The Invincibles

Arsenal's unbeaten 03-04 team. How do you think they would fair against the Manchester United and Manchester City teams of this season? Specifically, could they beat them, and would they finish above them in the table by the end? Also, how do you think they fair up in a head-to-head comparison of the starting 11's?

Votes and opinions appreciated.

PS: I've added this thread to the Arsenal board to seek their views.

 

I think they'd finish second. Behind Manchester... City!

 

They wouldn't do as well because they would lose a few games if they were playing against the quality in the Premiership these days as to what it was like 7/8 years ago. It is much harder to finish a season unbeaten now than it was then. So although I think they would come close, I think they would drop short.

 

They were a true definition of a TEAM, they had absolutely everything required. Strong centre halves, attacking full backs, gritty midfielders, creative midfielders, goalscorers. AND a top keeper. They would lose the one off matches to Man City but over the season they would win the league. Man City and Man U would have a close battle for 2nd and 3rd. Arsenal would beat Man U in the one off games.

 

You can't make this kind of comparison, in my opinion, and your poll is going to be worthless, in any event. Die-hard Gooners are going to vote favourably, even if they suspect that the matter is not so black and white, and neutrals are going to exercise caution because we know that these are different times.

This United side may just be the "invincible" team of its day. In any event, City have the riches to build whatever team their owners desire.

There is absolutely no doubting that your "invincible" side was something to behold - I watched them play on a number of occasions and even I, as a hardened Spurs fan, marveled at the economy of their football, and the devastating speed with which they could turn defence into attack - but times have changed, and the typography of the football landscape has changed immensely. It is far harder to dominate the league today than it was back when the likes of Seaman, Adams, Bergkamp and Henry were breaking records.

 

Who cares man it's just a bit of fun. Besides, I've made the names of the voters visible, so we can see exactly where the Gooners and where the neutrals have voted.

That is true. However, I just wonder how they would face up to todays top teams. Not necessarily dominating the league, just winning it. I highly doubt they could do the unbeaten run all over again with the quality in the league today, but I wonder which position in the table they would be fighting for against the elite.

 

Okay. Fair enough, fella. My apologies for sounding like a kill-joy

Hee-hee! That's going to be interesting, to see how everyone votes!

 

No worries.

I'd like to hear some Gooner views on this one. I mean even I must admit, whilst the teams of Man Utd and Man City have some amazing world class players, Arsenal's team literally had incredible footballers in every single starting position without fail. Henry even bagged himself 30 league goals, which is a feat which would stand up very well to the likes of Aguero and Rooney today.

 

Arsenal still. They would win the title HANDS DOWN. They had the PERFECT team back then.

#Discussion non-valid.

 

They'd get smashed, their well old now!


I think they'd do pretty well, capable of switching tactics and combating any type of play/players
alot of red cards tho, but some fantastic goals especially with the footballs etc of today!

 

I say they'd finish below them both. Man Utd have improved since then, and obviously, Man City have.

Yes, they went a season unbeaten, but they drew a hell of alot of games. Correct me if im wrong, but, we were the only team to actually draw more than them that year.

 

Vieira - probably best CM to grace the league
Bergkamp - among best AMs to grace the league, an absolute genius
Henry - Best striker to grace the league?

Id say the invincibles would cope just fine

 

Yes but a lot of those draws were after we had already won the league

 

Would quibble and say Gerrard was a better midfielder than Vieira but apart from that totally agreed. Would say Cashley has been the best left back of the last decade aswell. People forget how good the likes of Kolo Toure, Campbell, Ljungberg, Pires and Gilberto were aswell.

 

Gerrard?

****ing gerrard?

 

Speaking of Gerrard, where the hell has he went? Seems like he's vanished off the face of the earth. Does anyone expect him to get back to playing his best, or is it pretty much top career over?

 

To be fair, I don't think you can liken Gerrard to Veira, because whilst I believe that Veira was a better defender than Gerrard, he wasn't a better attacker; but Gerrard's attacking attributes were not a great as Bergkamp's. Gerrard was a bit of both Veira and Berkamp. In short, Gerrard is a completely different kind of player than Veira, only better or worse depending on how the manager sets up his team.

 

Uh huh?

[video=youtube;jyRy0C9dxe8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyRy0C9dxe8[/video]

 

Arsenal would still win the league, that team was the best I've seen in my lifetime and that includes Barcelona.

 

He's a box-to-box midfielder though.. Viera was more defensive and Bergkamp was basically a second striker/deep-lying striker.