today's best soccer players and yesteryear's.
So prudent sports journalists then take the "best of era" tack. You can't compare teams from different eras. Yes, you can in tackle football your stupid idiot, probably you can in basketball (rules changes though, hmm: three point line. Ooh); you cannot, I agree, in baseball or hockey or soccer (although I have only been a soccer fan this millennium). So what can we say about the greatness of Liverpool, 2018/19-2019/20? Since the Premier League has only been around since 1992 we can clearly say that if Liverpool goes unbeaten and doesn't draw twelve times they are the best team of the Premier League era...Excuse me, infamous forces have just firebombed my home...Manchester United people (13 time Premier League champs, two three-peats, three repeats) will violently disagree. And I must say, they have a point. Therefore, as a prudent blogger, I can say i
