no not during the 70's and 80's
Liverpool success in that era over took you by then
That is why Fergie when he first arrived said I'm here to knock Liverpool off their perch
he meant "winning perch" not "bigger perch". even now sir jim ratcliffe talks about "knocking pool/city off their perch" and it's not because he thinks they are bigger.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe has vowed to knock Manchester City and Liverpool off their perch but has warned Manchester United fans it could take at least three years to do so
www.theguardian.com
he paid more for man utd. he knows it is bigger.
liverpool is in merseyside and that is a region that can never be elite, glamourous or have superstar shine..
rough, poor, crime ridden scallywags who talk funny .. perhaps.
#1 club in england.
never.
that is why utd had glamorous georgie best, charlton and law whereas liverpool had working class dour heroes like keegan, rush and sourness.
even back then man utd had more money and were breaking transfer fee records way more than pool.
A million-pound fee for a footballer is not much of a story these days. Premier League clubs made 26 such signings in the January transfer window alone.
www.telegraph.co.uk
man utd grew into that position in the 60's with best as the 5th beatle and that post war "best decade" lore gives the club a sheen in the minds of many that other UK clubs do not have.
arsenal were behind even spurs in europe back then.