Are City really better individually?

Ripper

Ripper

Ripper

Soldato
Joined
25 Jan 2003
Posts
11,542
Location
Newark, Notts
I keep reading this on here, but are they?

Here is a stupid way of comparing them..

Based on today's teams, I have put the player in bold who I believe is the better player, italic suggests theres no real winner (i.e. Both as poor/good as each other). Each line compares with the same line on the other team (i.e Valencia vs. Milner, Young vs Nasri etc).

De Gea
Rafael
Ferdinand
Evans
Evra
Valencia
Carrick
Scholes
Young
Rooney
Welbeck

Vs.

Hart
Zabaleta
Kompany
Lescott
Clichy
Milner
Barry
Y.Toure
Nasri
Aguero
Balotelli

This would be 6-3 to United. Richards would Get City another point if he played, but then so would Vidic. Silva would get City another point, Tevez too possibly, but then so would Nani over Nasri if he came in, and I was kind to Zabaleta as well. Players like Johnson, K.Toure, Dzeko, De Jong, Giggs, Hernandez and Smalling don't change much as far as I'm concerned.

Some may argue with Evans and Carrick but on form they have been better as far as I'm concerned. Please don't try and argue calamity Clichy though :)

Basically, I don't think it's as clear cut as people seem to suggest in regards to City having better players. United are the better team and have the individual talent too.
 
Last edited:
Lescott is average, more average than Evans. It's a loose comparison as stated, but the overall point is that its not as clear cut as people seem to believe on here.
 
Maybe a better way of doing it would be to pick a simple team. Putting aside age, stats etc and just based on a team you would pick for a single game. Straight 4-4-2:

Hart
Richards
Vidic
Kompany
Evra
Valencia
Y.Toure
Scholes/Silva
Nani
Rooney
Aguero

It's very even.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom