Draft of Drafts

[lanman]

A summary just here:


Team A

Total Caps 819
Total Goals 174
Average Caps 74.45
Average Goals 15.82

Team B

Total Caps 919
Total Goals 229
Average Caps 83.55
Average Goals 20.82

Team C

Total Caps 769
Total Goals 186
Average Caps 69.91
Average Goals 16.91

Team D

Total Caps 845
Total Goals 201
Average Caps 76.82
Average Goals 18.27

Team E

Total Caps 974
Total Goals 231
Average Caps 88.55
Average Goals 21.00

[Bauser]

Elias Figueroa
Caps 47 goals 2
Captain of the Chilean National Team at WC'66 , WC'74 and WC'82.


Interesting facts regarding Figueroa. His international career spanned five World Cups, still he only managed 47 caps.

[Excape Goat]

Elias Figueroa was three time South American player in an era where many of the greatest players from South America were at their peak. And he was a defender!!!

[comme]

I don't like a forward pairing of Romario and Gullit, for me it doesn't really work.

The pick of romario is a good one, it was the selection of Overath that mucked it all up.

[Real Ray]

I don't like a forward pairing of Romario and Gullit, for me it doesn't really work.

The pick of romario is a good one, it was the selection of Overath that mucked it all up.

Yes, Romario would not have been my choice, but the choice of Overath as I saw him playing, was/is sound.

-------------Banks

Santos---Krol----Baresi---Maldini

-------Neeskens---Overath

Gullit-------Zico----------Cruyff

--------------Fontaine

This was my vision of the team. And while I have a chance, let may say that I have read your thoughts re: "the three drivers," and I think they can be easily knocked down, as to argue about personalities is the most subjective argument; too easy to project one's views about how players would get on .

On the surface, it is easy to think that there are too many no. 10, but when you break it down, it's not very complicated at all: the only person who would have to adjust his game here is Zico. And all we would would be asking him to do is play a bit deeper; to be a bit more picky in his attacks. More importantly, it frees up Cruyff and Gullit.

When we picked Cruyff, it was (and is) my belief that on some level, we would have to address the Total Football concept-at least to the degree that we let Cruyff play in a postion that has some historical merit. In this formation we can place him in that role; having the freedom to move up and down his prefered left flank; surrounded by versatile players who have the the talent and intelligence to play off of him. That is why I like Zico in the centre in the role I described. In reality, Cruyff had no "position." The team-and Zico in particular-will take there cues from Cruyff.

The only debate about Gullit is a "personality" issue, which I have addressed. He would be fine playing here with the freedom to attack. What I also like with this trio is their pace: teams will have difficulty with this group, especially on the counter.

With Overath and Neeskens combined with our back four, I think we are solid both in terms of their historical positioning and talent. That leaves us with the striker.

Savante was very high on Romario-and he has some very good reasons for that, which I'm sure he will discuss and debate with others. I think in our team, we all felt that in terms of his historical resume, Romario was the best striker on the board. But there was a split re: what type of player best suited the team, and I cast my vote for Fontaine.

IMO Just Fontaine is one of the most undervalued of the strikers-most likely because people think his 1958 WC was a one-off. But the more I read about him (it helps to know a bit of french) the more I think he was the perfect fit.

His prime in France was 7 seasons, twice leading the league in scoring. In addition to his WC, he scored 5 goals in the 1960 European Championships; 10 goals (lead the competition) during the 1958-59 European Cup (he would get a 2nd place medal). He also played on 4 league champions with Nice and Reims. In his 213 games played, he had a strike rate of .94 per game. IMO there is nothing there to make me not think that had he not been struck down by injuries at 27, he would have continued at a very high level-probably in Spain or Italy. His performaces in the major tournaments shows that he could excel at the highest levels. And because his key partner, Raymond Kopa shared similar qualities with Cruyff and Gullit, I think Fontaine would do well playing on top as the sole striker. IMO he is an all-time player.

Spartak & Mobile had other good ideas as well and I'm sure they will share them. I don't know if I would play Romario in the manner that Savante is, but he's the captain, so I'll respect his choice. This is our team. And to be fair, a 4-2-3-1 always puts a burden on that one striker-Raul, and Vier, will feel that heat in a few weeks. That could be a problem. But 4-3-2-1 was my vision for the team.

PS: I know there are still subs to pick and naming Fontaine might be bad form, but I think it seems to me, not an issue, no? It's more a matter of when you get to pick at this point-no hidden treasures.

Saludos

[kopiteinkc]

I am glad to hear that Fontaine was at least discussed. I had him on my short list of "players not picked"

I disagree with Comme though. I think Gullit and Romario would be an outstanding pairing. With Zico and Cruyff behind them, wow!

I agree with Comme on Overath, he's overrated IMO. Was Patrick Vieira already chosen or not considered as he's too much from the modern era and history hasn't judged him yet.

[comme]

I don't think that Fontaine was that great a player in his own right, but with the supply line of Gullit, Zico and Cruyff he would score goals.

Why on earth though are you playing Gullit up front? That is my problem with your team, I would have played Gullit in the Overath role and picked Nordahl to play up front with Romario, that would have been a brilliant pairing.

Alternatively you could have played Cruyff at centre forward and allowed Zico to be the playmaker.

The thing is that i was very jealous of your team up to the selection of Overath, I'm not any more.

[ManiacButcher]

I want to play this game !!!!!!
I could be Team F !!!! :D

[Dark Savante]

I'm pretty disappointed in the way our teams deliberations ended. I didn't think it was right to prolong the draft any longer waiting indefinitely for someones determining vote. Of the 3 strikers we were talking about I felt Nordahl to be wrong for an all time draft starting spot up front alone. No matter the circumstance, this guy didn't do his thing on the world or Europe's higheststage unlike every other striker picked. In my opinion that is his misfortune, but he still remained an unknown quantity.

As I argued before in our deliberations being dominant in your league is just not enough otherwise Shearer or Henry would deserve a spot - give it 50yrs, some fanciful journalism, and they will be written about with a more glowing praise. My arguement was that peope like Best and Di Stefano displayed there wares in the European Cup and put in performances so good as to become folklore for the rest of that tournaments history. Removing all of Di Stefano's league awards and we are left with 5 dominant displays in the Euro Cup...that's awesome and deserves merit.. take away Nordahl's league awards and your left very thin. Again, the fact he was hindered by semi-proffessional laws with Swedish nat. team is neither here nor there for me. It's his tough luck and just leaves us with speculation of what he coulda, woulda done rather then what happened. As such he remained to much of an unknown quatity to be our #1 goal getter.

The Fontaine arguement is a different one. His credintials are more favorable, but Romario's are just there for all to see. The guy has scored over 900goals at a rate of 0.78goals per game in modern era. :o that is just insane, alayed to the fact that he won a world cup and 2 copa americas and we have a guy who knows what winning on the biggest stage is all about , as far as i'm concerned you have less leaway when picking strikers and centre backs because their mistakes or lack of nerve can ultimately win or lose you a game. When it come to crunch time in the box Romario is on the level Muller and Puskas as proven entity, there can be no dobts about that because he scored goals in the biggest games of his life.. that was the deciding factor for me and why as captain, I went for my choise over Nordahl or Fontaine.

With regards to Gullit and Roario up front. comme, although it wasn't my preffered pairing it is still one that is a problem for opposition defenders. Romario's clinicality in front of goal cannot be ignored and I can't see a single opposing defender matching Gullit in the air, not even Desailly..that's one factor to add, the other is Romario could form a superb partnership with any person he played with up front as long and if he can do it with Bebeto he can most certainly do it with the superior in every way, Gullit.

I'd rank our teams ground passing interchange between strikers 3rd of the 5 teams. with
Pele - Eusebio 1st
Puskas - Kocsis 2nd

I think that counts for a lot when considering the kind of pass convertor Romario is, I can see those 2 creating many a problem for opposition defenders

[Dark Savante]

I don't think that Fontaine was that great a player in his own right, but with the supply line of Gullit, Zico and Cruyff he would score goals.

Why on earth though are you playing Gullit up front? That is my problem with your team, I would have played Gullit in the Overath role and picked Nordahl to play up front with Romario, that would have been a brilliant pairing.

Alternatively you could have played Cruyff at centre forward and allowed Zico to be the playmaker.

The thing is that i was very jealous of your team up to the selection of Overath, I'm not any more.

I wanted Nordahl-Romario up front...that was what the huge stall last week was about. Others campaigned for Overath nd in the end they got their man. Having said that, I think Overath can allow our 3 number 10's to be even more expressive and interchangeable.

[comme]

Well take away Best's club achievements and what are you left with? Nordahl's record in Serie A is there for all to see. He is the most prolific striker in the history of the league. He also has a Latin Cup to his name and his international record is better than anyone else in the draft so far.

[Dark Savante]

Well take away Best's club achievements and what are you left with? Nordahl's record in Serie A is there for all to see. He is the most prolific striker in the history of the league. He also has a Latin Cup to his name and his international record is better than anyone else in the draft so far.

You know it doesn't work that way. And if you dissect his intertnational record you will see 43goals in 33games but ...24 goals from friendlies..12 in Nordic championships...and 7 in the olympic games..that is not the criteria for an all time striker in this kind of draft in my opinion. Not at the detriement of others who have done more on bigger stages anyway.

[Dark Savante]

Nordahl's record in Serie A is there for all to see. He is the most prolific striker in the history of the league.

Alan Shearer can make the same claim for the English league... does that mean he too is worthy of a slot over others who have done bigger things in bigger competitions then he?

[comme]

He did it on every stage available to him. That is the difference with Shearer, he only once achieved the real heights and that was in 1996. You cannot say that Nordahl ever failed a test he faced.

[Dark Savante]

He did it on every stage available to him. That is the difference with Shearer, he only once achieved the real heights and that was in 1996. You cannot say that Nordahl ever failed a test he faced.

That's my point. It's his tough luck. Nothing I can do about how it was for him, I can only go by the reality which is presented and it that reality he was never tested on the biggest stages unfortunately, for him. It has to count against a striker moreso then any other position except CB imo. He's the guy who will win or lose you the game. How can it be proven that he can cope? There's a difference between scoring a penalty in a WC final and scoring one in a league game is there not?

Anyways, this is arguing for arguements sake I think.

[Twenty26Six]

First elevens are done and everything has taken shape. I'm assuming we can drop names now since the reserves really don't matter that much in the grand scheme. I have some small notes, if anyone chooses to agree or disagree to them I can expand on them. No disrespect to anyone. So don't get defensive, too much. = )

Team A - You were clearely the most organized in your approach to your picks. You put together a monster squad and I would pick Team A to win any match over any other team in this competition. Solid through the middle of the park. Good wing play. Pele, has all the freedom in the world in front of Rijkaard and Didi. I don't think the slowness or physical shortcomings[albeit only in this company] should hinder you. With a strong right back in Vogts and a great DM tandem, you should be fine.

Team B - Clearly the most offensively dangerous. Maradona, Muller, Marco... scary. Defense is not as tight as one could have hoped and I thought the Charlton pick was a bit off for my tastes. I would have gone with a more ball hawking center mid to compliment Deschamps in possesion. Deschamps was good but I don't think he can do this alone. One thing that is really questioned is your width. The more I look Team B over, the more I think 'counter-attack'.

Team C - I love this team. This team started off odd then took shape real nicely. I think that Team C is the most collectively talented of any of the teams. In a league format, I take you guys. In a one-off winner take all match however, I like Team A's experience. I would probably pair Di Stefano more with Ronaldo than Platini with Ron, but it's interchangeable. Based on learnt knowledge I think Varela was the steal of the draft. No team picked better into the late rounds than you guys.

Team D - This team started out promising then kind of got lost in the woods. The total football thing is a nice idea, but you went overboard. Overath and Neeskens cannot control guys like Pele, Maradona, DiStefano, Garrincha, as well as make up for the rest of your teams flighty approaches. You've got no true ball winners deep in midfield and I don't see anyone with a willingness to feed Romario the ball. Turmoil is bound to envelope this team. This concept would be great if this team were amongst lesser company, but once the wheels start to skip? You would have guys all over the pitch trying to do it themselves, playin each others positions. Get 3 roleplaying subs that could replace Neeskens, Krol, and Overath and you'd be redeemed to an extent.

Team E - I don't have much to say about Team E, I think you guys just didn't get it to come together. I think your center defense is suspect, and I'd be playing guys in different positions. I don't think that you did poorly, but maybe not as well as teams A/C.

Players not picked - Not necessarily guys I thought should have been picked, but more wondering if these guys were "thought of". If Deschamps can be picked anything is possible.

Just off top of my head...
Patrick Vieira
Roy Keane
Roberto Baggio
Eric Cantona
Hugo Sanchez
Kevin Keegan
Kenny Dalglish
Gheorge Hagi
Hristo Stoichkov
Rivaldo

[comme]

Team E - I don't have much to say about Team E, I think you guys just didn't get it to come together. I think your center defense is suspect, and I'd be playing guys in different positions. I don't think that you did poorly, but maybe not as well as teams A/C.



I'm bound to be a bit defensive in this so here goes.

I completely disagree with most of what you have said.

Our central defence is rock solid. Desailly is a beast and Figueroa oozes class, they are an excellent pairing. On top of that we have Thuram, Beckenbauer and Bozsik, all of whom can play centre half. In my opinion no team is more solid through the middle.

Which players would you be playing in other positions? Beckenbauer and Zidane I presume, we are actually playing them in the positions in which they have both had huge success. Its not like we are asking Gullit to play up front.

The rest Carlos, Thuram,Desaillt, Figueroa Bozsik, Best, Puskas and Kocsis have to play where we have put them.

[Dark Savante]

Its not like we are asking Gullit to play up front.
Lol, and so you just had to have a pop at us huh?

[Real Ray]

Team D - This team started out promising then kind of got lost in the woods. The total football thing is a nice idea, but you went overboard. Overath and Neeskens cannot control guys like Pele, Maradona, DiStefano, Garrincha, as well as make up for the rest of your teams flighty approaches. You've got no true ball winners deep in midfield and I don't see anyone with a willingness to feed Romario the ball. Turmoil is bound to envelope this team. This concept would be great if this team were amongst lesser company, but once the wheels start to skip?

Let's see...

First, let's start with the value of Overath. This is a man who played in three WC, was voted midfielder of the 1970 WC (with all due respect to Gerson), and if you know anything about him, you know he was one of the greatest big-game players of his generation. He was a complete midfielder-and in one World Cup, one of the stars of the competition. I'm biased of course, but I don't accept at all the idea that we have overated him.

As for the team and the roles: again, that is the weakest argument. Two points: Zico on the 1982 team, played in similar attack-minded midfield and shined; Gullit's dressing room issues (notably with Baresi) did not stop Milan from winning. If we were to play 4-2-3-1 with Romario as the sole striker...I still like the team (your point about not having ball winners-especially on a 4-2-3-1...just doesn't hold IMO). Played like this there are two points that make the team shaky: It's asking a lot of Romario to play up top due to his size-a taller, more powerfully built striker would be my preference. The other is the issue of the 3 and their ability to gel. It's worth discussing, but at the end of the day I think it's too subjective to write-off this team. Cruyff with Holland and Gullit with AC Milan/Holland had spells where their temperment hurt their sides. But they also have nice trophy cabinets, don't they? It cuts both ways. We (naturally ;) ) see the glass half-full.

You also seem to not take into fair account the defense. This is a supremely talented group who have the talent and smarts to step-up and play as asked/needed. Even with the talent on the other teams, this group has the ability to close down space and enhance overall possession.

The part of your anaylsis that I have to laugh at (good natured, mind you), is when you postI don't see anyone with a willingness to feed Romario the ball Here is the breakdown of Holland's scoring WC 1974 (not including PK's):

Rep-4, Cruyff-3, Neeskens-2, De Jong, Rensensbrink, Krol-1.

Who do you think was feeding the players balls? If you want to see how devestating Cruyff could be, watch Holland vs Argentina. Watch his freedom/genius; how deep he played starting the Dutch attacks; other times right at the top of attack. This is the point that I tried to convey in my other post: people are looking at him too much in a fixed position and not as the player he was. And this goes back to why I liked Overath. Look at what our midfiled would have been if we had picked two strikers?

--------Neeskens
Guillit----Zico----Cruyff

I would not put Zico on the flanks in this case, which leaves Cruyff outside-left, with two forwards in front of him. I did not like this as I think it undermines his genius. My point to the group was that we didn't not make Cruyff our no.1 pick to play him in this manner-at least I didn't, for sure. By taking two strikers, we would have basically forced one of the greatest all-time attacking mids into a defensive role. Which would be far more an issue re: "roles" IMO. It also places a heavy burden on Neeskens to win balls and provide teeth in the center of the pitch. Zico, Cruyff, and Gullit...not the first names that come to mind when one thinks of stuck-in tackling?

Zico also was lethal at feeding players-just killer at making the final pass into the area. Brasil WC 1982 scoring:
Zico-4, Falcao-3, Eder, Socrates, Serginho-2, Oscar, Junior-1.

On the issue of Total Football, that we have some of those Dutch players, should not be taken as an attempt to copy/play that way. The issue was to make a concession to it so that Cruyff could be play his game.

I would agree with Savante about the final two picks-we simply couldn't come to an agreement. I was firm about two strikers due to the 3 attacking mids that we have. As the team stands now, I would rather we play 4-2-3-1, in that I think it fits Gullit better. I would have him thinking attack first, but in a 4-2-3-1, I think he would find the flow of the game better; collecting balls a bit deeper and then using his pace. It also reduces the amount of work/running he would do. As we don't have natural wingers, having Overath and Zico as out wide...IMO it's better to have Gullit-Zico-Cruyff and take your shot with Romario solo up front.

Whew...

[Twenty26Six]

I'm bound to be a bit defensive in this so here goes.

I completely disagree with most of what you have said.

Our central defence is rock solid. Desailly is a beast and Figueroa oozes class, they are an excellent pairing. On top of that we have Thuram, Beckenbauer and Bozsik, all of whom can play centre half. In my opinion no team is more solid through the middle.

Which players would you be playing in other positions? Beckenbauer and Zidane I presume, we are actually playing them in the positions in which they have both had huge success. Its not like we are asking Gullit to play up front.

The rest Carlos, Thuram, Desailly, Figueroa, Bozsik, Best, Puskas and Kocsis have to play where we have put them.

First things first. It is in fact much easier to judge in hindisght than rather at the time. If it were my choice I would have played Beckenbauer in DM. I would have also picked another centerback besides Desailly or played Desailly in DM paired wih Beckenbauer.

The pick that I thought handcuffed you was Carlos, because he can't be played anywhere but LB in a format like this. You can't justify playing him as a wide withdrawn midfield player, not amongst this company. Even though it puts beckenbauer out of my preferred position for him, I would have done it something like this.

Thuram Beckenbauer ???
Desailly Boszik
Puskas Zidane Best
??? ???

Question marks being where I would have changed players. I thought goood enough players all around were to found to fit this formation. It's not necessarily the best alternative for what you have done, but I feel there were many ways you could have chosen to go midway through the draft that would have been less restricting. As it is, you picked a few players questionable of being considered "All-Time". I admit my little knowledge of KocsisI thought there were better players besides Kocsis available for the taking. At the same time you took Zidane but undervalued him. To be honest the French National team was good without him, but they definitely rode his back at most times. I believe he is good enough to be your number 10.

Another thing I saw was your team's initial response to pair Best/Puskas as forwards and then the subsequent shying away from it. Barring only the Kocsis/Boszik picks I could have easily seen this formation. Taking either a two striker setup or playing one of the [?] as a pair with Zidane or Beckenbauer. Maybe using Boszik as a runner in between both. Either way I thought that formation called for a stronger forward. One thing I think this team lacks.

Thuram Desailly Figueroa Carlos
Beckenbauer
Puskas Zidane Best
??? ???