Liverpool FC Forum

by **Madmax** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 3:18 am

Comparing Liverpool in the 70's and 80's with Man utd in the 90's and naughties

Both teams in those relative 20 years dominated english football but i would like a comparision to see which team was more successful and say better..

Liverpool

League- 11 Titles --- 1972-73,1975-76,1976-77.1978-79.1979-80,1981-82,1982-83,1983-84,1985-86,1987-88, 1989-90

FA Cup- 3 Cups --- 1973-74,1985-86,1988-89

League Cup - 4 cups--1980-81,1981-82,1982-83,1983-84

Charity Shield - 9 Times --1974,1976,1977*,1979,1980,1982,1986,*1988,1989

Euro cup- 4 Times --1976-77,1977-78,1980-81,1983-84

Uefa Cup- 2 Times--1972-73,1975-76

Super Cup -1 Time -- 1977

Total haul of 25 ( not inc charity shield)

Manchest United

League - 11 Titles --- 1992–93, 1993–94, 1995–96, 1996–97, 1998–99, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007–08, 2008–09

FA Cup - 4 Times ----1990, 1994, 1996, 1999, 2004

League Cup- 3 Cups---1992, 2006, 2009

Charity shield - 8 times --- 1990*, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2007, 2008

Euro Cup -- 2 Times --- 1999, 2008

Uefa Cup--- 1 Times - 1991

Super Cup -- 1 Times - 1991

Total haul of 22 honours ( Not inc charity shield)

As you could see both teamss built an empire and dominated in those 20 years. United are a great force in the last 20 years and liverpool were in the 70's/80's......

In the 70's- 80's we dominated football and united were in decline and as you could see the similarites that have reversed. United are dominating these past 20 years whilst we have been clinging on a cliff.

Our dominanating team had the right balance, shape and blend of talent of experience and youth. What you had back in those days with the Reds was arguably the finest passing side of English football.

The way they passed the ball around the third quarter of the field without going into 3rd gear was characteristic of the confidence and , the word you used 'dominance' on the field. The best managers of that time/era was a major factor in all of this too, without whom some of the greats to wear the red jersey would never have even played at Pool.

Great players in that era like clemance, huges, keegan, kenndy, hansen. dalglish, souness, rush, lawro, and many more....

I think the turning point and consequently the sudden end to their dominance in the game was largely due to Kenny Dalgish's abrupt end in reign, his resignation was a big blow at the club and one of the reasons why we conceded the title to Arsenal in 90/91.

As for mancs managed by fergie after 4 years in charge began his rule in english football. Blending in a team of talented players and installing true passion amongst his squad.
Many fantastic players have come through the ranks few like cantona, bekham. keane, cole, van nistelrooy, ronaldo, robson, gigs, schmeicel..

Both teams in thier eras were brillian but i would just edge out liverpool. Not biased but i feel we were a little more succesful. With scums they have had just one manager in the last 20 years of their empire which is a superb positive.

Lots of info i have missed on this so please add on....

by **Reg** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 3:25 am

Liverpool's momentum ground to a halt when we were banned from europe after Heysel more than Kenny's departure which allowed other teams the opportunity to develop and overtake us.

We spent money on the stadium and not the team during the same period then suffered a period of bad management. Overall, we managed our own decline whereas a young and enthusiastic ManUre were able to craft a successful team and build a dynesty.

Just a few thoughts.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 7:52 am

One is a team of legends, the other is a team of c*nts.

That's how I remember it...

by **Ace Ventura** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:38 pm

Alls i will say is we dominated europe when we dominated.

They have not.

by **DrPepe** » Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:50 pm

For all his domestic auccesax, That must be eating away at ORN, that his counterattacking, flat track bullies have never been very succesful in Europe:cool:

by **Owzat** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:08 pm

The playing field was more level back in the day

Seriously though, it was. The mancs hit the top at the right time, outspent their rivals and with Liverpool and Arsenal both stumbling into the Premiership era their main rivals were BLACKBURN and NEWCASTLE (says it all, where are they now?)

And rather than make wild and sweeping claims like many people do in these kind of era comparisons, I will back it up with stats. No need to make a case for more money, Liverpool's, Man Utd's and Blackburn's squads cost around £30m back in 1994/95 and these days the more expensive squads cost around £200m. But to show it was more closely contested is the main thing, only idiots don't accept more money is spent on players than was 15-20 years ago.

DIFFERENT CHAMPIONS

99/00-08/09 : 3 (Man Utd x6, Arsenal x2, Chelsea x2)
89/90-98/99 : 5 (Man Utd x5, Arsenal x2, Liverpool, Leeds Utd, Blackburn)
79/80-88/89 : 4 (Liverpool x6, Everton x2, Aston Villa, Arsenal)

DIFFERENT TEAMS IN TOP FOUR

99/00-08/09 : 7 (Man Utd x10, Arsenal x10, Liverpool x8, Chelsea x7, Leeds Utd x2, Newcastle x2, Everton)
89/90-98/99 : 13 (Man Utd x8, Arsenal x7, Liverpool x6, Newcastle x3, A Villa x3, Blackburn x3, Leeds Utd x3, Chelsea x2, Crystal Palace, Norwich, Sheff Wed, Tottenham, Notts Forest)
79/80-88/89 : 13 (Liverpool x9, Man Utd x7, Arsenal x4, Tottenham x4, Everton x4, Ipswich x3, Notts Forest x3, Norwich, WBA, West Ham, Southampton, A Villa, Watford)

The most telling stat there is that a lot more different teams made the top four in the old days, these days the "big four" make up 7/8 of the teams who've occupied the top four and it has been the same four for the past FOUR seasons. Leeds went down and are in League One, Newcastle may well follow suit. I guess the bitters may avoid making it 3/3.

In the day you could assemble a team rather than buy one, that was what made it so good. Forest were the last side to be promoted and win the title the following season (promoted 76/77, Champions in 77/78), these days it's unlikely a side finishing below 3rd will win the league the following season - it hasn't happened since Leeds finished 4th in 90/91 and won the league the following season.

And I'm not sure it's fair to compare the Champions League with the old European Cup given it used to be straight two-legged knockouts, now it's not only long and dragged out with a league stage, but up to four strong teams from Italy, England and Spain. AC Milan were the last team to retain the European Cup back in 1990, shows how hard it is to dominate that competition. That said, Real Madrid won the Champions League three times in five years (98, 00 and 02) But two of those were beating Bayer Leverkeusen and Valencia in the final, both peaked and have since declined.

And England have had a team in the final for the past five seasons, two in 07/08. Between 1977 and 1982 the European Cup stayed in England, retained by first us then Forest. We had eight finalists in 10 years, would possibly have continued but for the Heysel Tragedy.

by **Madmax** » Fri Jun 12, 2009 1:42 am

Interesting insight owzat and yet makes it alot clear about the big four. All about the money these days... If you have the money spend it wisely than who knows maybe a break into the top four! Man city anyone???

Anyhow the two eras which both liverpool and mannure have dominated are as different as black and white. Different empires of football dominating in a different age.

by **Sir Roger** » Fri Jun 12, 2009 8:14 am

Madmax wrote:Interesting insight owzat and yet makes it alot clear about the big four. All about the money these days... If you have the money spend it wisely than who knows maybe a break into the top four! Man city anyone???

Anyhow the two eras which both liverpool and mannure have dominated are as different as black and white. Different empires of football dominating in a different age.

Good thread
Great discussion

My take is that we dominated with the Bootroom Empire:
Take the best bits of the Roman Empire; education, art, style, culture, class. Add to this our three mighty Emperors; Shankly, Paisley and Fagan and you see why we had such a mighty and magnificent Empire.
Unfortunately the Barbarians were at the gate. We then had the Beetroot nose Empire: Snarling, mind games, uncultured, cheating, uncouth, boastful, arrogant etc. Through their leader, the all powerful Ghengis Ferguson, the mancs managed to use the dark arts to maintain their status.
However.
We are now on the verge of a new Empire. Fashioned in the mould of the old Bootroom; More locals on board bringing back the much needed grounding of players. Added the class and culture of our mainly Iberian cousins and we have a blend of poet warriors who will finally overturn the Tartan Tyrant and bring light back into this dark age.
:;):

by **Owzat** » Fri Jun 12, 2009 8:45 am

I think we lost our way when Kenny resigned for two reasons :-

1) the appointment of Souness who had become massive in the SPL but had no experience in a bigger league. We ended up buying a lot of cr ap and the club never really recovered until Houllier arrived, assembled a good squad, then went too far and signed the likes of Vignal, Cheyrou, Traore, Smicer, Baros, Cisse etc

2) Perhaps we didn't appreciate it at the time, but times were a changin' . Money was becoming more and more a powerful influence and the mancs stepped in and bought players like Pallister £2.2m (?), Bruce £800k, Keane £3.75m, Cantona £1.2m and then the likes of Kanchelskis £5m and Cole £6m + Gillespie. Bottom line is they spent money and got it right, just at the right time. He even unearthed absolute bargains like Irwin and Schmeichel while having Scholes, Giggs, nobhead and Beckham gifted to him through their youth set-up - so it may well be he got THEIR youth set-up right.

We gave Souness money, too much money perhaps, and ended up spending similar amounts and ending up with less quality - James £1m, Saunders £2.8m, Ruddock £2.5m, Stewart £2.3m, Walters £1.25m, Wright £2.2m etc He also made big mistakes in letting a lot of good players go

But I'm sure I've said all the above before (somewhere) and it has been discussed

http://www.liverpoolfc-newkit.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=24872&start=60

Came across that while trying to find the bit I said on Souness. Harsh to blame one man, but the decision to make him manager given he was managing in the two bob bit league (SPL) was many times worse than any decision made by LFC in all the time I've supported them (since before that mistake) Makes the signing of Keane seem like a stroke of genius by comparison

by **Sir Roger** » Fri Jun 12, 2009 4:13 pm

Owzat wrote:I think we lost our way when Kenny resigned for two reasons :-

1) the appointment of Souness who had become massive in the SPL but had no experience in a bigger league. We ended up buying a lot of cr ap and the club never really recovered until Houllier arrived, assembled a good squad, then went too far and signed the likes of Vignal, Cheyrou, Traore, Smicer, Baros, Cisse etc

2) Perhaps we didn't appreciate it at the time, but times were a changin' . Money was becoming more and more a powerful influence and the mancs stepped in and bought players like Pallister £2.2m (?), Bruce £800k, Keane £3.75m, Cantona £1.2m and then the likes of Kanchelskis £5m and Cole £6m + Gillespie. Bottom line is they spent money and got it right, just at the right time. He even unearthed absolute bargains like Irwin and Schmeichel while having Scholes, Giggs, nobhead and Beckham gifted to him through their youth set-up - so it may well be he got THEIR youth set-up right.

We gave Souness money, too much money perhaps, and ended up spending similar amounts and ending up with less quality - James £1m, Saunders £2.8m, Ruddock £2.5m, Stewart £2.3m, Walters £1.25m, Wright £2.2m etc He also made big mistakes in letting a lot of good players go

But I'm sure I've said all the above before (somewhere) and it has been discussed

http://www.liverpoolfc-newkit.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=24872&start=60

Came across that while trying to find the bit I said on Souness. Harsh to blame one man, but the decision to make him manager given he was managing in the two bob bit league (SPL) was many times worse than any decision made by LFC in all the time I've supported them (since before that mistake) Makes the signing of Keane seem like a stroke of genius by comparison

I loved Souness as a player
But as a manager for us he was wrong, wrong, wrong.
I actually had a season ticket when he was manager and gave it away because I wouldnt watch while he was in charge.
Woeful

Liverpool FC Forum

Comparison- liverpool vs man utd - 20 years of domination

Who is online