memphisto said:thats not the full issue though hangtime.
I'd take the man utd squad over the chelsea squad when it came to a game betwen the two.
Maybe you would, but over the course of a season I still reckon that quality counts. In one-off games the 'big four' are all capable of winning games off each other, but over a 38 game season Chelsea just have that bit extra to ensure success. They have the quality there to be able to rest players and still put out a good team, enough variety to switch formations to suit particular fixtures, enough competition for places to ensure players are at the top of their game, enough depth to mean that injuries and suspensions don't develop that vaguely troubling away trip to the Reebok into a nightmare fixture.
Also, IMO when Leeds won Division 1 (not the Premiership ) they had a good team, certainly better than 'top 10'. Strachan, Chapman, Batty, Speed, Lukic, McCallister, Dorigo, Cantona, Wallace etc - all decent players and problem some others I've forgotten. Remember at the time the English league had yet to hit the sky boom and was still suffering from the european exile, it wasn't riddled with quality and not that many foreigners were plying their trade here. Liverpool were on the slide following Dalglish's departure and MU were still on the rise; OK so Arsenal looked nearly invincible the year before (losing only 1 game) but I don't think there were more than half a dozen sides one could claim were better than Leeds on paper.