Are we heading into...

..the weakest Premier League season in a decade?

There is an argument that the upcoming Premier League season is in fact more of a competitive affair due to Manchester City's relentless spending and Liverpool's activity into the transfer market but does this lead us to believe that we are about to enter a season of top notch quality football or are we heading into another nine month stretch about to witness a product watered down even further than the previous one?

Almost every critic and tipster is tipping Man Utd to win it again and some even suggest it at a canter. The whole 'you can't look beyond Utd' machine is already gathering momentum before a ball has even been kicked. It's an interesting one. Utd won it with 80 points last season which is as low a total since they captured the title in 2000/1. They won 5 away games and failed to win back to back games on the road once. If ever a championship was won almost entirely at home then last seasons was the one.

There have been three 'great' teams in the last ten years them being Arsenal 2001-04, Chelsea 2004-06 and Utd themselves 2006-09. Now this is just my opinion but any of the current challengers wouldn't hold a candle to any of the above sides.

So lets look at the top six.

Man Utd. Rightly favourites but how many 'world class' players do they genuinely possess? Rooney? Possibly. Vidic? Arguably. Hernandez? Repeat last season and well on his way. Nain? Too hot and cold for my liking.... The one thing they do do is play as a team/unit better than anybody else but they appear grinders more than entertainers or am I being too harsh?

Chelsea. An aging squad that have retained the core of Jose Mourinho's squad but what does that say? Fernando Torres may never recapture the consistent form he showed at Liverpool and Didier Drogba is not getting any fresher. Last years mid-season collapse shows what can happen to a side when they become over reliant on a certain few players...Frank Lampard perhaps? Roman Abramovich wants sexy football but is he going to get it with this mob?

Man City. Appear too workmanlike for my money. A decent squad that has come at a ridiculous cost but their manager worries me. Of course a solid defence is a must at this level but why build your whole team around a back seven when you have brilliant players such as David Silva and Adam Johnson at your disposal? If City win the title churning out dross week after week then what does that say?

Arsenal. It doesn't look like Cesc Fabregas and/or Sami Nasri will be there come September. If both go then you'd be a brave man to back them to stay in the top four. They could do with a Man City-esque back four but then they have need that type of steel for five years. Easily the worst squad they have had since Wengers arrival and possibly since the early 90's.

Tottenham. Probably possess their best collect of players since the inception of the Premier League but that's not really saying much is it? Will Van der Vaart notch as many this season as he did last? Will Gareth Bale turn it on longer then the three months he did last year? Will Luka Modric even be there and if so will he get on the score sheet more than three times and assist more? Will they get together a steady back four and who will be their number one? It's a big season for Redkanapp what with the England job up for grabs at the end of it.

Liverpool. (My club). Spent massively in both pre-season and last January. a Champions League spot would signal progression but do they not need a title challenge straight off? Kenny may have a big job keeping all those midfielders happy though the one thing this Liverpool team look to have is goals from all over the park. I can see no reason why this side can't challenge at the summit but can they make Anfield a fortress again and be sturdy enough not to flake up away from home? Time will obviously tell.

So will all that said, and again this is just my opinion, is this not the weakest Premier League season in ten years?

Cheers guys.

I think you mistaking weak for closest. Its leveling out a bit and there are more teams vying for the Champions League places + plus the mid table teams are also closing the gap.

I would rather see a slightly lower quality of football and a more competitive league than a high quality of football and less competitve league which is what I feel it had been for the past few years. Last year was a really good season I thought, Chelsea were huge favourites going into the season and for the first few months people thought they'd win it by Christmas, then they collapsed, but managed to fight back towards the end. Liverpool (my club) despite it being a season of ups and downs, no fan cannot admit it was entertaining and thrilling, we saw the club sink to new lows under Hodgson, and then a huge revival which at one point had us believing we could snatch a Champions League spot.

I love seasons like that, and although people are already tipping United to the title (myself included) I definetly think there will be more than a few twists and turns into the season, and so that in my opinion means it could be one of the strongest Premier League season in years.

Good article.

It's interesting... I think for the bigger clubs this season they will rely more heavily on their younger players than we've seen in recent seasons. You asked about Man Utd and their world class players, is it a collection of talented young players with a point to prove that could drive them to the title this season? Take the likes of Welbeck, Smalling, Jones, Cleverley, Anderson, Fabio, Rafael and, to a certain extent, Young. All young players that haven't really set the league alight with fantastic performances for a top club, week in week out. Whilst Jones and Young had good seasons last season, so did Cleverley and Welbeck who have been at Manchester United for a while.

Most people said last season that Chelsea were too old to challenge for the title, but they still gave it a good go. Another case where they will be hoping their promising youngsters are able to slot in with the experienced players. Daniel Sturridge and Fernando Torres both have a point to prove at the club this season, but for different reasons. Torres cost Chelsea a crazy amount of money and has done little to start showing why he was worth £50m. Sturridge had a golden spell at Bolton towards the end of last season and has always said he wanted to play first team football for Chelsea. With Terry, Lampard and Drogba all pushing on now Chelsea can probably expect one, maybe two, more seasons of them playing at their best.

Those are the two clubs that will end up challenging for the title. I think Manchester City will come close to second place and probably won't concede that many goals this season, but if they are to lose Tevez then I can't see the attack leading the way. They have fantastic individuals like Silva, Balotelli, Aguero and Dzeko- but are any of them prepared to put the work in that Tevez did and can they carry the ball 40-50 yards before picking out the right pass or splitting a defence with the drop of a shoulder? One more season for Man City to wait for a team to gel, no wholesale changes needed to the squad, except ridding of the deadwood.

I've mentioned in a previous article that I'm a huge fan of Tottenham, their midfield to be precise, and the attacking football that they're capable of playing. Newcastle were victims of their brilliant counter-attack play at WHL when they tore our defense to shreads in the space of seconds. Redknapp needs to keep his side focused this season and try to keep his defense as consistent as he can. Assou-Ekotto and Kaboul both are very good fullback, and of course Kaboul will now face pressure from future England rightback Kyle Walker, another youngster who had an impressive loan spell last season. If Dawson can keep the form that saw him contending for a spot as England's centre back then I think they'll have a good season, especially with seasoned veteran Brad Friedel behind them. What Spurs really lack is a goalscorer. Defoe was off the mark last season and Crouch and Pav are good, but not good enough to carry the attack on their own. If 'Arry can scout a striker capable of playing alone and mirroring the success that RVP has at Arsenal then I think they'll cement a top 4 space and, sticking my neck out here, even challenge for the title.

I agree with your Sturridge point Churchill but will Villas-Boas have the backbone to give him a sustained run in the side at the expense of a superstar name like Torres? If he can replicate his Bolton form with Chelsea then there's no reason why he can't bag 20+ goals.

It's whether he's given a fair crack to do so though?

Hulk and Rossi are the names being thrown about for that striker position.

I think of the top 6 Liverpool and United have clearly improved their squads the most, but it's whether those signings can gel quickly, I can see De Gea struggling in his first season, and I think Henderson will struggle to get games for us.

FreekShow wrote:I agree with your Sturridge point Churchill but will Villas-Boas have the backbone to give him a sustained run in the side at the expense of a superstar name like Torres? If he can replicate his Bolton form with Chelsea then there's no reason why he can't bag 20+ goals.

It's whether he's given a fair crack to do so though?

I can't see Roman letting that happen, although it has been reported that he will keep his nose out of the team now Villas-Boas has come in, can anybody really see that happening? Chelsea will keep on trying to get Torres into the side for at least another year I think before they try and offload him for less than half for what they bought him for, I think if Torres doesn't start improving and fast he'll end up back in Madrid with Atletico.

Interesting question Freek - though I think the answer to your question is probably last year.
It's fair to say that Man Utd and Chelsea haven't regressed and Man City and Liverpool have strengthened, so it can't be a weaker division this year compared to last year (when I think the 5 of the top 6 with the exception being Man City were weaker).
It's still a two horse race and for my money I think Utd are good things, the others might be stronger but are still way short of these two

Having heard Owen Coyle be interviewed, he says that AVB seems to really rate Sturridge and that he's not going to loan him out. I hope he rates him enough to even just give him some subsistute appearances. No tiring defence is going to want to chase Sturridge all over the pitch.

Chelsea also might give more chances to McEachran and Bertrand this season, but after all the controversy over Kakuta's transfer, will he be the most likely of the Chelsea youngsters to be sent out on loan?

I dont think the league is getting any weaker, i agree with above posters that its just more competitive.

A good way to measure the strength of the league is to see how teams progress in Europe. Last season we had an English representative in the final for the 3rd year in a row, with all english clubs qualifying from the group stages. I'd wager we'll see - at least - the same result this season.

dancingweeman wrote:I dont think the league is getting any weaker, i agree with above posters that its just more competitive.

A good way to measure the strength of the league is to see how teams progress in Europe. Last season we had an English representative in the final for the 3rd year in a row, with all english clubs qualifying from the group stages. I'd wager we'll see - at least - the same result this season.

The 09/10 final was between Inter and Bayern. To be fair Utd had a relative walk into last years final with Barca and Real meeting in the semi.

Edit: Unless you are talking about Fulham's Europa League run in 09/10 which if so then my apologies.

Well all three promoted teams are currently sitting comfortably in mid table which says alot but it's early days.

Man city's brand of football has surprised me the most. I couldn't have been more wrong on that pre-season prediction! That said they need to replicate that in Europe.

Chelsea have been iffy, Arsenal have been as eratic as ever, Liverpool are struggling with putting a run together and Spurs are pretty much as they have been for the past two years.

And Man Utd have been Man Utd barring that disaster last week against City.

Well probably the weakest season in modern times was 09/10 where the final top 4 teams lost over 30 games between them. Utd played a good part of the season with no defence and yet managed to only lose out on the league by just one point.

This surely cannot be as poor a season as that one. Will the final top 4 lose as many as 30 games between them? Well as of now the top 4 have only lost only 4 games between them with 10 games gone and 3 of those losses belong to one club Chelsea.

dondelero wrote:Well probably the weakest season in modern times was 09/10 where the final top 4 teams lost over 30 games between them. Utd played a good part of the season with no defence and yet managed to only lose out on the league by just one point.

This surely cannot be as poor a season as that one. Will the final top 4 lose as many as 30 games between them? Well as of now the top 4 have only lost only 4 games between them with 10 games gone and 3 of those losses belong to one club Chelsea.

Yes but the flip side of that could be that the top four lost 30+ games between them due to it being a stronger league? Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs have lost 8 games between them and I'd expect at least one (probably all) of them sides to finish above Newcastle come what May.

FreekShow wrote:

dondelero wrote:Well probably the weakest season in modern times was 09/10 where the final top 4 teams lost over 30 games between them. Utd played a good part of the season with no defence and yet managed to only lose out on the league by just one point.

This surely cannot be as poor a season as that one. Will the final top 4 lose as many as 30 games between them? Well as of now the top 4 have only lost only 4 games between them with 10 games gone and 3 of those losses belong to one club Chelsea.

Yes but the flip side of that could be that the top four lost 30+ games between them due to it being a stronger league? Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs have lost 8 games between them and I'd expect at least one (probably all) of them sides to finish above Newcastle come what May.

Well it's a fair point but the fact that the top teams lost all those games that season was more likely due to them being weaker than in previous seasons. This gave the more poorer sides a better chance of beating them, for eg and as already stated due to injuries Utd played with no defence, for long periods in that season, they were definitely weaker than in previous seasons as was the rest of the top four.

Probably out of the teams you think will finish above Newcastle, the best bet is probably Spurs who have only lost 2 thus far. Despite Arsenal's win their defence is very poor and they will not get such an obliging defence as Chelsea's was on Saturday too often.

invincibleILeak (CL-6WF) wrote:

FreekShow wrote:I agree with your Sturridge point Churchill but will Villas-Boas have the backbone to give him a sustained run in the side at the expense of a superstar name like Torres? If he can replicate his Bolton form with Chelsea then there's no reason why he can't bag 20+ goals.

It's whether he's given a fair crack to do so though?

I can't see Roman letting that happen, although it has been reported that he will keep his nose out of the team now Villas-Boas has come in, can anybody really see that happening? Chelsea will keep on trying to get Torres into the side for at least another year I think before they try and offload him for less than half for what they bought him for, I think if Torres doesn't start improving and fast he'll end up back in Madrid with Atletico.

i don't mind if we bought him for 5 million

Fascinating to read people's thoughts abut the pre-season. Although most would have expected Man City to be strong, few could have foreseen their attacking verve this season.
Saw them at Tottenham early on and they looked very solid defensively but broke devastatingly. I reckoned they were totally built for the Champs League and it was a surprise when they struggled there initially, although that last-minute winner in the last game has steadied them.
Another surprise this year has been the goal tallies. I'm not one to moan about poor defending and would like to think it's the attacking skills that are leading to the goal glut.
A third surprise - Newcastle. Can they keep it up?

I think City are struggling in the Champions League because despite their superstar team, not many of them have a huge amount of Champions League experience, with Yaya Toure probably having the most.

Their best player Silva also seems to be a lot less influential in Champions League games as well.

The premiership imo is a vastly overrated league.

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:I think you mistaking weak for closest. Its leveling out a bit and there are more teams vying for the Champions League places + plus the mid table teams are also closing the gap.

completely agree.. It's better with more teams competing for the title, and seeing more intresting games

cricketfan90 wrote:

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:I think you mistaking weak for closest. Its leveling out a bit and there are more teams vying for the Champions League places + plus the mid table teams are also closing the gap.

completely agree.. It's better with more teams competing for the title, and seeing more intresting games

By mid March/earlyApril it will become a two horse race as per usual. Whoever wins the title this season would not, in my opinion, hold a candle to the Arsenal invincibles, the Chelsea Mourinho team and the Utd 06-09 team. The Premier League glory years were between 98 and 2008. A dip in quality is natural in every league.

The Newcastle side that gained Champions League football a decade ago was better than the current team two or three times over yet this lot are sitting third and unbeaten after 10 games.

We've had City beat Utd 6-1 who beat Arsenal 8-2 who beat Chelsea 5-3! Hockey scores!

For me only Man City have looked the real deal yet they are struggling in Europe.

FreekShow wrote:

cricketfan90 wrote:

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:I think you mistaking weak for closest. Its leveling out a bit and there are more teams vying for the Champions League places + plus the mid table teams are also closing the gap.

completely agree.. It's better with more teams competing for the title, and seeing more intresting games

By mid March/earlyApril it will become a two horse race as per usual. Whoever wins the title this season would not, in my opinion, hold a candle to the Arsenal invincibles, the Chelsea Mourinho team and the Utd 06-09 team. The Premier League glory years were between 98 and 2008. A dip in quality is natural in every league.

The Newcastle side that gained Champions League football a decade ago was better than the current team two or three times over yet this lot are sitting third and unbeaten after 10 games.

We've had City beat Utd 6-1 who beat Arsenal 8-2 who beat Chelsea 5-3! Hockey scores!

For me only Man City have looked the real deal yet they are struggling in Europe.

need i remind you lot, that the league is a marathon not a sprint, regardless of the results so far, we've got the entertainment factor that other leagues will thrive upon

the favorites has been and will still be Man utd despite the 6-1 last month

I think this season has been a very entertaining one, which lots of goals, some good football, some bad football, and a lot of talking points. I think that's brilliant. The quality hasn't been as high as it has been in past years, but the entertainment levels for me are much higher this year.

This season has certainly been a big step up from last when Man U were not that outstanding but there was nobody consistent or good enough to beat them to the championship.
Like to think we could actually get a three or even four-horse race come next spring. Probably be a two-horse one, though, with the Manchester clubs battling it out.

People are reading far too much into the Utd defeat. Utd were down to ten men and conceded 3 goals in injury time. Because of this people think that City are world beaters but the champs league have shown that when they come up against a quality side(which Utd were not on that fateful day)City are not really that special.

Also the fact that a team goes unbeaten a whole league season, what does that say about that league?. It actually shows how poor it is rather than how good that team is.

dondelero wrote:People are reading far too much into the Utd defeat. Utd were down to ten men and conceded 3 goals in injury time. Because of this people think that City are world beaters but the champs league have shown that when they come up against a quality side(which Utd were not on that fateful day)City are not really that special.

Also the fact that a team goes unbeaten a whole league season, what does that say about that league?. It actually shows how poor it is rather than how good that team is.

To be fair that Arsenal team was a beast of a side with a collection of brilliant players but that said they were lucky on occasions to remain unbeaten (A blatant Pires dive and subsequent penalty saving them at home against Pompey being one example) and did draw 12 games but still...

I agree that City have to show their worth in the Champions League. Tonight would be a good time to show it.