Have we done one yet?

If not...

1 Chelsea
2 Manchester United
3 Liverpool
4 Arsenal
5 Everton
6 Tottenham Hotspur
7 Aston Villa
8 Newcastle
9 Portsmouth
10 Manchester City
11 Middlesborough
12 Wigan
13 West Ham
14 West Brom
15 Sunderland
16 Bolton
17 Fulham
18 Stoke City
19 Blackburn Rovers
20 Hull City

1. Chelsea
2. Man United
3. Arsenal
4. Liverpool
5. Aston Villa
6. Tottenham
7. Everton
8. Portsmouth
9. Man City
10. Newcastle
11. Blackburn
12. West Ham
13. Fulham
14. Sunderland
15. Wigan
16. West Brom
17. Middlesbrough
-------------------------
18. Hull
19. Bolton
20. Stoke

1. Manchester United FC

With everyone else coming second.

1. Manchester United
2. Liverpool
3. Chelsea
4. Arsenal
5. Aston Villa
6. Tottenham Hotspur
7. Sunderland
8. Newcastle
9. Everton
10. Manchester City
11. West Ham
12. Middlesborough
13. Portsmouth
14. Bolton
15. Hull City
16. Blackburn Rovers
17. Fulham
18. WBA
19. Wigan
20. Stoke City

1. Chelsea
2. Man United
3. Arsenal
4. Liverpool
5. Portsmouth
6. Aston Villa
7. Tottenham
8. Man City
9. Everton
10. West Ham
11. Blackburn
12. Newcastle
13. Sunderland
14. Middlesbrough
15. Fulham
16. Wigan
17. West Brom
-------------------------
18. Hull
19. Bolton
20. Stoke

I'm quite suprised that not one prediction yet has Stoke and Hull being the bottom two, I'm quite tempted to go and put some money on it, and I bet I'd get rubbish odds.

1 NUFC
2 Arsenal
3 Man Utd
4 Liverpool
5 Chelsea
6 Tottenham
7 Man City
8 A Villa
9 Boro
10 Everton
11 Portsmouth
12 Wigan
13 Fulham
14 W Ham
15 Blackburn
16 Bolton
17 Sunderland
18 WBA
19 Stoke
20 Hull

Ale's obviously on more than ale.

1/ Chelsea.
2/ Man Utd.
3/ Liverpool.
4/ Arsenal.
5/ Spurs.
6/ Everton.
7/ Villa.
8/ Man City.
9/ Portsmouth.
10/ Newcastle.
11/ West Ham.
12/ Middlesboro.
13/ Sunderland.
14/ Blackburn.
15/ Wigan.
16/ Fulham.
17/ Bolton.
18/ West Brom.
19/ Hull.
20/ Bristol.

Last season I had it down as "Big 4", "Middle 8" & "Premiershit 8".
This season I see it panning out as "Big 4", "Famous 5", "Fun Finished by Feb 5" & "Premiershit 6".

not that drunk that I can see you stopping up by deault of the promoted teams...

As Erwin points out in his very good piece in the latest WSC, Portugal's performances in crunch games against Greece, France and Germany in recent years (as well as the 0-0 with England in 2006, which he didn't mention) should give anyone tipping Chelsea for the title some pause for thought.

Don't forget that if Finland had managed to score just one goal in Porto last November, Portugal would not even have been at Euro 2008 at all, an indication of the pig's mickey that Scolari made of getting through a very poor qualifying group.

QUOTE:
Ale's obviously on more than ale.

That said BC, you've placed "Bristol" in the Premiership.

Hieronymus of Hesselink wrote:

QUOTE:

Don't forget that if Finland had managed to score just one goal in Porto last November, Portugal would not even have been at Euro 2008 at all, an indication of the pig's mickey that Scolari made of getting through a very poor qualifying group.

It was far from a poor group. Portugal, Poland, Serbia, Finland & Belgium in an eight team group. It didn't have the quality of say Scotland's group, but had plenty of pitfalls. Throw in Azerbaijan, Armenia & Kazahkstan and you have the classic group of minefields. No side was going to come through it with anything near an exemplary set of results.

Portugal would have been through with games to spare but for sloppy late goals conceded to Poland & Serbia, and it's here where I'd be focussing my concerns for Scolari.

Poland = a bog-average side with one great player, as we saw last month.

Serbia = another deeply mediocre team with one great player.

Finland = nothing special at all.

Belgium = their crappiest national side since the early 1960s.

And any half-decent outfit should be beating the likes of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan with their eyes closed.

But Portugal couldn't win even one of their six games against the Poles, Serbs and Finns, and that has to go down as a fairly big indictment of Scolari.

Those descriptions (nothing special, average but for one player) can be applied to almost every team in Europe.

Qualifying campaigns are a slog now due to the number of games and the fact that national sides struggle to get full player committment and/or availability. Every campaign now serves up one exceptional side (Romania for 2008, Czechs a number of times), but the rest all come through with a number of slip-ups along the way. See Spain v Northern Ireland, Italy v Lithuania, France v Scotland. A far from impressive qualifying campaign is no benchmark any more. I'd share concerns about Scolari, but Portugal's stuttering qualifying campaign is not what I'd be focussing on.

Five points out of 18 against Finland, Serbia and Poland is pretty awful, though, isn't it? Especially given the calibre of player Scolari was working with.

Portugal's problem was that they are a team of 9 wingers and Carvalho. The talent of the wingers is undoubted, but over the "slog" of a qualifying campaign, the lack of balance in the side is made more obvious.

Its the whole "individual talent vs team" again.
Talent can win one-offs but for consistancy you need a team in every sense of the word.

It certainly is, just from having followed campaigns over the last decade, where the groups have got bigger and club committments taken precedence, I've seen so many top nations look shit in qualifying only to look more like the real deal come the finals. Remember France qualifying for Euro2000 because the Icelandic goalkeeper throwing the ball into his own net (exaggeration, but only just), all this after a poor campaign.

Anyway, my prediction:

1 Chelsea
2 Manchester Utd
3 Liverpool
4 Arsenal
5 Aston Villa
6 Tottenham
7 Manchester City
8 Everton
9 Newcastle Utd
10 Portsmouth
11 Middlesboro
12 Sunderland
13 Fulham
14 Wigan
15 Blackburn Rvs
16 West Bromwich A.
17 West Ham Utd
18 Boltom Wndrs
19 Hull City
20 Stoke City