I don't think Giggs or Barnes get close to Rensenbrink, to be honest, and Giggs is easily my favorite ManUtd player ever (granted........that's a low bar ).
Ah right, I thought you meant for talent - which was there in abundance for 1978. I can't make good comment on the '78 performances, since I was still a good 8 years off popping out of the womb. Maybe some of the aulder fellas around can chime in on that front?
That's fair, especially since I rated billyireland so highly and his team wasn't that great. His team did have Schmeichel, Rijkaard, Jimmy Johnstone and Papin yet looking back on it, I was rather generous with his team's ranking. I didn't feel anyone was out of position and with the players he had, only Crompton and Samitier had to make small adjustments. I also do feel that I've made a big deal on small flaws in teams so I don't take it to heart. I also believed I should have compared everyone on a head-to-head situation because your team can beat billy's. Ocwirk was a great player (starred at Switzerland 54 for Austria and a Sampdoria great), Rivelino was great too (either as an LM or AM) and I agree on Kocsis. Gerson was a star at Mexico 70 but not many people talk about the rest of his career though. Moreno, as I pointed out, was out of position and IMO, Socrates wasn't good enough for the role you put him in. He is still worthy of being drafted but I would have used him as a CM or withdrawn playmaker, not a #10. More people on BS know more about Socrates so I think most people would have rated you less if Moreno was at AM instead of Socrates. I felt that with Ocwirk and Gerson already in your team, you didn't need Socrates. I'm going to put up a my revised list now. It won't mean much and this is also after looking at other people's ratings and assessments. billy's teams takes a huge tumble and Peru FC's team gets a boost. 1. 26 2. comme 3. EG 4. ASF 5. Peru FC 6. schwuppe 7. Triton 8. PDG1978 9. billyireland 10. nicephoras 11. frasermc 12. Kyle P 13. L>G 14. DS 15. Karloski
My bad. I wasn't very keen on having two wide midfielders in what essentially looked like a diamond midfield and as pointed out before, Coluna would have needed to do too much work defensively. I was looking the line-ups of Belgium's games on www.planetworldcup.com and they did have him in midfield. Not only that, the first book in which I read a profile of him said that he was a striker and then a midfield general. From what I saw of him, he really knew how to get into scoring positions and despite being known as a hard worker, he didn't look like a guy who dropped back a lot. If I had to use a modern example, Ceulemans was like Kuyt or Iaquinta instead of Gerrard but much better. I think he made runs like those two guys instead of Gerrard, despite playing in a similar position to Gerrard. I see your point where the workload is concerned. With that 4-2-4, I felt that more of the players were in their natural positions. After reading about Ceulemans again, you could use that 4-3-3 formation but I still feel that Van Hanegem wasn't good enough defensively. I think that some posters would have had the same thought too about Riva. I put him as an LW in a 4-3-3 for the sake of putting my players in a balanced formation but I didn't intend to use him like a Giggs, Czibor or Gento. As you said, the support striker's position would have looked more adequate for Riva, even though it would look like that my team had less balance.
I don't think any of those players would have been weak choices. Perhaps arguably Rossi. But several others who starred at that WC were chosen. In fact, I got two stars from 78 in my squad, in Passarella and Boniek. And I think Rensenbrink was a very good pick.
It was not the Junta's antics that beat Holland. It was Kempes, Bertoni, Ardiles, Passarella and the others, and of course the great fans.
Right. Also Ardiles, Sanchez, Boniek, Tresor, Gentile, Tardelli, Benetti (although I ended up dropping Benetti), and there might be a few others if we go team by team. And several others who starred at that WC probably could have been chosen. I don't think 78 was weak in terms of football.
This is both wrong and disingenuous. Albert overlapped with Szilagyi and Szusza as well in his career. Furthermore the Hungarian revolution of 1956 drove out many of the best players in the world. Now would you expect the league to have improved defensively from the time in which both Puskas and Kocsis were scoring a goal a game? What's more, you are comparing someone who was the undisputed top goalscorer in a prolific era, with someone who wasn't anywhere near the most prolific. That is a huge difference. McGrory was the best in Scotland at a time when Scotland was still one of the very best leagues in the world. Let's go through the teams: argentine soccer fan: Sarosi and Batistuta billyireland: Papin comme: Greaves and Meazza Dark Savante: Ronaldo dor02: Hamrin, Altafini and Riva Excape Goat: Sanchez and Muller frasermc: Mazzola, Bergkamp and McGrory Karloski: Weah and Romario KyleP: Henry and Nordahl Lamps>Gerrard: Zico, Di Stefano and Drogba nicephoras: Eusebio and Shevchenko PDG1978: Fontaine Perú FC: Puskas schwuppe: Kocsis Triton: Rummenigge and Suker Twenty26Six: Gullit, Albert and Stoichkov You say you've got better goalscorers that "most" of these teams. Which teams?
I'm not sure Campos was ever as good as David James has been in the last few years. More like a David James at Liverpool. I agree he might not cost you that many games, but there is doubt about him. Good shot stopper on his day, but one of those more notable for his number of caps and crazy jerseys.
Not a crticism of the analysis Comme, but do you think with Mazzola, Bergkamp and Gullit listed, Baggio should be as well? I think i did get a lot of goalscoring potential in my team, despite a lot of predominantly creative players. Fontaine's GPG ratio must be one of the best. Baggio scored at better than 1 in 2 during his Juventus spell and his scoring rate for Italy is comparable to Bergkamp's for Holland. Michael Laudrup, during his spell at Barcelona played often as an attacking midfielder, maybe winger sometimes and the most advanced role would be deep-lying forward yet scored almost 1 in 3. His record for Denmark is slightly better still and the reason I could pick him in the first round. Tom Finney mostly, although not exclsively playing as a winger scored better than 1 in 3 comfortably over his Preston career and better than 1 in 3 for England. It was a higher scoring era but compared to similar players from the era it's still excellent I'm sure. He like Laudrup was more of a provider, as was Hoddle (in contrast I'd suggest for example, overall anyway to Lampard/Scholes in his prime etc) but he got better than 1 in 5 for Tottenham, 20 goals in some seasons and in a more attacking role for Monaco despite not quite being the same player as earlier in the 80s, he approached 1 in 2 GPG. Not quite as high GPG for England. Liedholm got 1 in 2 for Sweden, and although less than for Sweden or his Swedish clubs, his 80 goals for Milan at better than 1 in 5 over his whole time there, says he was a good goalscorer too. I'll try and make this the last propaganda for my team (and admitedly only Ondrus's scoring record from my defenders is notable) but I think given the creativity in my team, it would be a good achievment if my front 6 had the most scoring ability between them of any 6 in the draft. I haven't studied whether they would, just a feeling and how it would actually play out over a tournament is a subjective judgement, but still.
I think Lamps>Gerrard's front 5 (3 of which Comme listed) would be considered more prolific than my 6 actually between them if you consider Best in his Man Utd prime. I'm not just trying to invent new terms, or combine existing ones in the case of Magic Christmas Tree, but to try and explain Finney's role I'll call him a 'floating winger'. I would have preferred my formation to be called inventive not weird, but I can see the skepticism from people who put me low on that basis. Baggio and Finney have the same role but different ones is I suppose how it's seen - I just felt whether wide or in more of an inside forward position, Laudrup wouldn't do as well as if given the freedom of starting as the most central attacking midfielder/support attacker. in my own opinion, my team is not as good playing in a more structured 4-2-3-1 like Benitez has Liverpool playing, but it might have been less open to criticism possibly (maybe I need a Lucas and Mascherano-type partnership too).
Again, with the "prolific". It's funny how this simple word allows you to use both qualitative and quantitative evidence to suit whatever your opinion is. The funny thing is that if Albert and McGrory both were missing a leg that McGrory would have been "an amazing talent who overcame significant physical obstacles" and Albert would just be a "limping, carthorse with one leg".
You really are getting ridicuous now. We are not comparing McGrory and Albert as overall players but as goalscorers. Why don't you actually addresss the point of which were the many other attacks your team would score more than?
That's true. But it was a contributing factor. Well of course there's a doubt about him. But as much as there is about him, there's more doubt about having two mediocre fullbacks. Because there are two of them.
So why are you getting so flustered that I put you 14th? Don't start moaning and casting aspersions on other teams if you aren't prepared to back them up.
I asked for an explanation and you gave one. I disagree with your logic. If anyone's moaning, it's you constantly responding to my posts with _questions_ that keep moving along the "debate". It'd be utterly silly of me to pick at every other team. I don't have anything to prove.
My favorite player was Tarantini, for rubbing his hands on his sweaty balls before shaking hands with Videla.
I asked you one question in relation to a boast about your team. If you want to drop it, that's fine by me.
Hey really cool that I could convince you. You have some good points especially about Moreno. My initial plan was to go for Jairzinho for right wing, but I failed with my pick. Although I have to disagree with you about Socrates not beeing good enough for the playmaker position. Maybe I'm overrating Socrates, but the only guys having clearly better playmakers than him are Peru FC, Dark Savante and L>G. The others are pretty much equal or worse imho.
Moreno was one of those players versatile enough to play well in just about any position, like Di Stefano. In fact Di Stefano modeled his game after Moreno's game. At any rate, what I heard from my uncles is that no matter where he lined up, he was usually all over the place. And with that in mind, I thought Socrates could compliment him well in midfield, even though you're right about Socrates not being a traditional "10". (Socrates of course being less dynamic than Moreno, but very skillful, I can feel it working between those two, considering their characteristics and the type of teammates each of them played alongside in their respective great teams.) I was trying to visualize each team working together, and this one was one that worked for me.
To tell you the truth, I think L>G stole all the best playmakers. Without him monopolizing those guys, the draft might not have been so close.