Read on Twitter
A thread on the all-time club stats for..
UCL + European Cup Semi-Finals stage.
I chose the Semi-Final stage as they are the best indicator of a club's level in the competition over the course of their entire history. Looking at the UCL titles alone is not a fair analysis.
UCL + European Cup Semi-Finals stage.
I chose the Semi-Final stage as they are the best indicator of a club's level in the competition over the course of their entire history. Looking at the UCL titles alone is not a fair analysis.
Most Appearances in Semi-Final stage:
29 Real Madrid
20 Bayern Munich
16 Barcelona
12 Manchester United
12 Juventus
12 AC Milan
11 Liverpool
29 Real Madrid
20 Bayern Munich
16 Barcelona
12 Manchester United
12 Juventus
12 AC Milan
11 Liverpool
Most semi-final tie wins:
16 Real Madrid 55% win rate
11 Bayern Munich 55%
10 AC Milan 83%
9 Juventus 75%
9 Liverpool 82%
7 Barcelona 44%
7 Benfica 88%
16 Real Madrid 55% win rate
11 Bayern Munich 55%
10 AC Milan 83%
9 Juventus 75%
9 Liverpool 82%
7 Barcelona 44%
7 Benfica 88%
Now how do we interpret these stats correctly? 
Appearances vs win-ratio..
Appearances vs win-ratio..
Best clubs in terms of win-ratio:
88% Benfica
83% AC Milan
82% Liverpool
75% Juventus
55% Real Madrid & Bayern Munich
44% Barcelona
This list seems almost completely backwards when talking about the best UCL clubs. Thats why win-ratio is not a good stat.
88% Benfica
83% AC Milan
82% Liverpool
75% Juventus
55% Real Madrid & Bayern Munich
44% Barcelona
This list seems almost completely backwards when talking about the best UCL clubs. Thats why win-ratio is not a good stat.
Reaching the semi-final is actually an achievement on its own. To make the top 4 in Europe is an incredible achievement. It should NOT be brushed aside just because the team didn't win the entire competition.
By that logic only 1st place matters and the bizzare conclusion is that 2nd = 3rd = 4th = ... = failing to pass the group stage
Now you see how stupid it is to just look at the winner? It doesn't tell you how well other teams did in the competition.
Now you see how stupid it is to just look at the winner? It doesn't tell you how well other teams did in the competition.
Now obviously winning is the most important thing because thats what people remember in the long term, but its not an actual measure of how strong a team is.
Liverpool made the SF 11x (won 6 UCL)
Barca made the SF 16x (won 5 UCL)
Liverpool made the SF 11x (won 6 UCL)
Barca made the SF 16x (won 5 UCL)
To me, Barca > Liverpool...
5 SF > 1 trophy
ok WAIT... I know everyone would rather win a trophy than just make the SF 5x without a trophy. Thats because you will have a better legacy, but it doesnt make you a better team over the course of those 5 years. Thats my point.
5 SF > 1 trophy
ok WAIT... I know everyone would rather win a trophy than just make the SF 5x without a trophy. Thats because you will have a better legacy, but it doesnt make you a better team over the course of those 5 years. Thats my point.
What do you think now? What is the best way to judge a club's overall performance in the UCL throughout its history?
No way most people didnt read and just voted trophy count...
I shouldnt be surprised. Its FT afterall.
Anyway, I appreciate those who actually read the thread properly.
I shouldnt be surprised. Its FT afterall.
Anyway, I appreciate those who actually read the thread properly.
